Great speech. A few initial impressions.

[Skinner]

Overall, an awesome speech. Made the case in moral terms (finally). I think he'll get a modest boost with the public. Not sure if it will have any impact on the small number of Senate holdouts on the Democratic side.

The president gave a very clear and compelling explanation of the Public Option, and made clear why it is important. But he did not draw a line in the sand. Which is not surprising, but it is disappointing. In short: He wants a Public Option, but he'll sign a bill without one.

He was really harsh on Republicans. No doubt, they deserved it. But I think he would not have been so harsh if he believed there was a chance of getting any of their votes. Ok, maybe he thinks he can get one. But based on the way he called out the GOP, I suspect he has come to the conclusion that he's not going to get their help on this. It's all us.

No matter what happens, it's clear he is going to sign a bill. The only question, I think, is whether that bill has a Public Option.

[Horse with no Name]

1. I think he will lose the entrenched on either side of the aisle

Overall, it will appeal to the middle. I'm going to reserve judgment until I find out exactly about the Public Option.

[Catshrink]

2. The smackdown of Republicans was long overdue.

Redmeat.

[usregimechange]

3. I have been waiting for him to do this for quite a while

[CaliforniaPeggy]

4. I think there will be a Public Option.

Just my impression...

[JimWis]

I agree CaliforniaPeggy. That is the way I heard it and read it in

the text.

[abumbyanyothername]

36. Axelrod gave me hope that the Public Option lives.

Then he backed off again.

[DearAbby]

38. My gut feeling too

Obama is going to be working this, twisting arms of the blue dogs. It's up to the Democrats, and they will deliver, one way or the other. A bill with a public option will be on Obama's desk.

[mzmolly]

64. I agree. Obama made the public option the "compromise" saying liberals generally

want single payer. When he said that I thought, we're getting ourselves a public option!

[HughMoran]

5. I'm glad he made the moral argument for a public option

If you noticed, he did weave together the public option with the moral argument (government can do good things). Even though he did not draw a line in the sand (we all knew he wasn't going to), I still thought his arguments for the public option were stronger than I thought they would be. Overall I'm very pleased with this speech.

[Windy]

6. The only way to get a public option was to explain it in the way he did.

It makes the idea very palatable to skeptics in my opinion. He can't draw a line in the sand and still be an advocate for breaking gridlock and trying to work toward good government. If he would have said that in the speech, he would have diminished the rest of his message.

[Texasgal]

7. He made himself quite clear

I am very proud of him, he stood up to the machine. Screw them!

[blogslut]

8. He did great!

Remember, the Leo is a fixed sign. They're stubborn as hell.

[bleever]

33. How do you know?

You watched the direct link and didn't hear the pundits tell you what to think!


Awesome speech. He's carrying the public option football across the goal line. No doubt in my mind.

[jgraz]

9. In political terms, it was a clear signal that he's given up on the public option

What in that speech would convince even one more congressperson to support a public option?

[tabatha]

20. NOT at all.

[jgraz]

27. Explain how that speech changes one vote in Congress

If the President does not unequivocally insist on a public option, why should any of the fence-sitters in Congress support it?

[tabatha]

32. I was replying to him giving up on the public option.

I don't think he has.

[jgraz]

39. Contrast his Public Option comments with his comments about fiscal responsibility

He said clearly that he would not sign a bill that added to the deficit. Where was such support for the Public Option?

Obviously, Obama's not going to come out and say "Ha, suckers! You voted for me and now I'm going to screw you!!" He's going to put it in politico-speak. His lukewarm handling of the public option -- especially his indication that he's open to other ideas -- is a clear signal to the Dems that he's no longer fighting for government-run health insurance.

[inna]

54. +1. you're absolutely right. nt

[tabatha]

63. He said the public option would not be funded by the government

in his speech. But there will still be a cheaper, more affordable public option.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HughMoran]

30. I didn't take his speech that way at all

If anything, he promoted it a lot more than I expected. But your behavior is prototypical and I would expect nothing less reactionary and cynical from you. You're really not a positive person.

