tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3735639132152206688.comments2010-02-01T22:52:49.705-05:00Stephen Ambrosehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12421490128499458082noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3735639132152206688.post-455184169073734952010-02-01T22:52:49.705-05:002010-02-01T22:52:49.705-05:00Steve. Interesting thoughts and insight. You know me and my position. I disagree on the first half of the post but agree on the second. The long, metered approach would be best rather than a "once and done," half-arsed (assed in American) compromise. That said, we've got to start somewhere--there has got to be a time for discussion but also a time for action (same thing with energy--we don't have time to wait). My thoughts on the fact that Scott Brown got elected has less to do with party politics but more about a general malaise in the electorate. People are not feeling financially and psychologically secure. Therefore, healthcare isn't their number one priority (despite it being one of the President's). That is why I think we've seen a shift in the emphasis at the White House and rightly so. Healthcare is so important to get right that we need the country to be on firmer ground before we can tackle this huge issue. The country and Congress need fewer distractions than they have right now: a burgeoning deficit, a looming energy crisis and two very costly wars. The gift that keeps on giving (or rather taking) bestowed on us by the previous administrationMark Andrewshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05554723853136730251noreply@blogger.com