In a widely expected move, President Bush last week vetoed a bill that would have expanded government health coverage for children without insurance. The bill would have more-than doubled the funding (and presumably the number of children the program would be able to help) over a 5-year period and the expansion in the program would have been funded entirely by a 65-cent (per pack) cigarette-tax hike.

I'm sure at least a few smokers would be upset about this, but when I saw Bush on National television saying this was the first step towards implementing a national healthcare system I momentarily thought he was saying, "This bill is a good thing". Silly me, to forget that Bush backs big-business and a national healthcare system would mean fewer political handouts from drug and insurance companies.

Of course, much of the American public has been brainwashed over the issue of National Healthcare for decades. Let the record show that Canada's healthcare system, which is by no means perfect, costs half of what Americans pay, and despite the flaws in the system Canadians still manage to live several years longer than the average U.S. citizen.

The truth of the matter is that the U.S. method of healthcare means that the LESS care an insurance company covers, the MORE profit it can pass along to its executives and shareholders. To me, it does not seem morally correct that a company should profit from NOT saving someone's life, but that's the way the U.S. system works.

Turn that into a government-run system and then whatever the bureaucratic drawbacks, you are at least eliminating the need to pay profits to shareholders and the executives running the program aren't making $10 million salaries with millions more in stock options and perks. THAT is why the Canadian's healthcare costs half of what ours does.

And I think the Doctors themselves, many of whom have traditionally stood against the idea of nationalized healthcare, are starting to realize that they're being squeezed to death by insurance companies anyway. Public companies are expected (unrealistically) each year to post larger profits than the last. Insurance companies have been squeezing on all fronts: Reducing their (low-level) employees salaries and benefits, Increasing their clients rates and (simultaneously) the list of reasons they can deny a claim, and reducing the dollar amounts they will pay out to the doctors providing the services.

These companies cannot continue on like this indefinitely, and if they do it will be all of us (who don't own their stock) who suffer, doctors included. But while Hillary takes her handouts from the healtcare industry and pushes her weak plan for national healthcare, Bush stands up strong for his belief that National Healthcare is bad in every form, and that taxing a pack of cigarettes so that a child might live is wrong for this country.

Mr. Bush may be "Dead Certain" that he is sending our children the right message, but I hope they see it for what it is, because as Bush himself pointed out a couple of weeks ago in New York, the "childrens do learn". 

- one 

It appears that TIME magazine has helped crack open an honest-to-God Republican conspiracy within the DOJ (at least within their Alabama offices). As usual these days, the actual conspiracy comes as less of a surprise than the fact that someone is actually doing something about it.

Pacific Free Press reported many of the details yesterday and although this specific case seems to be limited to Alabama (so far as can be currently proven), it's pretty harrowing.  In short, a lobbyist went on-record at the Alabama Department of Justice offices and said he had made illegal campaign contributions (aka bribes) to a number of prominent Republicans as well as one prominent Democrat in particular — Alabama's Governor (at the time) Don Siegelman.

Siegelman was duly prosecuted and convicted last year, but none of the Republicans who received similar contributions were even investigated, much less brought to trial. This didn't raise much ire because it was not publicly known that other names had been named, until TIME apparently received the documents from someone inside the DOJ.

Not only were the Republicans not prosecuted, but several individuals who separately sought prosecution against these and other Republican officials in Alabama reported that they were roadblocked, told the DOJ was not interested in pursuing their accusations, and in at least one case they were allegedly threatened with having a Grand Jury convened to seek an indictment against them if they did not drop the issue.

Furthermore several independant observers noted Federal Judge Mark Fuller, who presided over Siegelman's trial, exhibited suspicious behavior during the trial in a number of ways — in particular, Siegelman filed a motion for release pending appeal and although these motions are typically granted almost automatically in cases like this, Fuller failed to make any ruling on the motion whatsoever.

Other information has been brought to light which suggests Justice Fuller, who apparently owns a company which benefits from defense contracts, may be implicated in some illegal dealings of his own regarding unauthorized access to classified information possibly obtained from Republican Senator Richard Shelby, who the New York Post reported has been investigated for mishandling classified information and with whom Fuller may have had business dealings.

All-in-all it's a big mess and next Thursday the House Judiciary Committee is set to open hearings on politically motivated prosecutions, with this case as a centerpiece. Any blind goat can see the events that occurred in Alabama fall in line with Alberto Gonzalez's policies and that Gonzalez fell in line with Rove and the "Loyal Bushies".

It's a shame that those men were permitted to resign in comfort when they should face criminal prosecution themselves and a crime-in-itself that Bush & Cheney will likely be permitted to continue ruining this country until their term is up rather than either of them facing impeachment.

- one