[jgraz]

40. Oh yeah! Up with people!!

Since when did this become a discussion about me? And how does my positivity relate in any way to the reality of the healthcare fight?

Perhaps you should look up the phrase argumentum ad hominem. It might do you some good.

[HughMoran]

41. ...and snarky too!

The argument is about you because you've made yourself part of the permanent opposition here. I think of you as a Republican or Socialist - you're not part of the Democratic Underground. Treating you as a hostile witness is appropriate in my opinion. So, it is about you - your opinions are pre-biased and predictable. in other words, your opinion is null and void before you give it. You are the null set in argumentation. I don't value your words.

[jgraz]

44. You really have no cogent arguments, do you?

Your personal attacks are laughable, but not as funny as the fact that personal attacks are really all you can manage.


Oh, and since you seem to be in need of a primer on basic politics: Socialists and Republicans are not the same thing. Just trying to help. :hi:

[HughMoran]

46. & you don't even know what the word "or" means

So, I guess I'll just leave it at that. You are insignificant to me.

[jgraz]

49. Wow, you sure spend a lot of time replying to someone you think of as insignificant

Just more intellectual dishonesty from you. You've played this game before with me and others and you never seem to stay away for long. I guess someone posting opposing ideas without being attacked personally is just too much for you to bear.

And yeah, thinking that someone could be either a Socialist *or* a Republican indicates that one might have trouble telling the two apart. Of course, you're still unclear on what a "Democrat" is. I guess you have that in common with our president.

[HughMoran]

51. ok fine

g'bye.

[jgraz]

52. I believe you this time, really I do.

:rofl:

[inna]

55. he doesn't do anything but personal attacks; don't take it personally.

:hi:


amazing. it's several people here like that. :shrug:

[jgraz]

56. Don't worry. Hugh is well-known around here

Nobody takes him seriously.

[Jennicut]

58. His speech was not totally directed at Congress but more at the public

which builds support which then puts pressure on Congress.

[jgraz]

59. Well, you're definitely right about one thing

There won't be any public option unless we all get off our butts and start making trouble.

[mzmolly]

66. The fact that he said the public option was the compromise

single payer was the position of the left?

[jgraz]

70. That just makes it less likely that we'll ever see the *centrist* proposal of Single Payer

For the record, the position of "The Left" is nationalized healthcare.

[mzmolly]

73. Nationalized healthcare ~ via a single payer system.

eom

[jgraz]

74. Nationalized Healthcare != Single Payer

Single Payer is nationalized health insurance. In a fully nationalized healthcare system, physicians would be government employees, as would most other healthcare workers -- including those in the pharmaceutical industry.

Nationalizing healthcare is the equivalent to a nationalized military or a nationalized court system. No one screams that judges and prosecutors and infantry personnel are government employees. It should be the same for healthcare workers.

[mzmolly]

75. I'm not sure why you

feel the need to explain? I indicated above that nationalized health care would be paid for with a single payer system in a liberal dream world. I also said I was glad that Obama noted as much in his speech. Obviously single payer would not go to pay large profits to middle men, which is why the R/W fears any kind of public option.

[placton]

10. But

wasnt there lotsa agreement that if no real support for public option. Mr. Obama was toast? He said nothing new - other than adding the wingers' tort reform bullshit to his quiver - and still didnt support the PO. Do we again imagine/infer/guess he will support it?

[bleever]

11. I am as encouraged as ever that the Public Option will be a part of it.

Great, great speech, laying the ground for a strong bill with or without any GOP votes.

[Uzybone]

12. The House will only vote for a Public Option

the Senate will eventually sign on for a Public Option (probably with a trigger). There will be a final bill with a Public Option, we are only fighting over the trigger.

[Ruby the Liberal]

62. The "trigger" was pulled on November 4, 2008

[demodonkey]

13. Woo HOO! I think he was great. nt

[sandnsea]

14. Way to miss the point of the speech

Which is trying to bring this country together and have an honest debate.

Lines in the sand wouldn't exactly be conducive to that.

