Now, I think you know that, but maybe You miss my point, either intentionally or otherwise.
I don't miss your point. The R's and the D conservatives foiled the big plan. I'm sure I acknowledged that. I wrote, "yes, conservatives got in the way, obviously."
Now MY point is that there is a difference between "what we should have" and what Alighieri thinks we should have. The R's and D conservatives got in the way with WHAT YOU THINK WE SHOULD HAVE, not necessarily with what we should have. I could just as easily claim that the D's or the liberals got in the way of what we should have, were I inclined to be so self-absorbed that I confuse my preference with absolute truth. <g>
What we got, I think, is something that almost nobody wanted. Each side foiled the other's dreams. Each side got in the way of what the other side thinks we should have.
I wrote: "And if he's unable or unwilling to recognize an attempt at analysis and mutual understanding but rather treats every overture as opposition even when it's not. "
You wrote: "It's not difficult to look around the world and observe that single payer produces lower health care costs..."
Clearly my point didn't get across. You see this as a contest. I don't. I don't want any part of any contest. I want to understand all the issues and all the points of view and be thoughtful about proceeding. I don't care about winning. I care about doing what's smart. We didn't do that. We didn't do that in part because the discussion was on the level of claptrap like "it's not difficult to look around the world and observe that single payer produces lower health care costs." That is superficial sloganeering, not analysis, not problem solving, not critical thinking.
Both sides did it and got what they deserve. |
