Ok Libs, here's some really straight shootin aimed squarely at some of the logic behind your leaders tactics. If you can, please debunk these ideas but keep in mind that we're looking for reasonable explanation and facts which means staying on target and issuing concise points to state your position.

"One plain fact should outweigh all the words of Barack Obama and all the impressive trappings of the setting in which he says them: He tried to rush Congress into passing a massive government takeover of the nation's medical care before the August recess -- for a program that would not take effect until 2013! Whatever President Obama is, he is not stupid. If the urgency to pass the medical care legislation was to deal with a problem immediately, then why postpone the date when the legislation goes into effect for years -- more specifically, until the year after the next Presidential election? If this is such an urgently needed program, why wait for years to put it into effect? And if the public is going to benefit from this, why not let them experience those benefits before the next Presidential election? If it is not urgent that the legislation goes into effect immediately, then why don't we have time to go through the normal process of holding Congressional hearings on the pros and cons, accompanied by public discussions of its innumerable provisions? What sense does it make to 'hurry up and wait' on something that is literally a matter of life and death? If we do not believe that the President is stupid, then what do we believe? The only reasonable alternative seems to be that he wanted to get this massive government takeover of medical care passed into law before the public understood what was in it. Moreover, he wanted to get re-elected in 2012 before the public experienced what its actual consequences would be. Unfortunately, this way of doing things is all too typical of the way this administration has acted on a wide range of issues." --economist Thomas Sowell

What to me is equally as interesting as is the above is another often overlooked part of the discussion of the proposed healtcare bills and the total costs involved in its implementation.

Though the figures range between $800,000,000,000 and $1,200,000,000,000 for implementing this program over a period of 10yrs the figure quoted by Big O himself obviously or naturally must also include the costs to implement the massive new bureaucracy that will be needed to oversee and implement this program, which is also touted at $800,000,000,000.

What this sounds like is what we'll be paying for over the course of the next 10yrs is actually just the cost of setting up the overall system. Unless of course we wind up with spending the loftier $1.2 trillion dollar program which would then leave us with $400 billion to actually SPEND on some of the promised healthcare for the 300 million people it would cover.

Sadly if you look at what that means amortised over a 10yr term is IF we buy into the bigger is better $1.2 trillion dollar program it would leave us with the ability to spend a whopping $133 per year on each person covered. By that figure we'd all better hope no one in the US needs treatment within that term for anything annually more involved or expensive than treatment for a cold each year