I think the notion that any change is better than the status quo is an emotionally-appealing one, to many people. I just think that it's wrong-headed.

I'm not going to go into a lot of detail, but I am in favor of a nationwide government (which is to say: taxpayer) funded, single-payer health insurance plan to cover some basic preventative care (shots, biannual checkups with n/p) that everybody should have, and allowing the market to work for all of the necessary stuff beyond that, by removing the state government monopolies on health insurance, and creating a system where a health insurance provider can sell in a given state if it meets either the state's standards or the new national standards. Obama was right about the monopolistic problem in, frex, Alabama -- but that's a problem that the Alabama state government created.

And, just fwiw, I'm in favor of the government (read: taxpayer) picking up the tab for inexpensive preventative care for all warm bodies in the US who have human DNA, including illegal aliens. I think illegal aliens should be deported, after getting appropriate due process; I don't think that denying them a flu shot is going to make them start running for the border.

Well, something's got to get started, or we'll have this "debate" when hospitals close and employers cancel insurance for folks, and the government suddenl bails out the big companies, and wishes the rest of us good luck, as has happened with the financial industry and the car companies.

Maybe it's better that way; the talk radio and TV could just bitch instead of trying to misrepresent the problems. It costs us to much to listen to that garbage, because lots of folks still believe it's all a big plot.

Kind of like the war after /11. We sort of attacked the wrong country, and put useless restrictions on ourselves, but it probably did stop the terrorists. At least the country got behind the President, who gave it his best effort. That's not he case with this problem, from what i see.

I'd roll with what we can get, i think.