re: No need for bipartisanship on healthcare
Most Democrats believe that fixing the system will require increased government intervention to guarantee universal coverage and to contain costs. Most Republicans oppose an expansion of government's role and believe an even more market-oriented system would pave the way to health care nirvana.
Trying to achieve full bipartisanship by squaring those two views is a recipe for incoherence.
This isn't a matter of "squaring views." One of these positions is correct and the other is not. In almost every other field of human economic endeavor, the private sector and market competition has delivered more for less money than the government has.
Obama and some of those working with him on this have gone on the record in the past as being for a total single-payer system and the obliteration of the private insurance industry. Many videos of past speeches have been circulating on the net.
Nobody's fooling anyone with this "government takeover? Who, us?" crap.
The Democratic plan has two parts: first, set up a tax-subsidized government alternative, and second, saddle the private insurance industry and employer-provided programs with so many taxes and mandates that they can't compete. Then wait to see who wins the "competition."
Then, there's the simple fact that we can't afford the liberal health care fantasy. Have you been reading the CBO reports?