Actually I think it exposes a significant population. Those town hall meetings appear to have a large amount of unimportant random people who are unversed, unstudied, and yet are managing to cause fear, panic, paranoia, and change the momentum in the health care debate. I think by showing that many of the people don't have a clue what they are talking about, it might in some small way, help others to think about the actual bill rather than be swept away in the tide of hysteria.
Ah... sorry. I saw that but wasn't really thinking about it when I made my post. (Damn meetings interrupting me when I'm trying to argue on the internet.) I think my post still applies to that statement, although that fear is probably an intentional exaggeration and is even less rational than the others I was thinking of.
It's an excellent point. People forget that the government actually invented the automobile and then started forcing everyone to drive as a central part of their lives. People used to loathe convenience and the idea of expanding their range of practical travel until socialist government practices put them under the yoke.
They certainly encouraged the use of them. Without government intervention (with the use of eminent domain etc) better methods of mass transportation may have evolved.
You of all people should not forget that the roads, and reckless Tokyo drivers, were responsible for Kurumanikuras, the Traffic Accident monster
I was getting to that, but in a step-by-step sneaky fashion, much like my kind are plotting a step-by-step sneaky approach to euthanizing people with socialized deathcam-- I mean medicine. Lord only knows how SouthernSelect would respond to Japanese influence, let alone other aliens But you let the white gorilla out of the bag I guess.
I forgot who said it but someone said that democracy is a terrible system of governance. The only thing worse is everything else.
That is a fair point and I agree there are very valid reasons to be concerned about the pending healthcare reform proposals. The problem though is that the overheated, hyperbolic, and in many cases simply wrong rhetoric thrown out by critics drowns out and prevents discussion of the valid concerns.
Sorry for the derail but he actually has a point here. Our sprawling and inefficient development patterns are very much do to the development of infrastructure like highways. Its possible that without massive spending on the government part to build that sort of infrastructure our development might resemble Europe and other places since developers wouldn't have looked to build sprawl without the infrastructure to support it. That said this has pretty much nothing to do with the argument at hand.
basso, let me know when you see something in the bill that is an actual complaint. Until then you don't come off better than the lady interviewed from aghast's post.
What's bizarre is that many of the "screamers" you ridicule actually want a national health care plan. I know I do. However, they (and I'm one of them) want a cost effective plan -- not just "a" plan without regard for medical economics. After his stimulus debacle, Obama has literally scared the stuffings out of people, particularly middle aged to older white America who obviously perceive they and their childrdn will have to pay for all the illegal aliens while getting pushed to the end of the medical line. They are upset because no one will address tort reform because most of the legislators are lawyers. They are upset because Congress chose not to be part of the program -- "Hey, it's good for you but, uh, I deserve better." Many of my tea party emailers are Democrats who have the same concerns. Virtually all agree Obama's main mistake is pushing too hard too fast with no regard for explaining exactly how public health care will work. "Trust me" is just not an adequate answer.
we don't live in a democracy; the founding father's were quite explicit that a pure democracy was not a desirable form of government.
