While he does raise some good points, I don't appreciate how horribly he simplified preventative care. When your main points consist of leaving a great deal out...that's what is commonly called a "half truth". Basically he made the same sweeping generalisations he was speaking out against, using similar logic...only in a different direction. Kinda funny when you lead in with a "half the story".
And as for the bias you mention...yeah, a physician has no stake whatsoever in keeping universal coverage off the board
What I do appreciate about this is that he quantified and elaborated on some areas that usually aren't in defence of his position, and he even managed to do it without confusing the *compassion* of liberals with "guilt", as certain people on the right so often do. However, if with that having been said he still couldn't get through his post without name calling and belitting liberals.
So sadly, even the better thought out arguments reduces itself to immature labeling, assumptions, generalsations, and name calling.
No wonder we can't make any progress