I responded to this quote from Mark at Ol' BC's blog recently.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the plan to simply give people who normally can't afford insurance an option? I don't think we are really talking about government interference on a scale that you seem to suggest.

It was my understanding that we aren't really talking about socialized medicine. We are simply talking about changing a few things so that the poor and sick have an option besides bankruptcy.

I will admit to being rather clueless about it all. The engines driving health care are far more complex than I can fathom. Likewise, I doubt you fathom them either. Once again, I will keep an open mind and try to make an informed decision when I see the actual proposals.

So far, what I have heard is this: If you have health care, you can keep it. If you don't, here is an option. Somehow this doesn't seem so bad. Of course, there are many other things to consider... but like I said, I am far from being an expert.

OK. I will correct you, and if you're going to admit to being clueless, it's usually wise not to enter into debate. The current plan being batted about Washington, DC is merely a stepping stone on the slippery slope that I was telling you about before. Thanks to Libertarian Leanings, we now have proof:



Any doubt now about Obama's intentions?

Didn't think so.

RWR