Bucco and Rubicon, I'm certainly not embracing ObamaCare, far from it. On numerous occasions here I've referred to it as a "Rube Goldberg bill". It was the product of virtually everyone getting what they wanted included in the bill. As was widely reported the day after the Affordable Healthcare Act was passed, "the champagne corks were popping on K Street".

What I am against is throwing the bill out, either by repealing it as Romney says he'll do or by Supreme Court decision tomorrow, without having a well thought out and debated comprehensive alternative. The Republicans want it repealed. Several states' attorneys general sued to have all or part of it thrown out because of expense being shifted to the states. That's the case the Supreme Court will decide tomorrow.

But even with the groundswell of people saying they don't like the program, NO ONE HAS PROPOSED A LEGITIMATE, WELL THOUGHT OUT, INTERNALLY CONSISTENT ALTERNATIVE!

There's no question that our healthcare system is inefficient, ineffective and unaffordable. That was the reason for ObamaCare in the first place. So someone tell me how throwing it out or having the Court throw out important parts if it without any kind of reasonable alternative is good for the country? Either will be great political fodder, but after whatever happens, we will still be left with the same problem, the same unsustainable situation the existed before the bill was passed a couple years ago. And a Congress who has little or no prospect of agreeing with one another enough to come up with a replacement!