<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Credibility</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wholesomereading.com/2009/06/03/credibility/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2009/06/03/credibility/</link>
	<description>Musings on culture and politics by baseball writer Steven Goldman</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 10:43:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: gary simms</title>
		<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2009/06/03/credibility/#comment-857</link>
		<dc:creator>gary simms</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:48:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wholesomereading.com/?p=485#comment-857</guid>
		<description>Unlike Gerald, I don't find this a matter of hand-wringing, so much as a failure to understand that there's no free lunch, and that politics is the art of the possible.

If we assume that universal health care is a goal (which I believe it is), then we have to (a) figure out how to pay for it, and (b) see what we can get Congress to adopt.

While many like the idea of a single-payor system, the politics (at least for now) dictate against it. So that means we'll wind up with something like the Massachusetts program which requires everyone to have insurance, for employers to contriobute to it, and for the govt. to pay for those who can't afford it or who are not employed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unlike Gerald, I don&#8217;t find this a matter of hand-wringing, so much as a failure to understand that there&#8217;s no free lunch, and that politics is the art of the possible.</p>
<p>If we assume that universal health care is a goal (which I believe it is), then we have to (a) figure out how to pay for it, and (b) see what we can get Congress to adopt.</p>
<p>While many like the idea of a single-payor system, the politics (at least for now) dictate against it. So that means we&#8217;ll wind up with something like the Massachusetts program which requires everyone to have insurance, for employers to contriobute to it, and for the govt. to pay for those who can&#8217;t afford it or who are not employed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerald</title>
		<link>http://www.wholesomereading.com/2009/06/03/credibility/#comment-852</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:39:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wholesomereading.com/?p=485#comment-852</guid>
		<description>I find hand-wringing posts like this by people on the left to be rather strange.  One thing that Obama has shown through his incredibly swift rise in politics and through his administration so far is that he is an incredibly adept politician.  Thus, comments like this are roughly equivalent to a Yankee fan worrying that Mark Teixeira is suddenly going to start to suck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find hand-wringing posts like this by people on the left to be rather strange.  One thing that Obama has shown through his incredibly swift rise in politics and through his administration so far is that he is an incredibly adept politician.  Thus, comments like this are roughly equivalent to a Yankee fan worrying that Mark Teixeira is suddenly going to start to suck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

