ObamaKennedyDeathCare Speech And Pro Analysis

Here are some of the highlights and initial points from the pros...

John Boehner (before the speech):

“We welcome the president to the Capitol tonight and we look forward to hearing what he has to say. But the question I have is ‘has the president been listening to the American people?’ I think the American people have made it pretty clear that they don’t really want another lecture, they want a new plan. They understand that we have a good system that works well for many people. Everybody understands that we’ve got problems in the current system that can be addressed. But to replace the entire current system with a big government-run plan is not what the American people want and certainly isn’t what I want.”

Ouch! They're really scared of Sarah Palin:

White House talking points blast Palin in run-up to Obama's third failed speech.

A source sends on the talking points the White House is circulating to allies in advance of President Obama's speech, most of them reiterating familiar themes of momentum and security.

But the White House has also chosen specifically to focus on former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, and evidently to make her the face of the opposition, or to respond to her ability to project herself into the debate. She is the only Republican named in the talking points.

In closely related news: Lefties praise Palin's WSJ editorial, indirectly, by caterwauling she didn't write it; and Marc Ambinder pleads with the MSM not to give Palin any exposure.

Never one to shirk from conflict, Palin responds:

I’m pleased that the White House is finally responding to Republican health care ideas instead of pretending they don’t exist.[1] But in doing so President Obama should follow his own sound advice and avoid making “wild misrepresentations”.[2] Medicare vouchers would give everyone on Medicare the chance to decide for themselves which health plan to use, rather than leave that decision to government bureaucrats. Such proposals are the kind of health care reform that Republicans stand for: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven.

The White House talking points leave the rest of my arguments unanswered. They don’t respond to the idea that all individuals should get the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers; that we must reform our tort laws; and that we should allow Americans to buy insurance across state lines. The White House also fails to respond to the Nyce/Schieber study indicating that wages will fall if the government expands coverage without reducing health care inflation rates.

One last thing: after President Obama’s speech tonight, listen for which pundits use the words “false”, “scary”, and “risky” in describing the proposals I put forward. That’s how you’ll be able to tell who the White House counted as “allies” worthy of receiving its talking points.

The winner is, of course, the DNC.

Powerline noticed the suddenly lower number of uninsured, too:

What can we learn from the malleable, missing millions who provide the pretext for Obama's proposed takeover of the health care system? He willfully misrepresents the magnitude of the problem. He is not to be trusted with numbers. He does not fear being called out on the obvious discrepancies on the fundamental rationale he presents to support his program, whatever it is.

He will say whatever he deems necessary to seek to persuade his audience. A man who refuses to get this issue right cannot be trusted with the more important facts, figures and propositions with which his speech was larded.

Patterico has a slightly different take:

...it helps the Democrats claim that ObamaCare will not cover millions of illegal immigrants. House Democrats have rejected every attempt to require that people should be required to prove they are a citizen of the United States before receiving government health care subsidies, despite the fact that verification is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But pulling illegals out of the uninsured helps them sweep that inconvenient truth under the rug a while longer — or so they hope.

The other benefit is that adopting a more honest number of the uninsured will make ObamaCare seem cheaper and (near-)universal coverage easier to attain. Again, in reality, ObamaCare would play out far differently, making the underlying cost estimates a fantasy. But the establishment media is so desperate to spin a Obama’s speech as “comeback” that there is almost zero chance that anyone will challenge Pres. Obama’s most obvious and arbitrary rewriting of the healthcare narrative.

I think both are probably right. But seriously, shouldn't it concern people that the goalposts are constantly moving with Obama? That seems like a big red flag all by itself, doesn't it?

One of the most interesting moments of the speech was when a GOP Congressman heckled Obama:

This would be Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who later apologized. Of course, he was not wrong. And, in fact, the lies were coming thick and fast in last night's speech. Oh, and before you get too mad about that horrible 'disrespect', just remember...

Let's not ride that high horse too much, okay? The facts aren't quite so forgiving of that 'outrage' by Mr. Wilson.

Speaking of which, how about some fact-checking? Shockingly, the AP actually does some legitimate work for a change:

President Barack Obama used only-in-Washington accounting Wednesday when he promised to overhaul the nation's health care system without adding "one dime" to the deficit. By conventional arithmetic, Democratic plans would drive up the deficit by billions of dollars.

The president's speech to Congress contained a variety of oversimplifications and omissions in laying out what he wants to do about health insurance.

OBAMA: "I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period."

THE FACTS: ...The long-term prognosis for costs of the health care legislation has not been good.

OBAMA: "Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have."

THE FACTS: That's correct, as far as it goes. But neither can the plan guarantee that people can keep their current coverage. Employers sponsor coverage for most families, and they'd be free to change their health plans in ways that workers may not like, or drop insurance altogether. The Congressional Budget Office analyzed the health care bill written by House Democrats and said that by 2016 some 3 million people who now have employer-based care would lose it...

OBAMA: "Don't pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut. ... That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare."

THE FACTS: Obama and congressional Democrats want to pay for their health care plans in part by reducing Medicare payments to providers by more than $500 billion over 10 years...

Powerline has a big fact check roundup here; their conclusion is that the speech simply wasn't directed at 'thinking people'.

Hot Air illuminates the Fearmonger-in-Chief:

“Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing,” says the guy who’s committed to doing nothing about social security, Medicare, and the mind-bogglingly enormous deficits that promise fiscal catastrophe in the years ahead while he saddles America with yet another red-ink-bleeding government program. Note well: He’s actually promoting a plan that will lead to health-care rationing as a way to prolong Americans’ lives. We’re living your dream, Orwell.

There's a taste for you. I'll post more as I come across it.

There's my two cents.



Related Reading:
New study puts Obamacare deficits over $1 trillion
The GOP response to Obama's health care plan