This is heartbreaking. If he sends a responding argument, I'd love to read it.

On top of everything else, that really sucks re: Drooping Acres. Bound to happen sooner or later, I supposed, but the timing sure could have been better.

Apparently, Harvard agrees with you. Damned pinko lefties.
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2009/db2009064_666715.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_policy++amp%3B+government

Those hacks at Harvard have been cribbing their studies from my blog for years.

This made me all sorts of angry, but it serves me right for reading anything Karl Rove has to say:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124588632634150501.html

He cites his own think-tank (*cough*)’s push poll, and gosh! When choosing between an imaginary plan that doesn’t cover all Americans (by an unspecified margin) and keeps taxes static, versus a plan that covers everyone while increasing taxes (by an unspecified amount), some people opt for less taxes! Shocking!

He whines about the deficit, which his cronies left like a present in the litter box. He baldly claims that most Americans are satisfied – er, “somewhat” satisfied - with their care. No mention of the size of his sample, what zip code he was calling (if the “poll” wasn’t conducted at his country club), or how the question was phrased.

The thing about medical travelers coming here gave off an odd burning smell, too. He cites the McKinsey Co., which scares the pee put of me, and then doesn’t say what type of medical care the travelers are waving our flag for. Plastic surgery?

But kudos for the framing phrase du jour, “Obama’s nanny-state initiatives.”