Republican hypocrites in the House

[srellim234]

http://www.dailybulletin.com/editorial/ci_17287739

So much for Republicans and their leader opposing any tax increase in any way, shape or form and focusing on creating jobs. When will people realize that they only want to protect the rich, apparently defined by them as people making over $250,000 a year? They don't give a cr*p about small businesses, the middle and lower classes, jobs or individuals. If they were, they wouldn't be introducing this bill at this time.

[IBCoupe]

Any taxpayer who has very high medical expenses will no longer be able to deduct those expenses from income taxes, if his or her health plan covers abortion. Likewise, if their health plan includes abortion coverage, taxpayers will be ineligible for federal premium assistance.

Yep. I've been walking around pissed off about this bill for a while. The Federal Government is already prohibited from subsidizing abortion coverage in health insurance. So what the sponsors of this bill want is for women, who already have to pay extra to get this coverage, to lose all tax benefits from having health insurance completely, because they've chosen to have this coverage in addition to the federally-subsidized plans.

***holes - they can't ban abortion, so they're just going to make it really hard to afford one.

[AppleBonker]

That means the Smith bill would prevent any federal funds from paying for abortions for many rape survivors, which could include women who are unconscious at the time of the rape, and mentally disabled women who have been raped.

Jesus hates the mentally challenged.

Seems like there are an infinite number of ways this Congress could spend their time and be more useful/productive. I honestly hate all politicians...

[heliochrome85]

Jesus hates the mentally challenged.

i cant tell who he hated more, sarah palin or trig.

ill see myself out.

[telcoman]

http://www.dailybulletin.com/editorial/ci_17287739

So much for Republicans and their leader opposing any tax increase in any way, shape or form and focusing on creating jobs. When will people realize that they only want to protect the rich, apparently defined by them as people making over $250,000 a year? They don't give a cr*p about small businesses, the middle and lower classes, jobs or individuals. If they were, they wouldn't be introducing this bill at this time.

Here is another one

Bye Bye Chris

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix ... signs.html

Telcoman

[audtatious]

Damn them Republicans. Thank GOD for the Dems in office because we have a balanced budget, no deficit spending and the lowest percentage of unemployment EVER since THE ONE took office.

Oh, wait!!!! The Dems didn't even try to have a budget in '10, are deficit spending more than ever and the unemployment rate is being swept under the rug. That DAMN BUSH being in office these last two years is the cause I'm sure.

Go right ahead and bash boys because everything is so much better after 4 years of Dem's owning Congress and 2 years of Obama as President and the Dems having a Super Majority.

But, But, But...BUSH... Come on, say it

Talk about FAIL, look in the mirror.

[AppleBonker]

Damn them Republicans. Thank GOD for the Dems in office because we have a balanced budget, no deficit spending and the lowest percentage of unemployment EVER since THE ONE took office.

Oh, wait!!!! The Dems didn't even try to have a budget in '10, are deficit spending more than ever and the unemployment rate is being swept under the rug. That DAMN BUSH being in office these last two years is the cause I'm sure.

This is a senseless argument. Are you honestly trying to tell me that we should all vote conservative because they are the lesser of two evils? That's a pretty weak platform to run on.

The point is, according to the conservatives in the country (conservative media, members of this board, etc), the democrats lost the House (in a major way, no less) because of voters' concerns about the economy. So why is it that an abortion bill is even being considered this early in the term? Seriously, don't tell me that the public elected these officials to fix the economy, and then use that power to start pushing other conservative bills through. If either party could get its head out of its a**, we might be able to make progress. But if each tries to push its own agenda whenever they get power, they damn well better not be surprised when they lose that power just as quickly. To me, it seems pretty obvious that the general public is quite concerned about the economy right now (and there is no doubt that influenced the last election). So, please tell me, if the democrats who were in power screwed the pooch so bad on all economic fronts, why isn't the new republican-heavy house working tirelessly to fix the economy BEFORE turning to other issues?

[audtatious]

Nope. I say both sides are hypocrites. Dems only point to one side. I'm making fun of all of those on this board who point and blame everything on the GOP when both sides suck and are failures.

[AZhitman]

I gotta say, even MENTIONING abortion in this bill makes me sick.

Then again, the lefties (whose ultimate goal is to have state-sponsored abortions performed at a drive-through) are no less to blame here. F*** them.

This is NO different than the whining and gnashing of teeth over the Dream Act. Great piece of legislation, but the hard-headed lefties just couldn't budge on making criminals ineligible - So, as a consequence, the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater, and the DNC retreats to their corner and claims the big mean GOP hates innocent A+ students with last names that end in Z.

F*** them too.

