I don't know about the ad. Shaking a Magic 8 ball really doesn't resonate with me.

No audio for me, either.

But I really think that one of the smartest moves Obama has made was to put Elizabeth Edwards in charge of this.

weird. audio working for us.

A few brief responses:

1) Good for Mrs Edwards. I am somewhat baffled that health care, after having been such an issue in the primaries, has sort of dropped off the radar screen since April. No one seems to be talking about it any more, despite the fact that, near as I can tell, voters are still just as anxious about the state of our health care system now as they were in January when it was all the buzz.

2) I am especially tickled to read that they are placing organizers in the districts of the potentially unreliable. Well done. Hold their feet to the fire and make them co-operate if they cannot be trusted to do the right thing spontaneously.

3) I am not sure if this is significant or merely a coincidence, but I was struck by the fact that only one of the five people shown in that ad was a man. Do surveys show that women are more likely to vote based on this issue?

This is good because it directly attacks the biggest single problem with our healthcare system: the insurance companies. The entire idea of having insurance companies involved must be discredited in order to make any progress on this issue.

Obama just released a response ad to the RNC ad, hitting McCain HARD on his gas tax plan! it's at The Page.

I wish they were promoting truly universal, single payer health care. It moves the debate in the right direction, but it doesn't go nearly far enough, and I fear it will give liberals a false sense of accomplishment, even while the insurance companies still control our health care system.

Thanks to Health Care for America Now. It may be baby steps but I think the timing of this election year is very important. Health care affordability or unaffordable as most of us experience - is really an important issue and part of this devastating economic downturn. It is an issue being talked about in local and state elections.

The Ad would be more effective if it vocalizes the eight ball responses of "Doubtful", etc. All election related ads need to vocalize - don't depend on the viewer to always be viewing the ad on TV - some people are only "listening" to TV.

Our current multitasking society requires more vocalization in ads to get the message across.

I'm deeply disturbed that some folks I generally support have aligned themselves with this group. My examination of their webiste, the language it uses and some of the players involved tell me that the prime purpose here is to take real single payer off the table and to make sure the debate is confined to private insurance based solutions.
Yes, it may be necessary to get to single payer by steps and not all at once, but any step that more deeply entrenches the private insurance industry, giving it more power over the lives of more Americans is NOT a step in the right direction.
We should start the debate with single payer as the right solution, not by taking it off the table as "not politically feasible". Their website and program act as if the only debate is about how much to regulate the private insurance industry, and as if eliminating them altogether is not even an option to be talked about. They criticize the actions of the insurers, but won't take the step to the real answer.
If insurance is the problem, MORE insurance is NOT the solution.