Michael Brenner at the Huffington Post, article entitled, “The Health Care Reform Debacle: Obama’s coming out“:

… Not only does the country remain handicapped by grossly sub-par arrangements for health delivery, we also are burdened with a president who has been discredited as a progressive dedicated to a betterment of how we conduct public business. [emphasis mine]

It seems that President Barack Obama has been making some closed door, back room deals with big pharmaceutical companies, a.k.a. the devil. Some may remember that on the campaign trail (not the current one, the previous one, while he was still a U.S. Senator, voting “present” all those times) then Senator Obama had a lot of really mean things to say about big drug companies and the role they played in Washington. He even ran a television ad about it (thanks to the L.A. Times for the link). But that was a LONG LONG time ago, before he actually had to get things done. Now that he’s in power, he does whatever he wants to do. In this case, that means closing the doors for secret meetings with big drug companies and cutting a deal that basically takes the teeth out of any Health Care reform he was hoping for.

… the [pharmaceutical drug]  industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul.

So while the President demonizes your doctor as someone who will cut out your tonsils or your amputate your foot for a profit, has assured the drug companies that they won’t have to give up their precious profits. Michael Brenner summarizes his perspective on Barack’s handling of the health care this way:

In short, we have gotten from him the antithesis of what we were promised and expected — in the substance and process of policy both. We have instead a conventionally minded politician overly respectful of the status quo and deferential to those who control and profit from it, A man with no apparent fixed convictions.

Brenner, writing at the Huffington Post, is certainly no conservative sympathizer. This indicates to me that our President has not only failed to woo conservatives but also managed to alienate those who supported him.

Here are a few of my problems with this whole scenario…

HE’S A LIAR!!

Seriously, I spent 8 years hearing George Bush demonized as someone who destroyed America and cast this country in a bad light. Barack Obama doesn’t think twice about destroying someone on the campaign trail (PhARMA) and then hopping in bed with them. He has no problem decrying the profits of insurance agencies while at the same time guaranteeing the profits of the drug companies. Which is it, Mr. President, are profits the bane of all existence and the ruination of all that is good and decent in this world, or are they not?

Finally, Greg Pallast (writing again for the Huffington Post, so these are libs talking) takes the President to task for his duplicity, re: Dick Cheney’s meetings with big oil…

When Dick Cheney was caught having secret meetings with oil companies to discuss Bush’s Energy Bill, we denounced the hugger-muggers as a case of foxes in the henhouse.

Cheney’s secret meetings with lobbyists and industry bigshots were creepy and nasty and evil.

But the Obama crew’s secret meetings with lobbyists and industry bigshots were, the President assures us, in the public interest.

We know Cheney’s secret confabs were shady and corrupt because Cheney scowled out the side of his mouth.

Obama grins in your face.

See the difference?

President Obama clearly doesn’t have the problem with big profits that he lets on. First of all, because he takes in quite an annual personal profit himself. Second, because I don’t believe a person can honestly violate their true values. I believe that a person will ALWAYS act on what they truly believe, regardless of what they say. Based on that, it would seem that President Obama cares very little about truth, justice, or the American way. Instead, it would seem that he cares a great deal about his legacy, and his radical ideology. It would seem that his actions and lack of integrity have cost him all of the above.

9 COMMENTS
David Banks
August 17, 2009
ad

Once again, 7 paragraphs on something that didn’t actually happen. It’s a thoery of some guy at the huffington post. There still isn’t a bill, there still hasn’t been a vote, but Obama is a liar who has rolled into bed with big Pharm and is going to protect thier profits in the legislation. Can’t you just save this post until something actually happens? What will you do when it doesn’t happen.
ie.. He’ll never let the banks pay back thier TARP money. The government is going to take over the auto industry. The white house is taking emails and cross referencing them with addresses to send goons to your house.. etc…
I’m sure the all the readers of this blog don’t exactly keep track of these things that are reported as EVENTS that are actually only baseless theories, but you must remember… you have to realize that your track record is about 0-15 on the end of the world prediction front.

David Banks
August 17, 2009
ad

Whats funny is I wrote that comment before I actually went and read any of the links. So I thought I should go check out this stuff and… (you already know the answer) sure enough, it’s all made up.
The article is about a fake deal that didn’t happen and even if it did, it would be a deal to cut profits, not protect them.

realityunwound
August 18, 2009
ad

Everything has happened. He didn’t let the banks pay back their TARP money at first (they have now). The government did take over GM. And the government did ask people to turn in their friends e-mail addresses. To say that Obama never met with big pharmaceutical companies is… I don’t even know what to call it. Wrong doesn’t seem to convey it.

I know how much it hurts to see one of your heroes turn out to be a shady megalomaniacal narcissist. Hang in there, though.

