Medved appropriately polices his side when their rhetorical forays attack the person and the motive rather than contesting the substance of their policy proposals. I certainly would like to see somebody from the opposing side perform the same public service. I would like to see both sides be devoted to the integrity of the voting process, tenaciously getting to the bottom of irregularities, rather than concentrating on the outcome. The "dribbling" was cute christian, but I would like to see evidence of your intelligence in addressing with actual data, the places where you believe the "pit-bull" got it wrong. I believe the progressive cause is ill-served by mindless ad hominem and hope for better.

Ann Anon had a great analysis of part of what ails medicine, and illustrated a larger point—all the sellers of the pipe dreams of healthcare perfection presuppose infinite supplies of perfect or perfectible providers of care. From the rural MD to the nursing home attendant, one should be able to expect homogenously perfect training from perfect educators and therefore perfect outcomes. Ann has brought up a particularly sticky and ignored sociologic phenomenon—the massive effect of “women’s liberation” on nursing (and therefore Medicine to a significant extent), teaching (and therefore Education to a large extent), and the secretarial field. Though I could not be more supportive of the opening of all fields to all qualified, it is...