Claymisher, summarizing my prior verbose post:
shorter ledocs: The food here is terrible, and the portions are too small.
I would not go that far. I must like the site, because I've been spending a lot of time here since I discovered it. I had a rough night, sleeping-wise, and wrote that rant in the middle of the night. The editorial board should take that post in the spirit in which I intended it, which is that of constructive criticism. The site is good, but it could be a lot better, sort of like my guitar playing.
The Stanford law professor I would like to see is Pam Carlin or Karlin, I believe. She was a big media presence during the Clinton impeachment. I saw her mentioned as a possible Supreme Court nominee during the runup to Sotomayor.
So, just to substantiate my complaint, I just did a search on "health care" for the entire history of bloggingheads. The vast majority of citations that turn up consist of the usual ideological point-counterpoint between two heads, neither of whom is anything like an expert in health care. It's just diavlogs in which health care is mentioned prominently. I did not see a health care economist listed. There could have been several diavlogs in which experts talked in detail about Canada, France, Britain, and other advanced countries. Krugman could have been on to talk about health care, because he has devoted a lot of time to the subject and has been on bhtv, and of course Reinhardt could have been on. And let the libertarians take their best shot with whomever they've got in this field. And for that matter, how about a mainstream Republican expert on health care, there must be someone.
And a further point, there is a podcast available at "The New York Review of Books" website by Jerome Groopman. He is interviewed by an editor. It lasts about 18 minutes. One might learn more about health care in America in that podcast than by listening to the entire history of talk about this subject on bhtv. There is someone else who should have been on bhtv. You call him up and see if he'll do it. Then you get him to suggest a suitable interlocutor, someone who does not agree with him about everything, if you don't already have someone in mind.