[stebo0728]

Why should abortion be state sponsored? Its an elective surgery, or procedure, right? Does the state sponsor face lifts? Does the state sponsor gastric bypass? Or vasectomies? (might make sense if they did tho)
Im full force against abortion as birth control, but Im now of the mind that it should not be a legislative issue, but rather an educational issue, and should the scenario arise where an abortion is under consideration, its between the patient and the doctor as to whether it should or should not be done, and the insurance companies should be free to cover or not cover the procedure.

[audtatious]

I don't care if someone gets an abortion or not, I just don't want to be mandated by taxation to pay for it (which is what the Dems want). I also get tired of the GOP, including the progressive side, pushing it to be outlawed unless they are willing to pay all expenses and raise the children themselves. They aren't so it's a moot point.

[stebo0728]

Well, we could stop abortion, and maybe then all the european celebrities will start a fad of adopting american babies. Bono could adopt a couple a babies from Wisconsin ...

[audtatious]

Nope, most celebrities see Western Civilization as a bad thing so they would certainly not work to help any of the poor or parent less babies in this country regardless of their color.

[IBCoupe]

This isn't about State-sponsored abortions. This is about raising taxes on people who buy insurance with abortion coverage. That's all it is. Maybe it doesn't have a shot to go anywhere, but, politics aside, I'm going to object to it on the substance. It's a f*** stupid law.

And to reinsert politics:
Republicans are telling you what insurance you should and should not buy. Sound familiar?

You should be more pissed off about this law than you were the Affordable Healthcare Act. The charge of government getting between you and your doctor actually sticks, here.

[audtatious]

This bill states that Federal funding should not be used for abortions. I agree. If you want an abortion then you should pay for it yourself. If I'm funding your health care policy because you are a Fed employee then get your own additional "abortion coverage" that does not cost me anything.

Can someone show me where they object to this, it seems very straight forward and has no earmarks nor hidden attachments? http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/text

[heliochrome85]

i object in priciple. unfortunately in a society, we can not all individually vote on what we will and will not pay for. i personally have no interest in my tax dollars going to churches that promote the destruction of my people. how do they go? by the government giving them a waiver from taxation because they are a religious institution. does it mean that i have the ability to go and craft a bill that bans such institutions from doing so? no. unfortunately, we have to pay for things we dont like. to think we can individually choose what we will and wont pay for based on our individual preferences is just simply idiotic and far too pie in the sky for rational thought. if that was the case, why would anyone pay taxes?

[IBCoupe]

Aud, your link is slow as sin, so I went to the House of Representatives website instead:

For taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this section--

`(1) no credit shall be allowed under the internal revenue laws with respect to amounts paid or incurred for an abortion or with respect to amounts paid or incurred for a health benefits plan (including premium assistance) that includes coverage of abortion,

`(2) for purposes of determining any deduction for expenses paid for medical care of the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse or dependents, amounts paid or incurred for an abortion or for a health benefits plan that includes coverage of abortion shall not be taken into account, and

`(3) in the case of any tax-preferred trust or account the purpose of which is to pay medical expenses of the account beneficiary, any amount paid or distributed from such an account for an abortion shall be included in the gross income of such beneficiary.

The Hyde Amendment that's been proposed and passed every year for the past I-don't-know-how-many is not what I'm up in arms about. I'm up in arms about the NEW provisions in the Smith version that would strip an individual of the health insurance premium tax deduction that they would otherwise get if they bought an identical plan without abortion coverage.

Plan A = tax credits for your premiums
Plan A + abortion coverage = no tax credits

So, is it okay for Republicans to tell you what insurance plans you should or shouldn't get? They're not talking about reducing the credit by the proportion of your premiums that go towards abortion coverage - they're talking about taking away your tax credits for the whole kaboodle.

[srellim234]

Absolutely I can object to

‘SEC. 303. PROHIBITION ON TAX BENEFITS RELATING TO ABORTION.

‘(2) for purposes of determining any deduction for expenses paid for medical care of the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s spouse or dependents, amounts paid or incurred for an abortion or for a health benefits plan that includes coverage of abortion shall not be taken into account, and...

They clearly state "health benefits plan" and not just the part of a comprehensive plan that might include abortion. Simply put, they are taking away the tax credit for the whole thing, not just the part that applies to abortion.

They want control over everyone's lives and will threaten to raise individual and business taxes as a means to accomplish that goal.

