So what you're saying in this article is that this is not a very good bill, but let's work to pass it anyway?
Conservative blogs and magazines tear into the actual text of the bill and try to explain, in detail, what it is and what it will do. I was hoping that The Nation would give a broad-based defense of the bill against its detractors, but, frankly, it seems just as upset about its contents as conservatives.
I would think that any bill that forces people to pay insurance companies for coverage and taxes them if they don't would be a bill you would oppose, out of its manifest unfairness.
If The Nation basically ignores the issue in hopes that history will straighten things out, that's a strikingly naïve attitude.
Does this mean that conservatives might be--gasp!--right in their views of the bill?
Nov 15 2009 - 11:51am