While I don't deserve all your accolades, it is nice to get them and I really appreciate it.

I'll do my best to continue to deserve your praise and trust.

Thanks again,

Dorian (D.E.)

I see many patients on Tricare, and the care we provide to our military families is no different from that which we provide to the children of our state representatives, which is no different from the cash-only patients who can't afford insurance. Your stories from other posts are excellent on this point. Thanks again for a clear perspective.

Jeff Pickens

Obama and the administration need to do this like a classroom teacher: Put a summary of the reform into about 5-6 points, one sentence in length. Then, let the debate begin. Not 1200 pages to senators and then turn them loose in “town halls.”

Personally, I am totally for a public plan and a single payer. I have worked for a health insurance company, as a physician reviewer for case management and utilization review. I could tell some stories.

Here's a related story about Lou Dobbs, on NPR:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?st…

This bill, and virtually anything that might be done to improve our healthcare system, involves too much complexity with which we are emotionally motivated to deal. In addition, there are too many factions with entrenched economic and/or financial interests to permit it to become a true health initiative.

There's been too much arguing about the details. People can not describe in 2 or 3 sentences the conceptual parameters of the effort and what it is supposed to accomplish. Unfortunately, people can describe how they feel about it in 1 or 2 words, and that's not good. And that's not to mention the elements who have whipped up hysteria by suggesting, with certainty, what will occur once the final product (which does not yet exist) emerges.

If either side of the debate has to work this hard arguing about something which theoretically should improve the lives of the masses of people, there's a big problem.

Even more so than how something is done, people are interested in results, not the details. And once again, as is frequently the case with much of human processing, the facts don't really matter. How people view the world, what they value, and what they want, matters.

And there is nothing collaborative in nature about that. Factor in the strong individualistic American DNA, and this effort is emotionally toast.

If the Free Market (in reality already heavily subsidized) is so great, let them show it. Let us have our public option and then see how well the Free Market can compete. Let them demonstrate how well they innovate, and control costs, historically by kicking people off their coverage. If they can do so much better or the public plan is so atrocious, then people will want their product. Currently there is no safety net for people who can't afford coverage, other than an emergency department or some program like what RAM is doing in L.A. this week.

Frankly I don't think we need a Trojan Horse to encourage people towards a more effective and comprehensive system of care. I would prefer a parade float, but its only a matter of time before more and more people get priced out of their healthcare benefits and will be looking for relief.

No, but it means that the proponents of the plan have to convince people that the plan's not designed to do that if they want to convince more people to support it. And that means actually addressing the language of the bill which opponents feel will likely lead to an untenable situation for health insurance companies, and may drive them out of business or drive up costs for private plans.

The onus is on them to prove these things aren't correct interpretations, but instead they choose to ignore the legitimate questions and try to marginalize their opponents through ridicule and demonization. Why is that? If there are answers that would set the record straight, then why isn't anyone giving those answers? Saying that “Obama said that everyone will be able to keep their own plan if they're satisfied with it” isn't a response- it's political doubletalk.

Even if a few would like to eventually get to single payer, it by no means that everyone that supports the plan wants to.

We need reform, in a terrible way. I don't support the bills being worked on right now, but the current system is not sustainable.

the current system.

Everyone get in line to lose your limbs, your house, your job and your lifesavings all because you've been bracketed out of coverage at the sole descretion of MedMob…

Or if there wasn't already sufficient evidence of modest programs gradually being expanded (SCHIP, for example.)

Fear mongering.

“We're all going to become commies!! The sky is falling!!!”

You're right. Obama just needs to host regular citizens telling their similar horror stories. He needs to do this a bunch of times to saturate the cattle with a new fear…the fear that is real…the fear that shakes people to their bones…the reality that if they or a loved one get a normal everyday sickness that requires hospitalization, then they will lose their house and/or their jobs and/or their life savings.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. The only difference is that these citizens can tell fearful tales to a shaking populace that are R-E-A-L…*shudder*

But Obama doesn't get to use that excuse.

But his is a hypocrite it appears, and is selling the 'true believers' down the river.

Now, why would he do that, unless as many of us have been saying, ObamaCare is just the Trojan Horse. Do anything you can to get it in the gates, then incrementally expand and modify it until the end game is achieved (The Department of U.S. National Health Care).