Some people seem to think that the inclusion of viewpoints that are critical of the speech suggests that those who provide those viewpoints hear only the people who don't like what was said.

First of all, this is a rather large assumption (and in incorrect one, at that). Secondly, it shows that there are people who think that only one side of the issue should be allowed to be expressed. While I have provided an alternative point of view, unlike quite a few other people in the thread, I have not suggested that other people should not provide any other perspectives besides the ones I have provided.

Personally, I am aware of all of the different perspectives on the speech. But the response from many of the people who were the intended targets of the speech is as important as any other, and should be included in this discussion.

I understand that a lot of people might find those perspectives to be a bit of a buzz kill, but it's not really about them after all.