Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RWR8189
Sounds like a damn fine governor. No one likes to take things from the least among us, but sacrifice is necessary for the general good. He managed to trim the budget, balance it, reduce some taxes, and still spend a little more on Medicaid. Why the heck is he so unpopular?
2 posted on 05/13/2006 1:55:52 PM PDT by spikeytx86 (Pray for Democrats for they have been brainwashed by there fruity little club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: spikeytx86
Medicaid eligibility rules were horribly rewritten and were relaxed ridiculously under Taxman Carnahan and Bob Fold'em. Technically, at one point in 1999, yr hmbl srvnt could have wormed his way onto the rolls, notwithstanding an income of over $60K that year, by fudging a fact or two on the enrollment form, as I was (believe it or not!) encouraged to do by an 'outreach' 'worker'.

Needless to say, this did NOT occur (nor ever would!), and I told this 'outreach' person (flunkies in charge of doing nothing but expanding the welfare state by trying to sign up everybody and his dog) as much. This flunkie said, incredibly, ''I don' unnerstan'. Donchoo you want dese free benefits?'' I replied, ''Some citizens are actually honest. Shall I translate that into ebonics for you?'', and, after a 10-15 second pause (long flash-to-bang time, I know, but what can you expect from welfare state flunkies after all?) the conversation terminated rather abruptly.

During the Carnahan/Holden regimes, and due to their obscene outreach efforts, the number of people on the public teat went straight up. The number is still wildly high -- the cuts amounted to all of 6.7% of the number of people formerly on the Medicaid rolls, and the lefties were busily screaming 'Holocaust!' when Mr. Blunt announced them. This is/was hilarious in one sense: there are EASILY another 10-12-15% of Medicaid enrollees who do not belong there, and wouldn't be there in the first place, had the enrollment process not been so corrupted.

His unpopularity is due principally to the unfortunate fact that every single major media outlet in MO, of any type, is dead left. Mr. Bush probably sees more positive stories in the LBM than does Mr. Blunt. If not, it's d*mned close.

9 posted on 05/13/2006 2:20:51 PM PDT by SAJ (b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: spikeytx86

We need that kind of leadership in Washington. Medicaid is the black hole of spending. To Liberals you cannot spend enough on Medicaid.


21 posted on 05/13/2006 3:40:57 PM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: spikeytx86
He managed to trim the budget, balance it, reduce some taxes, and still spend a little more on Medicaid. Why the heck is he so unpopular?

Because the press demonized him continously for being uncaring and dumping the handicapped into the streets. You think Gingrich got it for throwing seniors into poverty, then you ought to see what they did to Blunt. After all Blunt gave the boot to minimally handicapped kids with upper middle class parents to make sure that those who truly needed help continued to get help.

26 posted on 05/13/2006 4:08:15 PM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: spikeytx86

I was working as a cashier at Walmart about a year after Blunt took office. A customer was hopping mad because all the name brand WIC groceries was not allowed anymore. Instead Blunt's administration required cheaper store brands. That woman ranted about how she voted for Matt Blunt but never again.

I thought to myself "Beggers can't be choosers" but the previous Democrat govenor had expanded the rolls to get most of the state on some sort of welfare.


27 posted on 05/13/2006 4:15:31 PM PDT by Swiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson