Rep. Grayson really is awkward in interview mode. But he still wins at politics.

I like Grayson's populism. I suspect it's far more genuine than the faux populism of the Republican leadership. But let's face it: his sound bites are pretty vacuous. Not as vacuous as the stuff put out by the Right (death panels? lol), but still ungrounded in any real critical thinking.

I say this as an independent, though one strongly in favor of a public option.

>> ^HadouKen24:
I like Grayson's populism. I suspect it's far more genuine than the faux populism of the Republican leadership. But let's face it: his sound bites are pretty vacuous. Not as vacuous as the stuff put out by the Right (death panels? lol), but still ungrounded in any real critical thinking.
I say this as an independent, though one strongly in favor of a public option.


As much as I would tend to agree that civility is needed--Mr. Grayson is not helping in that regard--and although he is exaggerating (about the kindest way to put it), as long as Republicans are resisting without being constructive his ultimate point is fair. A lack of a plan might as well be a plan to cause what the absence of any reform would allow to happen.

Whatever happens, if Republicans brought a constructive debate, and even if it went largely ignored, it would be far more helpful to move forward at least SEEKING to compromise and get something done. So far it seems Republicans are only interested in compromise that removes elements of the Democratic plans, and that's not really compromise.

I too speak as an Independent (mildly Libertarian), and I too am in favor of the public option. Free markets work best with healthy competition, which is not what they have right now in this particular sector. Force them to really compete, and maybe eventually we can even pull back on the public option completely after we have spurred diversity and true competition in this market.

The "unnecessary tests" claim is in direct opposition to the idea that we don't practice enough preventative medicine. We should be testing early and often because health issues are much easier (and much cheaper) to deal with if found early.

Free markets work best with healthy competition, which is not what they have right now in this particular sector. Force them to really compete, and maybe eventually we can even pull back on the public option completely after we have spurred diversity and true competition in this market.

I agree with you that Republicans are not offering constructive solutions, they're too busy battling this surreptitious end-run to communize the American health care system. When the Elephants were in charge, it is true they did little differently...partially for good reasons. If the Rs were for an actual free market health care approach (which would consist of deregulation and allowing health insurance to be sold across state lines) instead of Republican Brand Communism Lite, the taxocrats would attack as viciously as they did when the Rs suggested privatizing parts of Social Security.

If the "public option" makes it in, it will join the ranks of (Sc)Amtrak and the post office: insolvent, subsidized government welfare projects that will NEVER end, and will cost 10 times what the deceivers "projected".

When the hell was government made a lawful "competitor" with actual wealth-producing businesses? Why would you think anything the government does will LOWER costs?

If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free

Wow. Well, you're right that the Republicans are not offering constructive solutions.

Neither are you.

Deregulation is the answer. Look at what it's done to our financial markets. Oh, wait...

Are you seriously going to try and sell me on the idea that the fact that I can pay like a half-dollar to send a written message across the country is somehow an inefficient thing? I pay more in gas to fuel my truck to drive one mile than it costs the government to move my message anywhere in the country (hundreds or thousands of miles). If I delivered a letter personally to Washington, it would cost me hundreds of dollars if I count the round trip. If I wanted to send a letter to congress? Half a fucking dollar.

Half a dollar.

Don't quote me again, you bankrupt, vacuous excuse for a human being.

If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free


I live in a country where it IS free, and its less expensive. How clearly is is possible to spell it out to you without you getting it:
Here's a list of government-spent $ per capita on healthcare, I took this from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934556.html but just about anywhere you look will give you the same kinds of result. this is from 2007, the most recent I found:

Iceland 3,294
Norway 4,080
Australia 3,123
Canada 3,173
Ireland 2,618
Sweden 2,828
Switzerland 4,011
Japan 2,293
Netherlands 3,092
France 3,040
Finland 2,203

This is how much the respective governments spends(our taxes at work) on healthcare per person. Each and every one of these countries provide free, universal healthcare for all their citizens,wether they have insurance or not (which you are welcome to buy) or whether they pay taxes or not.

So what about the US you say?

United States 6,096

Almost twice what many others pay.

No government spends more taxes on healtcare than the US government spends

Yet, US citizens have to pay private companies for most healthcare they actually get. Either by paying the doctor/hospital directly, or by paying private insurance companies.

How the hell is that cheaper than "free"??

Most healtcare, compared to US "healthcare", is actually cheaper than free.

ohhhhh no you didn't!!