I'm still Twittering, so I'll just say here that was pretty dynamite. We'll have to wait and see whether and how much it moves the needle, but it seems like a corner has been turned; Democrats in the chamber seemed ecstatic, Republicans angry and small. The Teddy Kennedy tribute, segueing into a explicit articulation of the moral duty for health care reform, was spellbinding, and, for some members, deeply shaming. Another historic speech from a guy who really makes it look easy.

Doing some liveblogging at Twitter.

My 4000th post on this blog—something like 9,500 since starting Backwards City in May 2004—is devoted to the president's upcoming speech on health care. Robert Reich says the trigger is bunk. Ed Kilgore says it isn't. Even-the-liberal New Republic's Jon Chait explains why centrism is bunk. Millionaire Rush Limbaugh says you don't even need insurance. An end to the gang of six? Tea leaves suggest Obama may finally be ready to go it alone. Schumer talks up reconciliation. President Clinton's health-care speech from 1993. Steve Benen on where things stand. Ezra Klein on where things stand. Excerpts from the speech.

"You need a process that both sides can buy into. You cannot let these internecine battles create a war." That was Chuck Schumer on Meet the Press a few minutes ago, speaking without specificity about how the superdelegate and FL/MI situation should shake out.

Let's parse this out.

"You need a process that both sides can buy into." Assuming both sides want to win, and that both sides consider themselves to be within striking range of victory, what kind of process could both sides "buy into" when clearly any process would result in one or the other losing?

I think Clinton's camp is going to argue going into the convention that the only possible mutual buy-in result is a joint ticket, and then assert she should obviously be the head of that ticket and/or quietly refuse to be VP. I think this is how she thinks she can still be the nominee.

UPDATE: I decided to post this as a diary on Daily Kos, with a poll: "Is a joint ticket the only solution to this mess?" After about twenty minutes, "no" was far and away the winner, with "There should not be a joint ticket under any circumstances" edging out "No, there are other possible solutions" by about ten points.