And I don't think it's just debunking '1 or 2 things' that she got wrong. The heart of the article is a lie.
Btw, OT, but here's a good substance video from today w/ Ezra v. Ratigan (the end on costs is p'bly the best part of it).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id /21134540/vp/35953913#35953 913
My website: History By Day Follow my on twitter @historyday.
if the heart is that this is a corporate gift that masks rising costs with bloated subsidies.
I agree about Single Payer, but as I've said, the fact that the Dems didn't start with that as the opening offer was a political failure of epic proportions. At any rate, a Medicare-Buy-In was entirely possible (and still could be in the future if the current effort fails, but it won't).
Obama disastrously pressured Kucinich, not the Ben Nelsons and Joe Liebermans. If he'd pressured right people, right now I'd be supporting this bill, a bill with an actual chance to provide real competition and a bill that could actually lay a solid foundation to improve upon.
I disagree on the overall tune on subsidies. The subsidies are essentially one big progressive tax. I mean, lets just be blunt about this. It's taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor - for the most part. Half the spending goes to Medicaid/Chip, the other half to the exchange. Most of the money raised to pay for that comes from taxing the wealthy and eliminating Medicare Adavantage.
supports passing this bill.
But just now I heard him say that Hamsher's points are overall correct.
