As much as you and I have argued, at least we can still debate things like this and talk to each other.
But those articles are just stating numbers, its not opinions. Those are facts. I probably could find the same numbers somewhere else.

I don't really respect the opinion of people who are pushing an agenda and won't attempt to be honest in all cases.

Yes, I do have my own thoughts, though I do like to supplement them with the knowledge and opinion of others that I feel have a compelling argument. I do think Obama is spending too much and is too much in favor of big government, but all the people here that voted for McCain would have gotten about the same thing, except with a more belligerent foreign policy.

I believe that Obama is at least capable of disarming hatred for America and prejudices against America with words. Some call it weak, but I think it is sorely needed. He is returning the focus of our armed forces to bin Laden and Al Qaeda. I'm really not into nation building and entangling alliances with foreign nations, but it might just be more cost effective and less violent to rebuild Afghanistan.

I'm willing to reserve judgment and see if Obama can turn this around. We were way down the path of accumulating debt before Obama took office. I'm willing to give him some time without griping too much. If he can't at least start to turn things around before the midterm elections, I expect we'll see a bunch more republocrats in Congress. I'd like to see more folks like Ron Paul in there, but too many Republicans have bought into what the Republican party is selling.

Here's some raw honesty for you: Bush was a RINO, and pushed several liberal wasteful programs in the name of "compassionate conservatism". He should be criticized for it. Happy?

You are wrong. Healthcare spending is the top drain on our economy (17% of GDP), and McCain had a sensible plan that would reduce costs in that area... the key point of which was allowing people to buy insurance products across state lines.

Touchy-feeliness is not important right now. We have to get spending under control and Obama wasn't the man to do it.

This approach isn't as pragmatic as you'd like it to be. From a fiscal standpoint, you have to see that these policies are failed.

here is my question, if government takes over healthcare, wont they be able to deny anyone and we will just be screwed. example you are a smoker, the government steps in and says, quit smoking or we will not treat you. quit eating red meat or we will not treat you... etc etc.

I'm certainly OK with companies charging people insane premiums if they choose to smoke. The key centerpiece of McCain's plan was allowing companies to compete across state lines. If Company X in Louisiana denies you coverage, Company Y in Nebraska could then step in and at least give you something if they want your business.

would you have a problem with those benefits being taxed at a federal level and/or state level?

I didnt say they should be taxed, so slow down. I asked a question and the reason why I asked it, is because McCains plan called for health benefits to be taxed.

Its really not simple enough for you to answer the question without implying that I wanted the benefits taxed. I know its a bad idea. But that was in McCains healthcare plan.

You are omitting a key component of McCain's healthcare plan. The plan also included a tax credit of 2,500 dollars for individuals and 5,000 for families to offset the benefits tax. With that credit I could have kept my employer provided coverage or had the choice of going into the market for coverage that better suited my needs.

This would have been great for single income families like mine, those who don't receive healthcare through work, and independently employed individuals.

As it stands taxing employer health insurance benefits is not off the table with President Obama, but the credit is off the table. So people in my situation, and the rest of the middle class are set to be royally screwed.