Not to mention the part about there needing to be many more components to health care reform than just the public option.

I thought you'd do better than whining about a two word slogan that has no plan connected to it either.

[tabatha]

21. I agree with that.

[kid a]

34. "two word slogan" =)

[jgraz]

42. Must we, again, defend a Democratic administration by pretending that words have no meaning?

Here's a two-word slogan for you: "Political Courage". My hope is that, someday, people on this board will understand what it means.

[Laelth]

47. +1

I was very disappointed in the content of that speech for several reasons.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Political Heretic]

53. I don't want to "bring the country to gether" And neither should you.

"Bringing the country together" is just cheap code for bringing corporate capitulators and the ignorant dupes that buy their propaganda together with the rest of us, and the rest of working class Americans and their families.

We don't need or want to be "brought together." Some people need to be run out of politics, Washington, political discourse and any sort of place of credibility on a rail.

[pinto]

15. I liked his broad support for a liberal approach to federalism. And his smack down,

understandably polite, of the RW fringe.

I don't think he had to draw a line in the sand on the Public Option in this address, though. It was meant for a broad American audience. In that context, I think he did really well. I liked it a lot.

And I agree, the proof is in the pudding. He's going to sign a bill - no question about that - yet what will a "public option" entail.

[Sparkly]

16. This may be dumb, but...

I thought the idea of a public option is that it IS funded by the public. His description of this sounded more like a co-op to me. I don't get it.

[tabatha]

17. There WILL be a public option.

[madokie]

18. I like the last half of the speech way better than the first half

I was feeling pretty let down there at first when he was giving the insurance companies more business and I'm still disappointed about that but I like the way he called the lesser than good party out on their bullshit.
I love the man I'm just feeling a little let down right now.

[madinmaryland]

19. Yes, it will be interesting to see what plays out after his speech.

I think it was a very good and impassioned speech. Hopefully Congress will act on it.

[Beregond2]

22. I'm baffled

by those who say he didn't declare support for a public option. It seemed to me the majority of the speech was precisely that.

[dgibby]

31. He did declare support for the PO,

but he didn't say he wouldn't sign a bill without it.

[felinetta]

23. I love him and I'm proud that I voted and campaigned for him and I'm a liberal.

[TexasObserver]

24. Recommend

[janx]

25. Skinner, for the first time, I finally think I understand what he means

when he refers to the public option in that way. If the left pays all of their attention to the public option--and believe me, I'm paying attention--then the whole of health care reform could fail. He has consistently extolled its merits, absolutely, but I don't think he wants things to appear as if he's just caving in to people who seem to be so demanding about one part of the plan.

This doesn't necessarily, or even probably, indicate that he has any notion to abandon it, from what I saw tonight.

He was harsh on *some* Republicans, and it appears that he knows who they are. ;-)

[redqueen]

29. He did a great job of drawing a comparison with public universities.

I think we're going to get it... however even if we do, the details will ensure that the complaining and hating goes on unabated.

[KoKo]

35. I was disappointed he didn't talk to the "People" It sounded like rehashed Campaign Speech clips.

I was disappointed he didn't talk to the "People" It sounded like rehashed Campaign Speech clips.

It sort of talked over the heads of ordinary folks who would have tuned in trying to figure out what all the hullabaloo is and why these "Tea Bag" folks are out there disrupting.

I wish he'd spoken to the Nation from the Oval Office...One on One. And, where the hell is his PLAN? So far all I hear is this leak and that from folks in his administration and congress about all the bad stuff that I wouldn't vote for if I had a chance to.

There's something very wrong going on. I don't know if it's his closest advisers giving him bad advice or it's HIM? Why is he still Campaigning. He's PRESIDENT WITH A DEM MANDATE! Yet, he still trying to talk to us like we are a crowd of fans or something.

If found it very disappointing. It was hard to get through it. That's my honest opinion..

[voc]

37. He was very clear.

He said he wouldn't back down. I believe him.

[ddeclue]

43. Care to discuss tort reform or mandated coverage while we have to wait for 4 years for co-ops to

kick in? What of the very limited nature of these co-ops and public option?

