Notice the only people who complain of a "nanny state" are the same people who can afford a nanny?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/08/giuliani_health_care_plan_echo.html

ROCHESTER, N.H. -Rudy Giuliani leapt into the health care debate yesterday with a plan like one that's already been declared dead-on-arrival on Capitol Hill - a version of a $15,000 tax break for insurance that President George W. Bush floated earlier this year without success.

Giuliani's plan also sidesteps the issue dominating the Democratic debate over health care - how to cover all or nearly all of the 47 million uninsured Americans.

In Giuliani's words, that's up to the marketplace, not a government "nanny state" - and he blasted Democratic proposals to subsidize coverage with tax increases as European-style "socialist" medicine that could bankrupt government.

But he admits it could take years for his plan to help those without insurance and makes no promise that all the uninsured would be helped.

[gasperc]

1. what's with the "nanny" $15k tax break

why does the "nanny" government need to give it's citizens a "nanny" like $15k tax break. I thought things were just swell. Why does the "nanny" government need to step in with a $15k tax break? Why do the "nanny" health insuance companies need a "nanny" subsidy so that that they can pay the "nanny" like $15k insurance premiums. Sounds alot like "nanny" government to me.

[BlueJazz]

2. Typical Republican "SideStep Logic". "We have No Money for...

..Universal Health Care"

BUT...WE DO have Trillions to fight some stupid-ass-war in a region that has had Wars for 2000 Years.

[NewJeffCT]

3. Rudy's plan would lead to millions more being without insurance

and tens of millions having to switch to having limited insurance, like catastrophe coverage only, or having a high deductible plan.

[HughBeaumont]

4. Right because we NEED useless soldier morgues like Iraq and handouts for the rich instead.

Death and war is profitable. Helping others is not.

Who let these POS's out of their kennels?

[NewJeffCT]

5. I support universal single-payer healthcare

And, we can afford a nanny if we wanted one.

I object to the term "nanny state" however. I know exactly what Rudy is referring to, however. It appeals to those who get upset when the government bans smoking in government buildings, or in restaurants... and, those who try to ban trans-fats or soda machines in our schools and those who try to be "politically correct"

But, what a lot of Republicans want is Uncle Sam to provide Corporate Welfare Nannies for big business.

[Warpy]

6. Meanwhile, they ignore the REAL nanny state

You know, the one that protects us from ourselves so we won't use those nasty old drugs to ease the pain of life (except the ones their buddies are making a fortune on), the one that tries to make us afraid of sex because access to contraception and abortion are getting more difficult, the one that approves of a "health care" industry that punishes us for the sin of getting sick.

Yeah, I complain about the nanny state all the time. I just define it very differently from the plutocrats.

[ellenfl]

8. yes, THEY are the nanny state . . . they want government

out of the board rooms but into our personal lives. can't get more nanny than that. hypocrits!

ellen fl

[cgrindley]

7. No, some people here complain about the nanny state just as much

or almost as much as the repukes do. Whenever I argue for the necessity of a highly intrusive socialist nanny state, I get flamed like crazy. It's like people want all the nanny state benefits without any of the sitting still, paying attention and doing your chores and homework.

[Justice]

9. that is a great line to be used in a debate!