Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP: White House ‘Met Early and Often with Lobbyists’ on Health Care

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:43 PM
Original message
AP: White House ‘Met Early and Often with Lobbyists’ on Health Care
Source: Associated Press

AP: White House ‘met early and often with lobbyists’ on health care

By Raw Story
Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 -- 4:15 pm

White House officials "met early and often with lobbyists" involved in the health care reform effort, visitor logs obtained by the Associated Press show.

The White House on Wednesday released some 1,600 records of visitors to the White House since the inauguration of President Barack Obama in January. AP reports that among the visitors were several health care experts who advocate a more radical overhaul of the health care system than the one being debated in Congress. Eliot Fisher of Dartmouth Medical School, a vocal opponent of inefficiency in health care, and David Himmelstein of Harvard Medical School, a supporter of single-payer universal health care, were both on the list.

Also on the list were a plethora of health insurance CEOs and lobbyists, including the CEOs of Blue Cross Blue Shield, Kaiser Health Plans and the heads of pharma lobby group PhRMA and the American Hospital Association.

Read more: http://rawstory.com/2009/11/white-house-met-lobbyists-h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
the blues Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. +1 brings rec's to 0
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 03:50 PM by the blues
I don't understand why President Obama met with any lobbyists about health care reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It's called we were played.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #2
76. I wonder if Joe Lieberman and whatshisname who was from North
Dakota until he got voted out were there. They are lobbyists too I hear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #76
103. And this is the deal they struck only they ran into some impediments


President Rahm Obama bargained away the PO early on for guarantees of campaign donations coming to dems (especially Blue dogs) in the next elections rather than repubs.

The proof is that the WH, under Rahm Obama, pushed for the "trigger" option which is no PO at all, under the guise of courting Olympia Snowe (when it was actually the other way around) and became extremely angry when Reid wouldn't go for it.

Reid managed to get the support he needed for the "opt out" PO version which really angered the WH since they bargained away the PO already but couldn't absolutely guarantee it since some senators would never go for a trigger version because they knew that was no PO at all.

Enter Obama's mentor Joe Lieberman to kill the PO so now in order to get that 60th vote Reid is being forced to offer the trigger option and exchange Lieberman's vote for Snowe's vote...which is what the muted WH wanted all along and which we all know is no PO at all.

Many claim the PO will get added back in without a trigger during conference of House and Senate...but it won't.

What is most important to private ins. is there be no Public Option because that will open the door for gov. involvement in the HC ins. industry which could be expanded in the future and most certainly cause competition in that market. Private ins has already spent millions to stop reform and have told Rahm Obama if the PO passes there will be hell to pay come election time as they will pour money into the opposition.

Keep in mind Obama has used Lieberman to do this type of bidding before like when Lieberman made sure the torture photos could never be sown via the FOIA by slipping it into some other bill...when Obama could not get it done through the courts as the courts all concluded they should be revealed.

So we can expect to get a PO with a trigger option (which is no PO at all) trading Lieberman's vote for Snowe's as the 60th vote to break a republican filibuster so there will be an up or down vote...at which point Snowe can vote against the bill and Lieberman can vote for it just to save face.

The anti civil liberties Blue dog leader Rahm Emanuel is a good indication of the direction Obama is taking, along with Tim Geitner.
Paulson and Summers...and it is definitely not progressive.

Dawn Johnsen has yet to be confirmed to advise the president and there has yet to be an effort to de-Bushify the gov. especially our DoJ by replacing all the USAs appointed by Bush. (sorry Siegleman...if only you were a republican like Stevens, who is guilty, from Alaska who was not shackled and did not serve a day in jail before Holder jumped to make sure he was set free, you still have the "proven" corrupt judge and USA putting you in prison for 20yrs while Holder and Obama look the other way. Justice you can believe in)

What a mess Obama has to contend with...but such a big mess needs good advisers to help the president deal with it...and we get Rahm...which none of us would have elected to the office he now holds that's for sure.

Happy Thanksgiving. I am thankful for all the things that haven
't happened as much as I am for the things that have happened.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #103
104. Also Medicare's budget can be expanded to cover us all via reconciliation needing only 51 votes to p


The senators aren't talking about that because it would completely eliminate priv. ins. profiteering. Then pre existing conditions, caps, etc wouldn't matter because we would all have medicare and the gov we elect could focus on fixing Medicare and with everyone covered it would even include dental.

