Edwards vs. Obama/Clinton: Why the Hell Is Single-Payer Healthcare Taboo? Stupid, It Ain't!

Possibly because John Edwards is hastily (and reluctantly) falling off the map of realistic presidential contenders, his interview with NYTimes (1/25/08)--in which he revealed stark leftist contrast to Obama/Clinton--has unfortunately been little-noted by the press & the public.

Although similar in healthcare plan as his Democratic opponents, in this interview he boldly blurted out the political explitives that Obama/Clinton have been avoiding like the plague:

Regarding his health plan ("Medicare-plus") which would allow all Americans to choose between private insurance options and new government insurance packages modeled on Medicare,

"American health consumers will decide which works best. It could continue to be divided. But it could go in one direction or the other and one of the directions is obviously government or single payer. And I'm not opposed to that."

Booyakashah! It warms the populist heart & the "Simplify health coverage!" mind like mine.

In Kevin Sack's coverage of Edwards' interview, he pointed out:

Republican candidates and policy strategists have raised the specter of “socialized medicine” and depicted the Democratic plans as a back-door route to a so-called single-payer government system.

Mr. Edwards brushed off that critique. “There is nothing back-door about it,” he said. “It’s right through the front door. We’re going to let America decide what health care system works for them.”

Yes, it's all about liguistical framing. While Republicans have continued to

1. champion the array of "choices" amongst our dozens of dense healthcare plans as a God-given American right (as always, free market competition will naturally and justly lead to healthy citizenry), and
   
2. demonize the god-forsaken "Socialized Medicine" that these Communists are stealthily seeking to ram up the arse,

Instead, for once a Democrat has framed the proposal right: the true "choice" sets up the single-payer (government) system as a market competitor. What the hell is there to be ashamed of, thou meek Democrats! (See The Frog's 1/25 post discussing David Moberg's article "Democratic candidates for president say they'll break sharply with Bush-era and Reagan-era policies, but avoid talking about expanding the role of the federal government") Maybe Moberg's article isn't as much of a whimper as I had called it; maybe Edwards actually took Moberg's advice..

As for the running topic question on Frog(the)Bulletin!: What are the differences between Democrat front-runners Obama vs. Clinton? Forget it, vote Edwards!!!!!!!!!!!(?)