I don’t recall claiming that anything Obama said was a lie and if I did, lets ammend it to say he used extremely rosy predictions in selling his stimulus. We can then also agree, using those same criteria, that McCain was using Rosy predictions too.

I take that as an admission of dishonesty and I whole heartedly agree. The truth is there he had no idea what direction the market would take because he had no idea how it would respond to his proposals or even what his proposals would ultimately look like. I’m not calling him a liar but I am agreeing that his predictions were made precisely for the reasons you said.

Obama is a politician so don’t be shocked at the suggestion that he was less than forthright during the campaign - especially after suggesting it yourself in a less forthright way.

You wonder whether Obama would have been elected “if he had been honest about his plans”.

Obama was elected because he is honest and in spite of the brutally dishonest smears that were directed at him.

Don’t mince words. You are implying deception, so call him a liar. See where that gets you.

In theory, if all the dominoes fell in the right places at the right time and everyone was willing to voluntarily do what is necessary to make this work, in 10 to 20 years healthcare would cost less, but by that time healthcare will likely mean something completely different and some supplemental private program will be authorised to to pay for everything universal care does not. Social Security was designed to be a self sustaining program that would ensure a smooth road to retirement but it’s been bailed out several times and scheduled to be bankrupt again. Programs like the 401k had to be developed just to supplement the income paid into it. Medicare has how many parts now? And medicaid? All these programs have noble goals and a certain level of success as safety nets but they haven’t ever lived up to the expectations that were set for them.

I say, if you want to try it, try it in hennepin county or new york or something smaller than the entire country. If it works there others will demand it in their area to and everyone wins. Considering how divided the country is on this issue, wouldn’t that be a fair compromise?

Perhaps the year 1 health reform cost will be $1 billion. Perhaps for year 2 as well. But shouldn’t we have enough confidence in this solution that for year 3, the cost can be budgeted at no cost. And for year 4, if this all is as good as people say it will be, shouldn’t we be able to budget the cost at a net savings, or a cost of -$1 billion?

You’re making the case that we need healthcare reform based on the fact we pay too much. Then you’re saying we have to spend $1 billion a year more.

Obviously now, since we have a democratic president, and democratic majorities in both houses of congress, reasonableness is not required of republicans.