Why won't they listen...expand Medicare's budget to cover everyone and being a budgetary issue it could be passed via reconciliation requiring only 51 votes....so simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I would have met with same, if for no other reason than to be able to say
I listened to both sides of the debate.

I guess they don't teach diplomacy anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. kestrel, du rules apply to everyone
and take a look in the mirror with a post like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
parasearchers Donating Member (264 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
25. I will wait till 2012, and then if the country needs to be shot in the head
I will vote for whatever loony the repukes put in. Let it go to hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. I'll wait until the final bill. I wait until his speech about Afghanistan. I might just wait...
I might just wait out 2012. Let's see how he does with all of those moderates who will vote for him.

I don't like playing the "who else do you have to vote for" game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Akoto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Consider the present situation for a moment.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 04:40 PM by Akoto
What's currently being pursued is, among other reforms, a public option. It would be very helpful to many people (myself included), but it basically remains a form of insurance. The fact that it's controlled by the government ensures a degree of fairness not found with insurance companies.

This, as you are no doubt aware, has been a hard sell. We're engaged in a heated conflict with our opponents, many of whom are swayed by the MSM over whether or not this is socialism/gubmint control. This, over a plan which will benefit many of its fearful detractors.

Consider what the reaction would be to a single payer system, in light of the firestorm over a mere public insurance plan. It'd be an even more drastic change in how things are done. I'm not saying it's a bad system (it works great elsewhere), but if we're ever to go single payer, it will be through steps like the PO. We just won't get there otherwise.

I don't see how the President sold us out for not seeing people whose cause is presently hopeless -- setting aside the fact that he never promised single payer in his campaign. If that were the case, then he'd have sold you out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tansy_Gold Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. A "hard sell" to whom? Not the public, since the public wants it
We took our last "steps" toward universal health care when Medicare and Medicaid were launched almost HALF A FUCKING CENTURY ago. With the exception of the "public option" in the current "plan," everythng else is a giveaway to the insurance companies with virtually no guarantee that they will actually provide coverage. They demand the premium, but they refuse to guarantee they'll pay out when the patient needs it.

Like justice, health care delayed is health care denied. PEOPLE ARE DYING. Doesn't that mean anything? Don't PEOPLE mean anything?

We get ooohs and aaaahs over what a gorgeous couple the Obamas are at their state dinner. But where is the action on health care FROM THE ADMINISTRATION? Is the failure of this administration to make any headway on this issue just set aside because Barack and Michelle look good in formal dress?

Read the account of the triage doctor from Little Rock. It's here on DU somewhere, tucked behind the photos from the state dinner and the name-calling when anyone dares to criticize His Royal Highness. Most of us critics don't resort to name-calling -- "traitor" "PUMA" "freeper" being among the more common -- but rather we try to deal with the issues.

Did Obama campaign on promises of "I'm gonna just sit back and let Congress iron out all this stuff with the various industries that have vested interests in the status quo"? No, regardless the fine print, his mantra was change. Change we can believe in.

His numbers are going down because he is not perceived as delivering on that essential promise. if he doesn't want to be a one-term president succeeded by a half-baked Alaskan, he'd better start delivering.



Tansy Gold
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Akoto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. Hey, no need to lecture me.
I'm bedridden at 24 with a rare chronic pain condition. There are treatments which might offer me a little relief, but I can't afford them due to lack of insurance/money. A public option or single payer would do nothing but help me.

Having said that, I am aware of the realities as they presently stand. The "hard sell" is to the resistant politicians whose votes are required to make change happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the blues Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I draw a distinction between lobbyists and experts
I understand Obama's desire to hear different points of view about health care reform. However, because his time is valuable, individuals with whom he confers should meet a gold standard. By this, I don't mean they will earn much gold if they are successful in persuading him to their point of view. By definition, a lobbyist is "a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest; a member of a lobby." There are many raw facts about health care reform that have been obtained by analysis of data. Let experts with no financial self-interest in promoting (or thwarting) health care reform present the case to the president.

