John Edwards’ policy is ‘you will do what I say’. That’s basically it. As was pointed out in Kevin’s thread, his remark regarding people who didn’t want to participate in his plan is “You don’t get that choice.” He believes that he and others in Washington are the ones that should make your healthcare decisions.

I’m opposed to any plan, devised in Washington, that tells me what I have to do with my health coverage. I’m opposed to any plan that implies that Washington bureaucrats are more able to make choices about my life than I am, and backs that implication up with force.

Did I stretch the hyperbole on this post? Sure. A little hyperbole makes for more interesting reading.

But the key fact is that John Edwards doesn’t respond to things such as the Vioxx debacle by wondering what’s wrong with the FDA and fixing it, he decides to add an extra layer of government regulation on top of it to downplay the impact of the failures that already exist.

I can understand anyone disagreeing with the plan, itself, although I agree with it. But I don’t understand how the plan can be so misunderstood or misinterpreted.

And here I was thinking that FDA was too strict. The FDA is too lenient? Does he want the drug prices to rise even more? What the hell?