When a piece of legislation draws this much fire from both parties, it means one of two things. One, that it must be good for us regular folks if it makes so many politicians uncomfortable. Or, two, that it must be such a bad piece of lawmaking that it's been disowned and discarded like Elizabeth Edwards.

This time around, I think we can all agree these two bills aren't worth the reams of paper they're printed on. I mean, any other time, if it's something that infuriates Michael Moore to tears then it can't be all bad, right?

But to hear that hobbit cast-off Dennis Kucinich now supports the bill should certainly give any of us pause.

Abrasive and forgettable personalities aside, the fact of the matter is that, honestly, for a bill that costs so much (as Republicans point out) it does very little to actually change anything (as Democrats point out). And the changes we will see - as in higher taxes, cost controls and rationing of care - are all things none of us want to see.

So let's forget the arguments about whether the Dems have the right to force this on us through legislative parlor tricks ('cause it's not like either party's blameless there) or whether health care is a human right (hint: it's not; just ask Moore's arteries), but whether we can afford to spend so much for what amounts to legislative cotton candy?