Cantor's Pediatric Research Bill Could Have Been a Bust
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor cheered the passage of one of his top priorities Tuesday, as a pediatric research funding bill he laboriously pushed through the House easily passed the Senate.
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Roll Call.
#1 Mar 11, 2014
Great idea..love it! Leave it to cantor to use a dying child in an attempt to make the republicans look like they are humans with feelings & compassion.The bill is the first piece of legislation under the umbrella of Cantors much-publicized Republican rebrand. Is there nothing the republicans won't do.
#2 Mar 12, 2014
There is NOTHING THE LIBS WILL DO TO HELP A CHILD WITH CANCER- oh how soon you forgot what Reid said:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is blaming Republicans for the National Institutes of Health turning away cancer patients. But when asked why the Senate wouldn't try to help "one child who has cancer" by approving a mini-spending bill, he shot back: "Why would we want to do that?"
#3 Mar 13, 2014
I have not forgotten what Reid said...now let's see if you can finish the story and tell the "complete" truth about that statement. What you wrote is untrue...now tell the whole truth.
That sweet child is being used by cantor and you can't justify that.
Since: Sep 13
#4 Mar 13, 2014
"Several House Republicans opposed the legislation because they would rather see the money used to offset the deficit."
Who are these 'christians'(cough) whom continue to put money before life.....they claim to defend?
#5 Mar 13, 2014
You are NOT telling the truth about what was said - I copied and pasted my comment and I will do it again just for you and I will add all of the comments.
"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) asked why Senate Democrats would want to fund the National Institutes of Health to help one child who has cancer Wednesday when asked that question by CNN reporter Dana Bash.
DANA BASH: You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials. The House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what youve said, will you at least pass that? And if not, arent you playing the same political games that Republicans are?
HARRY REID: Listen, Sen. Durbin explained that very well, and he did it here, did it on the floor earlier, as did Sen. Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? Its obvious whats going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is Obamacare. They are obsessed. I dont know what other word I can use. Theyre obsessed with this Obamacare. Its working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.
BASH: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldnt you do it?
REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means youre irresponsible and reckless " SO WITH THAT HE SAID REID LIED ABOUT OBAMACASRE WORKING AND A CHILD COULD DIE BECAUSE OF OBAMACARE AND REID WOULD NOT REALLY CARE SINCE HE HAS REFUSED TO HELP ONE CHILD WITH CANCER.
#6 Mar 13, 2014
Here is my copy & paste
press conference shortly after the government shutdown got underway. House Republicans had begun a strategy of pushing piecemeal bills to fund popular components of the government in order to undermine the Democratic unity demanding full government funding or nothing.
Our Abby Ohlheiser transcribed the conversation between CNN's Dana Bash, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Reid when a bill that funded the National Institutes of Health was brought up.
BASH: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn't you do it?
SCHUMER: Why put one against the other?
REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home.
The "why would we want to do that?" was in response to Schumer, not Bash. But Schumer's comment, off-mic, was ignored by Republicans, who claimed that Reid was actually dismissing the idea of helping kids with cancer. That's the message the Gabriella got, too, it seems.
When you feature a visibly sick child criticizing an opponent by name for something that is obviously unfair, it's simply stunning.
On Tuesday, CNN's Bash covered the story of Gabriella's life of advocacy and her death from a brain tumor at the end of October. She interviewed Cantor.
BASH: It's pretty rare to name a piece of legislation after a person.
CANTOR: It could be a really inspiring story for so many people.
As Democrats note to Bash, far more funding was cut from NIH under sequestration than would be replaced by Cantor's bill cuts that Cantor praised in September.
Screaming doesn't make you right-it just makes you loud.
The sweet is being used...period.
#7 Mar 13, 2014
Here are several more of the same thing - I did not see Reid responding to Schulmer he was talking to Bash when he said that. There are 4 web sites that I have looked at and all of them show Reid's comments. Every one of these shows the discussion between Bash and Reid - play them and listen to them. One of these below is also CNN and it took Reids comment the same way all the other Americans did. He would not support one child with cancer.
#8 Mar 13, 2014
I believe those are the edited versions. It's very hard to find an unedited one now. I think cnn is a joke and don't ever watch it--don't watch fox news either.
We will have to disagree...he was not responding to bash.
We can exchange links til the sun rises in the west and sets in the east, I am an American who does not believe for one second he was responding to bash.
Specifically, conservatives are claiming that Reid replied to a reporter's question, "If you can help one child with cancer, why wouldn't you?" by saying "why would we want to do that?" In fact, Reid was responding to Sen. Chuck Schumer, who had interjected, saying "why pit one against the other?"
