@Pedinska - I don't know the details of the arrests, but, on these boards in particular, there seems to be a fondness for the rule of law. That should apply equally to people protesting for and against issues you favor. However, that is the smaller point. The larger point, is that many politicians, rightly or wrongly, view a single payer system as anathema. I have already stated my preference for it in these comments, so obviously I am not going to defend his decision with much vigor. What I will cede, however, is that he Obama has a better idea of what he can get accomplished than I do.

I am left to hope (haha) that what Obama believes he is going to get is what I have termed "meaningful." I am willing to take that leap of faith because I am much more skeptical about how his actions viz. arm twisting/photo suppression will further erode our democracy.

@Pow Wow - This starts getting us into the content of Pow Wow's post. In which they completely disregard the meaningful concession congress achieved. But again to the larger point. When was the last time, if ever, the House of Representatives could have been said to represent the will of the people?

I willingly submit to you that the executive branch is trying to abrogate power from legislative. While this is not a good situation, I think it is far from taking power from the "people" it is much more accurately described as taking power from the special interests.

Your gotcha games are amusing, but change nothing.

If you are trying to pass a health care reform that can turn into a single payer system, but know that if you admit it, you will never get it passed, do you

A: Admit it anyways

B: Offer assurances that it won't evolve into a single payer system

Who knows, maybe the insurance companies will surprise me and turn over a new leaf and we won't need a single payer system, and I guess I don't have a problem giving them a shot. But my opinion of Insurance companies might even be lower of my opinion of congress.

1. It doesn’t and doesn’t need to. It is just common sense. Obama believes, as do I, that the nation urgently needs health care reform, and at this time I don’t think anything he has sacrificed on this altar has been too steep a price to pay. Would the founders prefer that Congress were driving this boat? Absolutely. How realistic do you think that is?

2. Do you think Obama doesn’t know this? He is practically back out on the campaign trail trying to lobby the lobbyists. And you realize that you have essentially said congress doesn’t matter in the comments of an article claiming that it is a big deal some members of congress were bullied into changing their votes.

3. Again, not once have I seen a clear path of how this “police state” will evolve. And to think, a couple pages ago I was accused of using similar language to set up a straw man argument.

4.When it comes to an accurate assessment of what kind of health care reform could be passed through the legislature, I will take Team Obama over Team Baccus. If I were designing a health care system from the ground up, the answer would likely change.

And what rights and liberties have I ceded? The right to an open government? Which amendment covers that? It is precisely because of our rights that I am not as concerned about all this. If I dislike the decisions my representative or senator or president are making, I have the right to say so. I have the right to vote for their opponent. I have the right to gather, peaceably, in protest.

From the beginning, I have been arguing against the notion that there is some slippery slope here that leads to a “Police State.” Where this all becomes murkiest, and where you rightly focus, is on the ramifications of losing public oversight. It is absolutely dangerous to say, “the government knows best what I need to know.” It is dangerous because you never know where the line is going to be drawn and redrawn. However, I think in regards to oversight there is a threshold past which government suppression efforts run afoul of the Bill of Rights. Take for example, the coal ash storage non disclosure, which is despicable, whether through congressional action, or court decision, or through the press, I believe the government will be unable to keep that information suppressed. If I am wrong, then I will be pushed a little closer to the way many of you think, but for now, I am going to trust the system of government that has gotten us this far.

No offense, and I am terribly sorry for whatever knock you got on your door, but if you think we are in a police state right now, I'm going to have to assume you don't know what a police state is. You are, after all, posting comments critical to the government on an open forum. What percentage of the world could be doing that?