David Banks
August 18, 2009
ad

Well… Sorta… Exept your post about refusing payback from the banks was about how he never would allow it because it was a huge conspiracy to take over. The government gave GM back after you said it was a huge conspiracy to take over and the government never asked for peoples email addresses only for fishy emails.
But back to the topic at hand. Your explanation would be fine if the post was about the terribleness of him having a meeting with the big pharmaceutical companies but it wasn’t (see, its right up there) the post was about the left turning on O because he cut a deal with them to protect thier profits which didn’t happen. You really should remember that we can read what you wrote. (see… its right up there)
I fully suspect he has had meetings with pharmaceutical companies and wouldn’t expect anything different (remember the post you wrote about how he wouldn’t meet with real stakeholders because he didn’t care.. of course you don’t)

David Banks
August 18, 2009
ad

Oh and right up there where it says “HE’S a LIAR” in big letters. What are you saying he lied about?

August 19, 2009
ad

I posted several links corroborating that your BFF Barry met with big pharmaceutical companies, and cut a deal (which was clarifying the point of the post… more on that to come).

Your (common) retort is, “it didn’t happen.” Now, it’s not that you’re not more credible than everyone in the world, it’s just that I don’t believe what you say on this issues, and you haven’t supported anything.

Since you say everyone can read the posts, but you clearly don’t, let me readers digest it for you. The post is about liberals turning on King Barry Hopenchange (It’s right there in bold letters at the top).

The reason for the lefties abandoning ships, in this case, is the closed door meetings to hammer out a deal with pharmaceutical companies (the details were in the links).

The finely crafted rhetorical flourish highlighted Obama’s continued doublespeak. That’s where I cited Pallast who was nauseated by Obama & his minions lambasting Cheney for doing the same thing with oil companies that he did with PhARMA, secretively cut a deal to advance an unpopular agenda. These points cohesively point to the problem: a lack of integrity, well documented duplicity, and saying what’s politically expedient and then doing what is most self serving.

And since the CEO of GM is the guy he appointed, you can’t really say he gave GM back.

August 19, 2009
ad

I’m saying he lied about the evils of profit mongering big medical companies, before he cut a deal. C’mon, man. It’s all right there in black and white. Your little diversion tactics make me weary!

David Banks
August 19, 2009
ad

Well the “deal” he allegedly cut which is supported by some unofficial document which is denied by both sides, was one to CUT profits, not protect them and would not in any way make him into a liar even if it was true. (which I think it is for what it’s worth. The actual smoking gun memo seems to be fake, but the 80B figure seems to be somewhat legit as it has been mentioned by both sides several times)
What I don’t understand is the HUGE jump to liar, liar, pants on fire. The whole issue of health care reform is to create a system that doesn’t allow the companies in charge of that care use the full strength of the inelastic demand curve they enjoy, but do it in a way that doesn’t cripple thier ability to make a living and still foster innovation. (will doctors work as hard for 500,000 a year as they do for 3mill?) There are about 20 ways to curb that profiteering and it sounds like he sat down and said, “Hey we have to control these costs and I dont want to destroy your industry so.. what do we do?” the answer was to do number say 1…4…6…12…and 17 but ignore the rest translating to a savings of 80B to the public.
Someting like that would be a great deal for everybody and should make you happy because at one point you were concerned that he wouldn’t sit down with people who can make real change and try to reach a fair compromise. But instead… you agree with the lefties that hes folding to the right and it makes him a liar and he’s protecting thier profits etc…
I don’t disagree with the title of the post. Indeed there are many on the left that think he’s doing to much to compromise with the right. (including me) But you dont get to have it both ways.. when he gives a little that makes him a liar for being too eager to make compromise (and then you go on to completely mischaractorize that alleged compromise) and when he doesn’t, then he’s the same ol partisan liberal who is a facist and doesn’t care about conservative views.
Is there any significant health care reform you would agree too?

realityunwound
August 19, 2009
ad

Of COURSE I would agree to significant health care reform, if it addressed the real problems in a significant way. I just don’t see how superimposing a form of a broken system (medicare) on a much larger populace (Americans) would make things better, cheaper, and more better. How can increasing demand (pushing even a fraction of the people onto the public policy), without increasing the supply (are there going to be more doctors? Why? How?) possibly work? How does that even make a lick of sense?

Compromise is not a principle, and it is not a value. It is what it is. I don’t applaud compromise, neither do I denigrate it. What I applaud is integrity. When he fails to compromise on the auto bailout or takeover of GM, I am going to be against it because I disagree with government take over of corporations. When he compromises with big medicines to limit profits, even if it’s limiting less than it was going to be, I am going to be against it because I don’t believe that punishing success is a fruitful endeavor. I don’t give a rip whether he compromises or not. I am simply making a point to call out when he is inconsistent, at best.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.