So Edwards’ numbers are a good “first step,” despite that they’re grossly inaccurate.

proof please?

Unwillingness to propose something prematurely that’s inaccurate is tantamount to Bush.

obama’s performance on Saturday speaks for itself. it doesn’t have to be tantamount to bush for it to be proof positive of my main beef with him: he’s not about anything but himself – his self-perceived power to average all ideas and come up with THE WAY.

It’s scary to think Kucinich is the only guy in the Democratic field that gets the fact that a complete overhaul is the only way to make universal health care workable.

he’s not the only one to “get” that. you think that after what hillary went through she doesn’t understand that? kucinich has the freedom to propose whatever he wants, and bless him for doing it. no one else is in quite that position.

if edwards and richardson’s numbers are a first step, then i’m fine with that. if they eventually cut out the waste, they might be onto something.

and by the way, you might want to take another look at the numbers on your site. an overwhelming majority knows that there needs to be change, and right away.

Running the numbers on Edwards and Richardson’s claims that universal care is possible for $120 billion a year is laughable. Even if they just cover the 45 million not covered, that means they’d be doing it (somehow) at 1/4 the cost of Medicare. If that’s possible, why does Medicare cost so much?

That’s literally what Obama seems to be running on:
I don’t need any ideas, I don’t need any policy positions. Because I’ll take every problem and forge a consensus. I’m a uniter, baby, and that’s all it takes. Consensus solves every problem.