[Professor S]

I haven't seen the whole speech yet, only the highlights from each major news network, but if what I saw is a microcosm of his whole speech I'd say it's the least successful of any speech he's made to date. He had an opportunity to come across professorial, which he is very good at, but instead he took the route of the patronizing school marm lecturing those who "just won't listen". And from what I saw, the reasoning behind the existing bills were simply repeated, and not expanded on or clarified, especially when it comes how to REALLY pay for it. The efficiency/cost reduction thing is not a new argument, nor has it been a convincing one. Also, I HATE the idea of forcing people to get healthcare who do not want it, and that would be a deal breaker for me as I find that a bit too Orwellian for my tastes.

I was happy to see the idea of tort reform addressed though, however briefly. And I think he mentioned opening up national competition, which would be a GREAT thing, but I only heard that in pundit recap, not from the horse's mouth.

But from what I saw, his answer still remains to hamstring private care with added regulations/mandates overall... and then compete with it, and I think that's rife with opportunities for abuse and quickly regulating private care into extinction.

But then again, that's just from what I saw in the highlight reels. I'll add more thoughts as I find the entire speech later this week.

I didn't see the Republican response, but I'm sure it was condescending, if recent history is any indicator. I prefer John McCain's overall healthcare response, converting the contentious un-insurable via government organized, but not funded, risk pools to sell to private insurance to reduce their risk by injecting volume into the equation and lower costs overall. That would 100% necessitate nationwide competition, though, if we wanted it to work. Personally, I think his plan driven organically by market forces is as comprehensive as I've seen and borderline brilliant.