I wasn't sure what you meant when you wrote "they don't teach diplomacy anymore" -- but then I saw your harsh response in post #7. Now, I understand exactly what you meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
43. Well said..
... Washington hasn't changed one bit, and folks on both sides of the aisle know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crzyrussell Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
99. Technically
anybody who goes to Washington to influence , whether it is AARP, SEIU or the chamber of commerce are lobbyists. Even the supporting groups of HCR are lobbyists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
31. deleted
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 06:16 PM by ljm2002
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
42. Yeah...
.... except he never listened to OUR side. Single payer wasn't even given a thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
56. But they do teach how to dispense DLC hogwash. Too bad it only pays five bucks an hour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
107. Shame he listened to the corporate side more than those who care about us.
A familiar occurrence with this president.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. He said no more lobbying before he got elected.
GRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HuckleB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
36. So that means he's not going to consult with anyone?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
53. +1 brings it to recs 53 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #53
105. 117 :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Okota Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
65. why he met with lobbyist?
Because there his pimps.they tell him what kind of services they want him to perform on the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #65
90. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
SergeStorms Donating Member (248 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 06:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
88. Money...........
lobbyists from the health care industry invest lots of money for access to our government leaders, and they expect a return on their investment. Just like the banking industry, they paid for access and demand it when they want it. Until there is honest campaign finance reform this will be standard operating procedure in Washington. Anyone who thought Obama was different in this respect - that he wouldn't give lobbyists their money's worth - was quite naive.
Hope and change: we hoped they'd change, but obviously they haven't. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. Apparently they also met with critics of the health care system
It says so right there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BREMPRO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. yes they did, with single payer advocates, dartmouth atlas researchers as well as corporate reps.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 04:29 PM by BREMPRO
does it occur to anyone that the meetings are not just to be influenced by lobbyists, but to understand and listen to their point of view and try court the industry on board for the best possible outcome for us? Obama met with all the stakeholders and kept them engaged in the process. That is why we even have a bill to consider, unlike hillarycare that was a closed door process that was killed by lobbyists before it ever got traction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtheistCrusader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. Flood insurance.
It's a federal insurance program, administered by normal insurance companies. Perhaps they are exploring a single payer system in that model?

My home is backed against flood damage by the Federal Government, but Farmers Insurance actually adminsters the policy. Collects the premiums set by the Government, and pushes money around in little piles for the government when payouts are needed.

I don't know what the insurance company's cut is of the piles of money, but it could theoretically work for health care I suppose.

I'll wait and see what Obama comes up with. But everyone needs to keep in mind, while he can apply political pressure on this topic, he can ASK for things, try and broker the deal, etc, his true function is basically go-no-go on whatever the Congress tries to pass. So we need to temper our expectations OF HIM a bit, I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
29. The insurance companies are not stake holders. They are leeches who
kill people with their claim denials and recisions for profit. Unless you are a doctor or a patient you are not a stakeholder in this debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sukie Donating Member (563 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. It appears he was doing what was needed in order to
make an informed decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
20. lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. I will see your lol and raise you a guffaw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
57. And I'll toss in a haw haw haw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Go2Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #27
63. Yep, amazing rewriting of history some here want to do.Anyone else remember when DR.s were shut out?
The administration really fought to keep the grassroots and single payer representation out of the meetings. I can't believe folks have forgotten that already?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
59. + 10
It's just amazing the lengths the apologists will go to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #20
75. I'M WITH YOU PT
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #75
79. XOXOXOX
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
96. Apparently, for some of you... the expected process for a loan application
must include meetings with the Mafia and your local loan shark. After all, one should keep all their options open. Right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
8. That's the headline from rawstory? I would have thought David
Himmelstein would have been bigger news, since for months people have been complaining that the WH never met with single-payer supporters.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radhika Donating Member (563 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
9. What about Patient's Groups, Community Clinics, Non Profits?
Maybe I missed it, but didn't get the idea that participants in volunteer free healthcare clinics, women's health or disease management advocates or local non-profit community groups that work in medically-underserved areas got through the screening process. Or bankruptcy trustees. Not sure I saw small businesses either - cuz the big lobbies don't work for them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
change_notfinetuning Donating Member (750 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
13. The same lobbyists who were going to be sent packing by the new sheriff?
Nah, couldn't be. Not with that tough-talking sheriff who was going to show them who's boss.