[audtatious]

i object in priciple. unfortunately in a society, we can not all individually vote on what we will and will not pay for. i personally have no interest in my tax dollars going to churches that promote the destruction of my people. how do they go? by the government giving them a waiver from taxation because they are a religious institution. does it mean that i have the ability to go and craft a bill that bans such institutions from doing so? no. unfortunately, we have to pay for things we dont like. to think we can individually choose what we will and wont pay for based on our individual preferences is just simply idiotic and far too pie in the sky for rational thought. if that was the case, why would anyone pay taxes?

Muslim religious institutes also receive tax breaks don't they?

[IBCoupe]

I don't get what that had to do with what he wrote.

[audtatious]

I'm up in arms about the NEW provisions in the Smith version that would strip an individual of the health insurance premium tax deduction that they would otherwise get if they bought an identical plan without abortion coverage.

Plan A = tax credits for your premiums
Plan A + abortion coverage = no tax credits

So, is it okay for Republicans to tell you what insurance plans you should or shouldn't get? They're not talking about reducing the credit by the proportion of your premiums that go towards abortion coverage - they're talking about taking away your tax credits for the whole kaboodle.

If Fed money is not being used for the HC coverage which is including abortion then it should not matter to "the Republicans" and they should SFTU about it. Then again, people should not be receiving tax breaks because of the expense of any elective "surgery" in the first place so plastic surgery and elective abortions should not apply.

[audtatious]

I don't get what that had to do with what he wrote.

I was responding to:

i personally have no interest in my tax dollars going to churches that promote the destruction of my people. how do they go? by the government giving them a waiver from taxation because they are a religious institution.

T is going on about tax breaks for religious institutions, primarily Christian I assume by the above and that is what I was responding to.

I do apologize for all the Christian suicide bombers who are targeting Muslims tho.

[IBCoupe]

They're not receiving tax breaks because of the expense of an elective "surgery." They're currently receiving tax breaks for any health insurance premiums they pay, and if I'm not mistaken, existing law already excludes the portion of that which goes to abortion coverage.

Even if it didn't, that might be an agreeable provision, but that's not what they're trying to do. These jackasses want to punish people for being so uppity as to BUY health insurance that covers abortion.

[IBCoupe]

I don't get what that had to do with what he wrote.

I was responding to:

i personally have no interest in my tax dollars going to churches that promote the destruction of my people. how do they go? by the government giving them a waiver from taxation because they are a religious institution.

T is going on about tax breaks for religious institutions, primarily Christian I assume by the above and that is what I was responding to.

I do apologize for all the Christian suicide bombers who are targeting Muslims tho.

Which was part of his "We don't get to dictate tax code based on our personal preferences" bit. Which is why your attempt to stir up religious divisiveness came out of left field. Your only response to him completely missed the point, and it looks like it only served to stir up s*** on a taboo subject here on these forums.

Tell me I'm mistaken, Aud.

[audtatious]

I didn't go the religious route, he did by bringing up taxation of a religion that promotes the "destruction of his people". Now, if his religious institutions were not receiving the same tax breaks then I would agree with him. They get the same breaks so it's moot. I support abortion, I don't support paying for it or giving special credit for it being done.

[IBCoupe]

It sounds like you still missed the point: as much as he'd love to selectively restrict federal tax breaks for churches that espouse anti-Muslim rhetoric, he's accepted that he can't, because that's not how it works. His point (if I'M understanding him correctly) was that his personal preferences don't mean jack.

The religious implications were incidental, and that was the only part of his post that you responded to.

[audtatious]

Doesn't matter. IMO it's wrong to charge you, me, him, Greg, whomever to pay for an abortion due to some chic having unprotected sex. Let her finance it herself or pay out of pocket. If the Dems are so damn adamant to pay for abortions then let the DNC fund it or other Dem supporters pay for it out of their own funds and pockets.

As far as my stupid suicide b0mber response it was directly related to his retort on his people being targets. I meant it to be a stupid response. You didn't get it that's fine. He responded with something ridiculous and I did the same.

[heliochrome85]

i'm enjoying this banter.

isaac understood exactly what i meant. im saying that ultimately i dont get to choose where my money goes. just like the institutions i support (npr, pbs, etc) get funding, there are those that i dont support that do too. you are reading too much into the religion quote. and yes, we do get tax breaks. its just much much much much harder to get them post 9/11.

[heliochrome85]

Doesn't matter. IMO it's wrong to charge you, me, him, Greg, whomever to pay for an abortion due to some chic having unprotected sex. Let her finance it herself or pay out of pocket. If the Dems are so damn adamant to pay for abortions then let the DNC fund it or other Dem supporters pay for it out of their own funds and pockets.

we pay for breast enhancement surgery for members of the military. just happens that that is ok by the religious right.

[srellim234]

I bet the taxpayer paid for Bob Dole's Viagra, too.