#9 Mar 14, 2014
We will have to agree to disagree - Reid did not even look towards Schumer and was talking to Bash. I have provided the web sites that I believe show Reid was in total control when talking to Bash. Thanks for the web site you provided as follows:
"On October 1, the federal government was shut down after conservative Republicans refused to pass legislation funding operations unless that funding was tied to the defunding or delay of Obamacare. As part of an effort to avoid political damage from that unpopular decision, House Republicans have called for piecemeal bills that would fund some parts of the federal government, including the National Institutes of Health and national parks."
What the GOP had asked Obama to provide to the people the same treatment he did for the businesses by giving them an extension on the effective date and Obama refused to negotiate and as a result of that the government got shut down. The shutdown could have been avoided if Obama would have negotiated on the extension date and the Government would not have gotten shut down.
Thanks for having a good post when we both can agree to disagree.
#10 Mar 14, 2014
The whole idea of a debate is to convince the other party they're mistaken-it doesn't always happen--I'm good with that.
I'm glad this bill is doing well BUT cantor is using a sweet little girl as a pawn, not just to get the bill passed but to rebrand the republican party--and I object I object I object. Cantor's motivations are ego, greed and politics, using a child to accomplish HIS own goals makes me sick.
#11 Mar 14, 2014
And I feel Reid hates children - since he would not support a child with cancer. I believe Obamacare will NOT take care of the really sick (cancer, COPD, heart) on the old - if you can not function on your own and you are not going to be able to get better then you are a waste of money and you are SOL.
“Happiness comes through giving”
Since: Feb 08
#12 Mar 14, 2014
You are more twisted than a pretzel. You know damned well Reid meant something else. If you don't, ask the nurse in charge of Bingo.
“Happiness comes through giving”
Since: Feb 08
#13 Mar 14, 2014
No matter what Cantor's motives are, this day should be memorialized as a rare moment when a Republican actually did something positive for the people.
#14 Mar 15, 2014
You are taking up mind reading? You know dang well that Reid did address the reporter and did not even look at other senator. Reid was too busy trying to make the GOP look bad and he was making a statement against the GOP and against the reporter for asking the question. Look at the web sites (3) of them and they all say the same thing.
This shows Reid will stoop to a real low just to stop the House from trying to get anything past.
The millionaire Dems want all they got and them some and do not want to help the middle class or the poor other than by trying to keep them dependent on the government. They have done NOTHING for JOBS and the AA unemployment rate is at 17%. They continue to try to blame the GOP but Reid will NOT bring any bills forward or even discuss them.
The people are not stupid and they can see what has happened.
#15 Mar 15, 2014
That's more than the Dems want - they want to CONTROL all people, do away with the constitution and tell the people what food they can eat, how they exercise, what DOCTOR they can go to and what insurance they have to buy and how they live and the list goes on and on.
All of this coming from a president that runs and hides when the phone rings at 3 in the morning and we have 4 dead Americans. Then we have Hillary with her campaign slogan of "What difference does it make".
#16 Mar 16, 2014
To be sure, majorities of 60% or more among Republicans and Democrats across the ideological spectrum agree that inequality is on the rise, and about 90% of liberal and centrist Democrats say the government should do something about it. But while a 61%-majority of moderate and liberal Republicans say the government should do something to reduce the gap between the rich and everyone else, 55% of conservative Republicans dont want the government to do much or anything at all about inequality.
Conservative Republicans are also far more likely than more moderate Republicans to say the government would do more to reduce poverty by lowering taxes on the wealthy and corporations to encourage investment and economic growth (70% vs. 42%); half of moderate and liberal Republicans say raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations to expand programs for the poor is a more effective way to reduce poverty. And while 78% of conservative Republicans believe government aid to the poor does more harm than good by making people too dependent on the government, more among moderate and liberal Republicans say it does more good than harm (52%) than say it has a negative impact (40%).
#17 Mar 16, 2014
Lets compare the taxes between Obama and Romney - Obama screams about the rich millionaires - he is one and yet when the taxes came out it was Romney that had a large donation and Obama did not. Its nice to talk a good line but it is better to take action - Obama is only spending the tax payers dollars - but he is not willing to donate his money - so don't touch his.
A lot of people that came off of unemployment went on disability to keep from working, check the numbers. There are more dishonest people who do not want to work and they want the government to continue to take care of them and Obama wants a larger government and this is how he is going to obtain it.
You know the saying give a man a fish and he can eat today - teach him how to fish and he can eat forever.
#18 Mar 17, 2014
I sure do hope Romney gave more to charity then Obama did..Obama's worth around 8 million..Romney's worth around 250 million. Tax returns are public. Romney gave most to the Morman church..check out what they do with their "donations" and do NOT pay any taxes on.
By 2012, the couples taxable income had dropped to about $608,000, with only about $273,000 from sales and royalties from the books, according to the tax return. Most of the income came from Mr. Obamas presidential salary of $400,000 per year.
