You SHOULD be watching Eric Cantor on CNBC, the Kudlow Report, right now. The smug fuck. He's sitting here like the battle's already won for them. He's talking about, "The box Obama's in and now he has to deal with Republicans; there's no other way. Him and Pelosi have had their worst month yet."

He's talking like the Public Option is already completely off the table. The argument now seems to be that if the Government even tries to compete with the private sector, it's going to lead to a complete takeover. So, even though there's no talk whatsoever of a Government takeover, equate a public option with it anyway. Get it? It's simple - Public Option = Gov. Takeover.

Say it enough times over and over and maybe it'll start to make sense.

I don't think Matthews EVER does his homework. He thinks he knows it all and can't be bothered. Or else he is not bright enough to understand the issues. damn

Pelosi has said, again, no public option = no bill from the House. "A bill without a strong public option will not pass the House." The woman is tough.

MSNBC's Chris Matthews: Just Enough of a Douchebag To Keep His Job®

agreed eve...tweety is exactly that.

This is precisely why I despise Chris Matthews.
He doesn't do his homework on issues, he merely learns a few buzzwords and then peppers his "commentary" with them.

What a douchnozzle.

What an ass! He's too busy telling us repeatedly how to pronounce Dick Douchbag Cheney's name to bother with real facts and research.

I like what Anthony Weiner said on the Doucheborough that fateful day that he stupified him with his intelligence:

Most people already participate in a single payer system. Your insurance company is that single payer. You give money to them. They give it to the doctor. The difference is that you're insurance company keeps an obscene amount of it for itself and only sometimes pays out.

Government as the single payer would not be trying to generate a profit and would always provide services.

Yes, it's too bad a Matthews staffer didn't research because he or she would have found this fantastic info from WIKIPEDIA!

Single-payer health care insurance is a public service financing the delivery of near-universal or universal health care to a given population as defined by age, citizenship, residency, or any other demographic.

Single-payer health insurance operates by arranging the payment of services to doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers from a single source established and managed by government. This source replaces private insurance companies with a single, public entity which would provide health care financing, which in wealthy nations is typically extended to all citizens or legal residents. A single-payer national insurance plan, H.R. 676, the "National Health Care Act," is expected to be voted on and debated by the U.S. House of Representatives as a replacement to H.R. 3200, the "Affordable Health Choices Act," in September.[1]

The fund can be managed by the government directly or as a publicly owned and regulated agency.[2] Australia's Medicare, Canada's Medicare, and healthcare in Taiwan are examples of single-payer universal health care systems.

The term 'single payer' refers to funding and does not imply a socialized medicine system. A socialized medical system is one "in which all health personnel and health facilities, including doctors and hospitals, work for the government and draw salaries from the government," an example being the U.S. Veterans Administration, while U.S. Medicare is a single payer system which is not socialized medicine.[3]

In Canadian Medicare, which is a single-payer insurance available to all citizens, doctors may work in private practices or for public or private hospitals, each of which is in turn paid by government health insurance. Under the United Kingdom's National Health Service, which also uses a universal single-payer fund, the public owns the health systems and facilities. The term single-payer thus only describes the funding mechanism—referring to health care being paid for by a single public body—and does not specify the type of delivery, or who doctors work for.

******As regards health care reform in the United States, it is the only high-income industrialized country in the world that does not have some version of national universal public health insurance; although every state has a public health care system of some kind, they do not provide guaranteed universal coverage.[4][5]****

The majority of physicians in the United States are in favor of national health insurance system.[6] A recent study published in 2008 in Annals of Internal Medicine, a leading medical journal, showed 59% of physicians “support government legislation to establish national health insurance,” while 32% oppose it and 9% are neutral.[7] This represented an increase of 10 percentage points as compared with a similar survey in 2002 in which support for such legislation stood at 49% of physicians.[8] Among the general U.S. public, recent polling ratings for single-payer are apparently dependent on wording, ranging from 49% to 65% in favor.[9][10]

I think you have Matthews a little wrong Bob.

He knows what single-payer is.

But saying the words "government take-over" sounds better. Government take-over provokes a response, gets ratings, gets tempers up. Saying "nationalized" sounds like venezuala.

Its all about the sound bite. Reality be damned.

What rox said.

Now I remember why I never watch Hardball anymore.

If it didn't happen in a 40's or 50's movie Chris Matthews doesn't care to know about it.
He does NOT live in our times.

Matthews isn't that dumb; he's being deceptive, deliberately so.

This is way off topic, but I wanted to share. If you don't know who Craig Ferguson is, you really should watch his stand up. I like him a lot.

For jane.....

Craig Ferguson Stand Up

And I pretty much done with Keith Olbermann too. How is that MSNBC can allow a rascist like Pat Buchannan on their statioon, but if President Obama doesn't get the plan that he wants passed, we should primary him in 2012.

I want to ask this crazy people if they voted for Clinton in 1996, because he sure as hell didn't get a good majority of his agenda passed. But he got elected again. But hey I forgot, Keith Olbermann doesn't vote right?

Whatever...