by Dacia Nichol

We've all had enough of the debate already, wouldn't you say so? "Trudge along" is still the order of the day unfortunately. While yours truly would love to just pick a side, one cannot merely dismiss the chaos and inherent lack of logic found in both arguments.

If polls mean anything to you, it seems the country is not in the mood for a few things:

1) more debt;
2) more government;
3) the partisan attitude of Congress; or
4) socialized medicine.

Unfortunately for Democrats this health care bill, lovingly coined "Obamacare", appears to contain all four elements. After the administration threw us some bread crumbs suggesting socialized medicine could be removed, they had to come quickly back around with a dust buster to clean up after the backlash.

A couple of backlashes actually - one from the hard left demanding that socialized medicine was not an option open for discussion (this one even had Jon Stewart questioning Barry's testicular fortitude), and the other one claiming that the public option was such a huge part of Obama's campaign platform, that turning back on the promise to push for one was a sign of shortage in political capital.

Thus far, the administration has been bombarded with unsolicited advice from every nook and cranny in the literary world. Every study presented has had zillions of anecdotal evidence and stories brought to counter against it. Lists upon lists have been drafted to offer solutions....some even of the familiar "12-step" variety. From the looks of it, one might conclude that this phenomenon could be useful for the White House, meaning they can rest well knowing that yes, the American people DO want health care reform. Er...health "insurance" reform rather? Or whatever...we'll see what the winds bring tomorrow.

That being said, we'll move onto the topic of who is most evil in this debate.

First, let's start by acknowledging the bipartisan conclusion that health care needs fixing.

Second, let's define what exactly we agree on:

1. Health care costs are outrageous;
2. Insurance companies are profit ventures and conduct business as such - even at the expense of human life.
3. Medicare is an implosion waiting to happen;
4. The poor and middle class are the most vulnerable and under-served in the health industry;
5. Things like transparency, a good doctor-patient relationship, coverage for pre-existing conditions, and portable care are highly desirable features; and
6. Tort law is out of control.

In sum, we all want health care to cost less, be more accessible to individuals, and have lots of choices like our doctors, our hospitals, and our coverage options.

So what's getting lost in translation? The role of government. This entire debate is winding down to the fundamental differences between the parties - big government vs. small government. Here's the other kicker - instead of reaching for compromise, both parties have fallen back to semi-yellow-journalism tactics (sensationalist journalism dating back to the pre-Revolution days).

Democrats - "We can't do nothing - nothing isn't an option! If we don't do this now, people will die! It's all the evil insurance companies' fault!"

Republicans - "If this plan goes through, government will take over your lives! They'll ration your care! They'll decide who lives and who dies!"

Democrats point to long lines at medical clinics in poor neighborhoods with countless video testimonials to justify their points. Republicans point to the histories of any and all countries with similar systems to what is proposed as examples of the failure of the social medicine side of the bill. Their claims also come with complimentary video footage.

Question - with all the advice and proposals and ideas circulating around America, with public support for reform high, but support for this reform in its current state low, why aren't the necessary nips, tucks, and alterations being made?

The Republicans have decided to take the approach of being stalwarts. Apparently, Obama is not doing so hot in the "bringing people together" promise, and that means he's built himself a loyal opposition. Not good news when you're trying to overhaul a major system in the country that will affect every single American...oh and most Americans don't identify with your party either. In fact, a new Gallup poll says that Vermont, Hawaii, and Massachusetts would be your only solid supports in the end.

The Democrats aren't taking a very "group-hug" approach either. Some want to drop the public option for the sake the country for the time being, but others - far louder than the compromise crowd - demand that no concessions shall be had, and want the bill pushed through regardless of its popularity. The "we won" mentality still runs strong, but now it also appears to be tainted with the acknowledgment that political winds do change and a rush job is needed to preserve the social justice they live, breathe, and would die for. Well...at least they act like they would.

Then there's the president himself. Strangely, he continues to stay in campaign mode, generating more questions than answers with each appearance in the public forum. It's not the questions - some of them have been phenomenal. It's the overall candy coated shell slick smooth talk that still doesn't give the hint as to whether we're talking peanut, plain, or crunchy.

In another stroke of irony - one of the only things we all agree on in this country about health care also happens to be the one thing Obama is not interested in addressing: tort reform. Further, Democrats are trying to marginalize anything and everything Republicans object to with the argument "Republicans have no alternative". Except they do. And demanding that the minority party devise an entire plan of their own that they know has no chance of passing is just an avoidance strategy - avoiding the debate that is.

See, the idea behind a president who campaigned on being "bipartisan" and "reaching across the aisle" kind of centered on the notion that you know...you'd include the opposition party in whatever it is you're doing. Sure, politics-as-usual wouldn't find any of this current fiasco surprising, but that's the downside of having promised to get past all that in exchange for a new beginning if elected. We all must have forgot about the reasons why we don't get along to begin with, for they are certainly on display now.

So - who's most evil? It wouldn't be accurate to paint Republicans in any kind of saintly light, but they are there, with ideas, now using stalling measures in response to being shut out (or so it seems). If the health situation really is as dire as Democrats claim it to be, they'll agree to gamble pulling the public option, reducing costs by working with Republican ideas, have sweeping reform, then hope that the cost of health insurance will have lowered so significantly, there is no longer a need for a federal health insurance option. Or perhaps the public would be open to a much smaller price tag on a public option after said reform takes place? No…apparently the public option is a sticking point not worth sacrificing for all the poor that are being used as pawns in their quest for socialization of our country.

Verdict: Democrats.