Political Crossfire Forums

Fair enough.

The original bill passed by the House did include that public option, though. Which was of course intended to eventually facilitate the transition away from private insurers. Which is the point I was trying to get across when I said "supposed to be". Incorrect of me to express it so.

My position remains that the original intent was (and is) single payer. We'd have a public option now if not for Lieberman. Well, we'd have had a public option for a little while, anyways, lol.

Considering Spider makes trips to Canada often *shudder* I'm surprised he is mistaking the two.

I'm super proud of him for kind-of-sort-of admitting he was wrong though.

lol yes Galt. I know.

As I said: The original bill passed by the House did include that public option, though. Which was of course intended to eventually facilitate the transition away from private insurers. Which is the point I was trying to get across when I said "supposed to be". Incorrect of me to express it so.

My position remains that the original intent was (and is) single payer.

I'm aware that the public option is not single payer in the same way that I'm aware that a triangle is not a square. I didn't say they are the same thing. I said that the one was intended to facilitate the transition to the other. Literally. Right there, in black and white, directly above.

Here we go again.

I've already stipulated to the rest of your post. As I said, my mistake.

Goddamnit Spider, you were so close!