gid, i know what you are saying and the definition you cite, but i have never seen an example of anyone in any nation being jailed for not buying into a health care plan. if i am wrong, and there are those "political refugees" out there. therefore i don't think the definition is accurate. tho it does make for good rhetoric.
Sean. As Libertarians, it does not serve the party well if we rely too heavily on "talking points" from the big two, as you are doing here.
well, actually, as i pointed out, i am not trying to imply even that i support her plan or anyone else's. if i gave that impression or mis-spoke, i apologize. she doesn't have one, and i haven't endorsed anyone's in the bigger picture.
she is, and i think genuinely, trying to get a consensus of good ideas. perhaps her definition of a good idea is different than mine, that remains to be seen. but i have to agree with the premise of doing that. i believe that we will get nowhere in this country with ANY plan that garners "51%" or any slight majority. in order for anything to actually work, we're gonna need a much bigger majority to make it work. otherwise, any plan will merely be sabatoged by it's detractors whenever given the opportunity and it wil become "just another big government program."
but your point is well taken. but it is common for people to take my "fighting for the underdog" or just wanting a "fair playingfield" is often misconstrued as "defending " the libs or cons or reps or dems or whatever...i can understand that.
and i tend to put a high value on personal liberties and it finds me in their camp more often than with the right, at least online. while i know you consider some of the GOP's issues more relevant in your priorities, which puts ya with the GOP more often than not. so, both of us find ourselves rubbing elbows with the people we refuse to actually align ourselves with, for various reasons, all too often. but in our system, i think we would both have to concede that working with the 2 bigs often yields more results than trying to crash the party from the outside. hell, a 3rd party hasn't been able to get into a debate since like 92.
I think Americans would be far more likely to embrace your more moderate position of available health care than the DNC's proposal of universal health care. Even though I don't even side with you there, I find it far less totalitarian.
and again, i think in the end, if anything real does get done, it will be a more "moderate" plan than most of the pre-election rhetoric would suggest.
one side note,,,funny, i'm one of those people that everyone who is on the right thinks i'm liberal, and everyone on the left finds me conservative. but that's more common "offline" where people see more of who i am than gets put on display here.