There seems to be no protection against rate increases as a way to get around denying coverage for pre-existing conditions either. There seemed to be quite a lot wrong with this plan to me.

Doug D.

[deaniac21]

45. There is no question that there will be no public option.

[KittyWampus]

48. you must have missed the speech.

[Romulox]

50. He "smacked down" Republicans by integrating plenty of their ideas into his plan?

:shrug:

[lonestarnot]

57. Sir, there will be a public option.

[grantcart]

60. And how good the system is will not be known until we see what is actually

offered in the health exchange and how big the subsidy is for the poor.


But what did change is that the government's role to govern was established.

[90-percent]

61. Republicans with hand lettered signs

What was up with that?

What did the signs say?

Is this customary for such an event?

To me, it seemed childish and ....pathetic, frankly.

What do you all think?

-90% jimmy

[madokie]

65. I was really disappointed to begin with

felt a little better as the speech went on but got up this morning with a knot in my stomach. I trust that the man is doing all he can possibly do and realize the final bill isn't written yet but I sure feel uneasy. I think I would have felt better if he would have talked about the PO earlier in his speech because by the time he got to it it was too late for me as I was already whizzie. Today whats giving me some comfort is thinking that maybe this is the best way to go about it and that we'll ultimately have a better plan. I'm VA so my dog in this fight is mostly for you all, family and friends.

I still love our President as much today as I did yesterday though and will do anything I can to help him.

[Warren DeMontague]

67. CNN Poll: Double-digit post-speech jump for Obama plan

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/09/09/cnn-poll-two-thirds-of-speech-watchers-favor-obamas-proposals/

[Trillo]

68. It could have been a worse speech, much worse in fact.

It could also have been a better speech. For example, President Obama said public option would be limited to those who don't have insurance. I didn't quote it, but I specifically heard that phrase.

Now, maybe he was just blurring a mark in the sand, perhaps something else, or maybe he even takes the vast majority of us for idiots. There is no-to-little competition from such a limited idea as being eligible for the public option only if you don't already have insurance. That's not COMPETITION, that's a fall back safety net, no more, and there's no way for it work effectively to keep private insurance prices lower. It's highly limited in size.

And my god. A health insurance mandate? We already have THE Most Expen$ive Health In$urance in the entire world, ranked #37 by WHO (so you know the difference is "the profit") and the greedy Insurance corps can only think of expanding their fat-laden markets further? If you don't buy, you can opt out with a fee (let me guess, that money is a tax that goes to the government, levied against the poorest and probably also the youngest workers).

Like I said, the speech could have been much worse, but it could have been so much better. I think these folks running the government, specifically the elected, have been hobnobbing with the wellest-off, and their idea of "the middle" is skewed towards those who have so much that a $3500, or even a $700 fine, is pocket change.

I know folks that can't afford a $250 deductible so even though they have insurance they don't go to the doctor, even when they really need to. The deductible just isn't in their budget.

[Jersey Devil]

69. I think no lines were drawn in the sand because he was talking to the people

The whole idea of a speech before a joint session was so that he could communicate to the public directly and get them behind him. That actually accomplishes two purposes, the first being public support and the second demonstrating to the blue dogs that they can in fact vote for it without getting punished for it at the polls. He had no reason to draw any lines in the sand because he knows exactly who he can count on and who he can't. Threatening vetoes (as Clinton did in his health care try) or demanding the other party (and some of his own) do this or that has no interest for the general public in my opinion. They weren't interested in seeing a partisan fight. They wanted to know what Obama was proposing and hear it from his own lips when he said death panels, etc., were lies.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

71. Thank you Skinner for realizing that no line was drawn on the Public Option, with

lots of wiggle room that can go on for 4 years...... Hmmmm what happens in between now and 4 years? Oh yes! Another election...

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

72. One more thought here.... didn't anyone else see this poll? 77% of Americans FOR a Public Option?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/20/new-poll-77-percent-suppo_n_264375.html?page=4

Who is the President really pandering to, the "backwash" or the Insurance companies?