In 2012, the president and first lady paid about $112,000 in federal income taxes. The White House said their effective tax rate was 18.4 percent, but added that it would have been more if Republicans would accept his tax proposals.
Under the presidents own tax proposals, including limitations on the value of tax preferences for high-income households, he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it, Jay Carney, the presidents press secretary, said in a statement on the White House Web site.
In 2012, the Obamas gave $150,000 of their income, or about 25 percent, to 33 charities, including a gift of $103,000 to the Fisher House Foundation, a Chicago-based group that provides free or low-cost housing to veterans receiving medical treatment at military hospitals.
Mr. Obama and his wife also paid about $30,000 in state taxes in Illinois, the White House said.
Calculations from 24/7 Wall St. of the peak lifetime wealth (or peak so far) of Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama add up to a total $128 million while Romney reports assets of up to $250 million.
Mitt Romneys personal income-tax records confirm the obvious: He is a wealthy man part of what Occupy Wall Street calls the 1 percent and definitely not part of the 47 percent of Americans that the Republican presidential challenger labeled as dependent upon government because they dont pay income taxes.
Mitt Romney Hates People Who Dont Pay Taxes, but Loved Using His Church as a Tax Shelter
a secret tape revealed presidential candidate Willard Romney telling a gathering of high-income donors he regards 47% of the population parasites because they dont take responsibility for their lives. Romney was expressing his disdain for retired Americans, combat troops, disabled Veterans, and those too poor to meet the threshold to pay income taxes, and yet he did not impugn the Mormon Church that that does not pay taxes on its income and investments because it is a tax-exempt charitable organization
#19 Mar 17, 2014
More BS made up Dems. The Dems said this referred to the old people on SS, people with handicaps and the troops and that was another pack of lies - look at who cut medicare due to obamacare and look who is cutting out troops where America has NO DEFENSE. That 49% were those that would NOT work and yes there are some of us that agree that there are those that will never work because they like the "free money" being handed to them. It is easier to drop a baby than to work and get monthly checks for that child. That message was sent in by Carters grandson and the Dems went crazy with pulling out more than what was really said as they usually do. When it comes for them (Dems) to talk the plead the 5th or have executive orders to get the GOP to shut up - people are getting smart and have figured out the works of the Dems - most are LIES.
#20 Mar 17, 2014
The Republican Candidate said that President Obama "robbed" Medicare of $716 billion to pay for ObamaCare/the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Sounds serious. Is it true?
According to Romney, Obama went into the "Medicare Trust Fund" room in the Treasury Department walked out with 716 really, really big ones, and leaving the Trust Fund depleted by that amount, jeopardizing its solvency for more than 40 million senior citizens and disabled persons. Sounds nefarious.
No money from the "Trust Fund" was withdrawn. By reducing rates paid to hospitals, health insurance plans, and other medical providers (not physicians, by the way -- a mistake being made by media all over the place), the "draw" out of the fund is reduced by $716 billion between federal fiscal years 2013-22 (it was $449 billion between 2010-19 when the ACA was signed in March 2010). If the ACA is implemented as passed, then $716B less will be withdrawn over those ten years, meaning the Medicare Trust Fund will have about eight more years of solvency than if the ACA had not been signed into law.
One more thing: Romney said at his Whiteboard Event, that there would be "no changes" affecting current Medicare beneficiaries while he is President. At the same time, he says he's going to repeal the "entire" ACA. But the ACA has already expanded benefits for current Medicare enrollees -- including, closing the Part D drug "donut hole," providing free annual wellness visits for all enrollees, and covering all preventive care services with no cost sharing of any kind.
Governor Romney is saying two different things at once -- I will not cut benefits for existing Medicare enrollees, and I will cut benefits for existing Medicare enrollees by repealing the ACA
I think your dislike of Obama has created a closed mind. I don't know where you get the idea old people are being screwed and neglected or they can't see their own doctor. The food we eat? If you are talking about the obesity problem in the states, you have to know, it is a serious health issue....I don't recall Obama passing any restrictions on what you eat (?) Do away with the constitution? What are you talking about?
Are there some people who abuse the system? Yes, for sure and Romney takes advantage of the tax system that is geared toward the wealthy.
The $716 Billion Question: Strengthen Medicare, or Tax Breaks for the Wealthy?
Add your comments below
|Trump tells California 'there is no drought'||4 min||Lawrence Wolf||15|
|Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11)||5 min||Blitzking||197,533|
|'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10)||17 min||Jay||225,182|
|'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15)||27 min||who cares||11,938|
|If Donald Trump Was President, Here's What Woul... (Oct '15)||28 min||LarryV||8,691|
|The top 5 people Donald Trump might pick as his...||42 min||Fumblementally ill||19|
|Libertarians pick ex-New Mexico Gov. Johnson fo...||48 min||Retired SOF||5|
Find what you want!
Search Republican Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC