Reply #113: Two schools of thought ...

[zoff]

1. A bad start will eventually lead to a really bad bill, so status quo is temporarily better. Single-payer got compromised at the get-go so we got taken for a ride. Some say Kucinich ignored the needs of the 2-6 million or so who can be covered. He could also have fought for 40 million or so that were NOT covered. Start from scratch and include single-payer advocates. Leaving them out stands in the way of progress. We need more like Kucinich.
2. The bill in its current form can still be modified. Baby steps is how Washington works. Idealism stands in the way of progress. Kick out Kucinich.

But the bill has passed the house, so the question is: will this bill ever see the light of not-for-profit single-payer health care?

Just like politics, nothing is black or white, so to answer the OP, I am apprehensively happy. But Kucinich must stay; we just need a different front man.