Well before I go into a longer explanation of things what did you mean when you said this:

"Other countries don't have the healthcare system we do, so why would we ask them the way?" - Pat

He was not dealing with "one side of a complicated dilemma" in his talk he was telling you how other countries provide healthcare, not just insurance, for their citizens. If your point is that our government is more inept than governments in England, Germany, France, or Japan...ok, fine if that's how you feel about it there is probably not much I can say to you. Somehow I doubt you think these other countries are superior to us in any way so I'm just in the dark about your comment above.

This really comes down to a few things, Pat, one of which is taking the power of the insurance companies to make decisions about your healthcare away from them. Creating a public option is only bad for them because it would cut into their profits, maybe in a big way. I'm not sure why you think a guy behind a desk at an insurance company having the power to grant or deny you coverage based on how his company would profit by doing this is better than what they have in Europe, Canada, or Japan. Why it is more efficient or cost effective to have the guy at the insurance company tag a random (randym?) 20% of whatever the cost of your care was onto the bill because he was nice enough to grant you coverage. Why is it ok that insurance guys profit from you getting sick unless of course it is something that may be terminal then they can cut you off? I mean we have death panels in this country but they sit in the board rooms of insurance companies with their lawyers and risk assessment squad and dream up ways not to cover you and how to tell you where you can stick your pre-existing condition.

This really is not an issue about left or right and just so you know Mitt Romney ran for office presenting a healthcare plan that was just about identical to what Obama wanted to do.