SHUSTER: If you start with a public option and you leave it up to states to decide to opt-out, wouldn’t that be a little bit more aggressive than Olympia Snowe’s proposal?
BILL NELSON: I think it’s the opposite. I think the trigger would be more important, otherwise you could have a state would say, well, the insurance companies lobbied that state and they just completely did what the insurance companies wanted and took away the public option.
So Nelson thinks it's less aggressive to have a public option that the insurance cartel could lobby against -- because some states might cave to the lobbying. Yet he thinks having no public option at all is very powerful.
Oh the twisted and backwards logic of guys who are desperate to protect their bosses in the cartel. Just remarkable.
Adding... Nelson thinks starving is better than having food to eat. You know, because someone might steal your food.