Subsequent to that Obama in his speech also said he is (remains) in support of the public option, i.e, the universalist (for everyone) public alternative to private insurance (health care) plans through the “exchanges.”

The other two noteworthy things about the speech are that he wants to retain the employer-based system (at least rhetorically) and make employers pay if they end insurance for employees, and to have individuals be required to have (and buy) insurance, as in Massachusetts.

Everything else in the speech was either clumsy (Medicare and how it and other health care would be reformed, how Medicare would not be harmed by taking money from it arbitrarily), or dishonest (with a number of items), or degrading (appeals to emotions of losers, with Teddy Kennedy and the welfare state stuff).

It didn't strike me as excessively so — it was refreshing, actually, compared to what the Dems have been doing so far. Much more clear and cohesive as well.

Obama earned only a fifty-something on a scale of 100 for the speech, and there were defects with it. He's maintaining the existing system and retaining the employer insurance model (calling it, stupidly, a form of “responsibility,” collectivist garbage that insulted the intelligent), and subjecting employers to fines if they don't provide insurance (they predictably will pay the fines and dump the employees into the individual “exchange” market and any public option that may be set up). Individuals will have to buy insurance (taking a cue from Massachusetts, including subsidies or tax credits, etc.).

Nobody intelligent was fooled by the “you can keep your doctor,” “immigrants won't benefit,” “abortions won't be paid for” current-state-of-affairs, not state-of-things-after-reform nonsense.

The touchy-feely idiocy about Teddy Kennedy (why wasn't someone playing the viola? HAHAHA) and a nurturing federal government was nauseating, appealing to degenerate, self-debasing children and losers.

Nobody I heard chattering and clucking on NPR or CNN or other sources had any intelligence or presence of mind to note aloud that this was an unusual speech by Obama and of questionable propriety, not a serious state-of-the-union event and message but a pleading to rescue the Dems' health care effort and Obama's betting much of his reputation on it, and on silly rushing to passage of legislation.

That he did the speech anyway is accomplished fact, and overall he merits a score of 50-something.

“This-is-the-moment-ism: Why, after posing as a practical moderate, go on and on about the need to avoid timidity and do “what the moment calls for” and “history's test.” Obama couldn't let a speech slip by without veering into grandiosity–but this very grandiosity undercuts his attempt to appear like a reassuring centrist who wants to disrupt existing arrangements as little as possible. Makes kicking the can “further down the road” suddenly seem vaguely appealing. Instead of “this is really a big deal like 1935 and 1965,” why not say “this really isn't such a big deal”? … In particular, couldn't Obama somehow make the point that a trillion dollars over 10 years isn't such a big deal. He tried, by comparing it to expensive things the Dems didn't like (the Iraq War, tax cuts). More effective would be comparison to effective things the Dems and the voters do like (i.e.,”that's less than a sixth of the cost of Social Security” or “one fifth as much as Medicare now costs each year”). It's only $100 billion a year, people!

In general I'd say he preached to the choir (progressives) and put the congregation (the American people) to sleep.

Healthcare has been a long standing problem and now a crisis that at least one party is trying to solve after eight years, (if not 40 years), of neglect from the General Opposition Party. Face it, you don’t want Americans to enjoy the healthcare security that people of all modern nations enjoy. You don’t care if people are losing their homes because of hospital bills that are oppressively to high, and even WITH insurance!

I am left with only one question for you: Why do you hate Americans?

I think he also did a good job of quieting the fears of at least some progressives who support the public option. Obama supports the public option but also thinks that there are workable alternatives to it that will accomplish the same goals. He convinced me that although I might prefer the public option, a bill without it will not be useless and will still be much better than what we've got now.

I'd also like to say that I was impressed with the remarks of Republican Rep. B (can't remember how to spell his name) of Louisiana, even though I didn't agree with everything he said. He seems like a reasonable and smart guy who is willing to try to find some common ground.