Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: JDN who wrote (215821)	8/16/2007 2:37:50 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) of 793999

I cant agree. the Democratic party TALKED a good story but NEVER passed any kind of prescription coverage EVER. It's true that Part D was offered up by Republicans. Seems like a "conservative" approach to a real need....there are people who this really means a lot. No doubt about it. But one of the key differences between the parties, if not THE key difference, is that the Democrats favor expanding federal social programs and taxes to help those in need and Republicans oppose taxes, redistribution of the wealth, and anything that smacks of socialism. This thread is called politics for pros. Supposedly we know the inherent differences between the parties. Democrats are the party that champions public support programs for the have nots. Part D may be a relatively more conservative version of nannyism than a program developed exclusively by the Democrats would have been but it's still a federal social program for the needy. Perhaps you have forgotten all the criticism Bush took for endorsing this even on this very thread and all the op-eds questioning whether Bush was a real conservative... I am not even 65 and my prescriptions are not so high that it might apply to me Are you listening, Hillary?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next