So it should have been transparently obvious from the outset that the only response our glorious and wizened Senate could come up with, when facing a failed healthcare system that has been steadily bankrupting the country, its businesses and its citizens for decades, would be to invent a solution in which the companies most responsible for the problem would be given cash hand over fist. And indeed, that seems to be the "solution" that is closer to fruition than any of the others.
The premise in this case is a mandate in which every American shall be forced to buy private insurance. Apparently that is uncontroversial, to our leaders, but the notion of providing a government-backed plan for those who do not want their health and welfare tied to the same companies that have been screwing them over for decades, now that is a bridge too far.
Let me be clear. To me, such a plan represents the very pinnacle of corruption, of corporate toadyism, and of the complete dissolution of effective government into merely being a legal framework for corporations to most efficiently extract wealth from the nation. And the day such a plan passes, I will no longer be a Democrat
Well said (although I'm pretty sure I'm not a registered Dem, but sometimes they trick you into these things when you register to vote, err not vote in some cases).
Just to follow up: This is why we should get rid of the Senate as an institution altogether -- it's resistance to representative government enables what Hunter is talking about here:
Max Baucus is a crook. There, I said it outright. Ben Nelson? A crook. Grassley, Boehner, McConnell, Hoyer and the others? Crooks. Not "conservative", not "fiscal watchdogs", not "representing their own peculiar constituents", none of that hogwash and drivel that churns up our airwaves on a daily basis. They join the long line of leaders that rake in more cash from health insurers, pharmaceutical companies and the like than you or I are likely to see in our lifetimes, and in exchange for that they are the unquestioned _kingmakers_ of reform, and all the nation must bow down to them and to those that have paid them more cash than any of their own constituents have been able to shell out. With regularity, every industry under the American spotlight will turn to "friendly" senators and representatives, where friendly means nothing more than plied with cash, and in them they will find regulatory salvation for a relative pittance. It does not represent corruption under our system of government simply because we have carefully designed our government to freely allow it. Corporations are people, after all, and people have freedom of speech, and dollars represent speech, and therefore the person with the most dollars is entitled to the most representation.