But I was a bit surprised that Howard Dean now would vote for the bill even without a Public Option or Medicare buy-in. He totally folded. And the reason? Because he's tired of being pushed around by the right wing, as he stated in the interview. That's understandable, but a political reason nonetheless.

And I'd really like to know where Cenk stands on this, as he too repeatedly stated that a bill without a public option or buy-in would do more harm than good, and that he wouldn't vote for it. I have the feeling that he too has "developing views" on this issue, and would have to eat his words, meaning he would vote for a bill without any of that, if he where a senator. Cenk, please address this!

I'd take the vote, first public option, if that fails, let's try buy-in, and if that fails, take what you can get and run. Try to fix it later, and if you can't do it, you at least started a transformation, and another democratic president will pick up the mantle. That means, if he wants to do it, or deems the times ripe.

And the best argument for a public option, as a cost control will the then still rising costs be, for which insurance companies and republicans alike could be blamed.

Of course, long-term planning sucks for people of the present era, especially if there is the opportunity for a faster solution.But it's still better then no planning at all, as is the republicans strategy.