You're punting on the shifting polls. Americans have been trending towards serious healthcare reform since, well, since the problems started getting serious. Even polls in Clinton's time weren't that dissimilar in overall breakdown. The system is crap for way too many, and something must be done. It ain't just Obama's poll numbers - it ain't even Obama - although the Republicans would like us to believe that.

I'm glad you're outlining alternatives. Have you contacted your representatives about those? Do you feel you need to? I feel the need to talk up, as do many on this board, because I have direct experience of hardship (not just me). Any hardship that I'm aware of is multiplied by millions, as is obvious if you have eyes and ears, and I'm sensitive to those folks too. Something must be done.

What I don't appreciate, from anyone, right or left, is talk being used as a substitute for action. That's the Republicans' number one tactic, with dissembling at number two. (I might have those reversed.) I hope it's not yours.

dclach is a plant. The over-solicitousness should give it away, but I read his letters. He claims several times that he's not a Republican, never watches Fox, only reads carefully from selected thoughtful tomes, lived abroad, etc. - and yet every single letter is boilerplate Republican talking points. Saddam Hussein/Al Qaeda links; Saddam bought yellowcake; Bush didn't lie, torture, create secret prisons or upset the Constitution; pro-Limbaugh and Coulter; pro-"Wingnut's" articles; Sotomayor not fit, global warming not proved, healthcare solutions won't work - you name it, every post is a Republican catalog, albeit done without the usual histrionics. Slick. He's either:

1. a paid shill

2. a congenital liar

3. Camille Paglia

I'm going to go with (3).

now officially means getting both sides of the Democratic party to cooperate. Republicans have nothing to do with it, thank goodness. Although Olympia Snowe can keep going to work. She's ok.

Keep the heat up on timely healthcare review and action.

The polls say, at least, that a healthy majority of Americans think reform will either improve or do nothing to their coverage or the country at large. That's kind of the point - that it work for many, and be neutral for the rest. The polls don't address improvements in reigning in costs over the next decades; that's not something that can be entirely answered right now, as it's part and parcel of the writing of the bill. As a primary goal of the reform package to begin with, hopefully, as it develops, that'll get out there too.

Polls reflect the public's awareness, not just proclivities. I'm really glad to see Obama stumping for reform, in all its aspects, and fair, positive reporting like this. Thanks.

Plan B: if this doesn't work, we should just all join the military.

If you click on the polls that Mike references that's what the numbers show.

I went to your blog - dude - it's too complicated. Just tell it in plain English, I think we're in agreement. Are you arguing for single payer? I agree with that, but I'm a realist - the absolute most important thing is to not let this subject slip for, well, another 16 years. The perfect must not eliminate the good, or all the people needing some good in their healthcare right now.

If you're young, it may be an age thing. But believe me, this is not the time to postpone possibilities, given this president and this Congress. Unfocused time and subterfuge are vested interests' best weapons.

OOOPS! Sorry old man - I'm right behind you - 57. You've got the enthusiasm of youth, which I mean as a compliment. You fooled me!

Single payer is the best way, the right way - should be the only way. I'm just jazzed that the subject's back on the table, and anxious to see what Obama and Congress can come up with. I like the public option, hope that's not dropped. That would be a dealbreaker for me and I know for many, many others. But let's see what happens.

I promise I'll look at your blog more carefully, now that I know you're not a surfer! Pardon.

F 'n' A. Perfectly put. If he can pull this off, I keep eyeing that little sliver of space between T. Roosevelt and Lincoln on Mount Rushmore. The ears would stick out a little, but what an achievement it would be, after 16 years of Republicans shoving this under the table.

I don't know - Huffington is great for breaking news and lots of it, and there are flaky things on it for sure. But I'm not certain the best use of Salon's resources is a hit piece on their very close neighbor. There are more than a few writers on Salon over the years who can't pass snuff - Paglia, Sirota and Debra J. Dickerson come to mind, not to mention David Horowitz. Not sure that e-zine hiring practices are going to bear much scrutiny across the board. But if you say so.

Salon has some great talents too - Mr. Greenwald, the superb and sorely-missed Sydney Blumenthal, Romm, Keillor (and I love Andrew Leonard), and lots of their articles get passed back and forth, with Bill Moyers' inestimable addition. There's an awful lot of shared territory between the two zines, as well as other liberal sites, which can often make for a great web-wide synergy. Hollywood and fluff is kind of everywhere isn't it?

the public option is staying in, as of a few minutes ago. Watering down going on, but looks sort of safe.

I was a recent critic, but I'm really impressed with Salon's commitment to healthcare coverage and depth this week, just when it counts. And I really appreciate Ms. Walsh's righteous indignation about the kitchen sink tactics being used to derail anything of substance that might benefit ordinary Americans. Right and right on.

And thanks for taking the contest to the airwaves, which entails a special degree of difficulty.

10.0