JBrown72073 at cs.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 11/16/02 6:47:36 PM, owner-lbo-talk-digest at lists.panix.com
> writes:
>
> Michael Pollak:
> >But I think if he [Gore] made it a central issue in the general campaign that
> >would be something else again. The thing about single payer is that
> >you're either for it or against it. There is no such thing as single
> >payer plus and everybody knows it.
>
> Yeah, and I never thought 'conservative' could mean communist, or that
> 'universal health care' could mean the Clinton clusterfuck, or that
> 'prescription drug benefit' could mean giving public money to insurance
> companies, so I'm waiting for 'single-payer' to mean something like the
> government hires Lockheed Martin to administer Medicare. You watch.
>
> >And if you're for it, you instantly
> >amass enormous enemies.
>
> Yeah, what's with Gore? A little late in the game to start channeling his
> inner human. I predict either he or this thought will soon sink from view.
> I hope I'm wrong, of course.
Hope springs eternal in the breast of those who just can't break their tie to the Dems. Man never is but always to be blest.
Carrol