THANK you, converse. I expect more from TPM too.

I just love the simplistic, ridiculous, "analysis" offered up by the commeners on this site. It goes something like this: Anyone who opposes the House bill is necessarily motivated by an ulterior motive, in this case it is always greed, whereas those on the left who support increased statism and unprecedented government expansion and control over the economy all have motives as pure as the driven snow and are beyond reproach.

The silly comment above by "TheRealFish" is the perfect example. Kent Conrad couldn't possibly be opposed to the House bill because he is representing his constituents, because obviously North Dakota is one of the most far-left states in the US. They don't call Fargo "Little San Francisco" for nothing. The same is true of Ben Nelson. That man owes his election to liberals, because Nebraska is obviously one of the bluest of the Blue States. The same exact thing can be said of Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, or any other moderate Democrat who opposes the piece of garbage that passed the House.

This "analysis" is deployed anytime someone has the temerity to offer any sort of opposition to the health care bill. The fact that more Americans are opposed to Obamacare than support it? Let's just ignore that inconvenient fact.
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/healthplan.php