This is the last time I run up to kick the football with it being held by a Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
optimator Donating Member (606 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
17. can't wait to hear the spin on this
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllTooEasy Donating Member (540 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. what spin...he met with both sides, and the CEOs left pissed

It's been well documented. This is old news. His group meeting with the CEOs was broadcasted on every news station. It was one of the first things he did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #21
81. why were they pissed? The insurance companies got a hand out...
and get to keep on playing God with our health system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
18. But O-man looks hawt in a swimsuit so all is forgiven
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
48. and aren't they a gorgeous couple?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #48
58. Michelle is so hawt! All is forgiven.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllTooEasy Donating Member (540 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
19. old story, we knew this. His group meeting with the CEO's was broadcasted on every news channel
...and the immediate reports were that it didn't go well.

The CEO's didn't like what Obama wanted and Obama was surprisingly (how?) upset with their complete unwillingness to bulge.

Hey, nice try.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sasquatch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
23. I know Obama isn't quite the president I wan't him to be yet, but this looks like a good thing to me
He met with all sides of the issue in order to reach a decision. I'm sorry but that's the reasonable thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
32. So Physicians for a National Health Program got a meeting?
Or Mad As Hell Doctors, not just the AMA?

I see David Himmelstein on there, but were physicians' groups given similar access as the AMA?

I don't know, but it sounds like you might and I don't see the full list.

I disagree that he met with all sides in order to come to a decision. Rather I believe it was known he would not support single payer when elected and would be weak on public option as well. And I also believe the meetings were to ensure corporate support for a bill and corporate donations for the party.

What you wrote sounds so reasonable. I just think it is untrue. I'm sorry too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Go2Peace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #32
64. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
28. Right and that's not all they met with..
<snip>

"Top aides to President Barack Obama met early and often with lobbyists, Democratic political strategists and other interests with a stake in the administration's national health care overhaul, White House visitor records obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press show.

The AP in early August asked the White House to produce records identifying communications that top Obama aides — including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, senior advisers David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett and Pete Rouse, and 18 others — had with outside interests on health care. The AP in late September narrowed its request to White House visitor records for those officials on health care.

The White House on Wednesday provided AP with 575 visitor records covering the period from Jan. 20, when Obama was inaugurated, through August. The records give the name of each visitor to the White House complex to see people on AP's list, the date of the visit, who they were supposed to see, how many people attended the gathering, and in a sampling of cases, the purpose of the visit. The records do not identify the visitors' employers, say on whose behalf they were there or give any specifics on what was discussed.

The records show a broad cross-section of the people most heavily involved in the health care debate, weighted heavily with those who want to overhaul the system. Among them were Dr. Eliot Fisher, a Dartmouth health researcher who has estimated that nearly one-third of health care dollars are wasted on unneeded services, and Dr. David Himmelstein of Harvard Medical School, who is among the top advocates of a single-payer health care system.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091125/ap_on_bi_ge/us_whit...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
30. Wait, so the AP is a TRUSTED source now?
Or has the LW become the RW?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Raw Story. Before you shoot the messenger, learn to aim better
"The Raw Story is a left-leaning news and politics weblog<1> founded in 2004. Updated continuously, it is known primarily for its investigative reporting. The Raw Story currently covers daily local, world and economic news and publishes its own editorials and investigative pieces. According to their own masthead, Raw Story has been reported and featured in The New York Times, The Guardian, LA Weekly, the New York Post, the Toronto Star, The Hill, Rolling Stone, The Advocate, Roll Call, and Hustler.<2>
Screenshot of Rawstory.com

Boasting an average 3.6 million readers, the site is described by Newsweek as, "Muck, raked: If you're looking for alleged GOP malfeasance, the folks at rawstory.com are frequently scooping the mainstream media."<3>

On August 4, 2008 the Online News Association announced that RawStory.com was a finalist in the 2008 Online Journalism awards in the "Investigative, Small Site" category<4> for the story "The permanent Republican majority", about improper partisan influence in the prosecution of former Governor Don Siegelman of Alabama."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Raw_Story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bikingaz Donating Member (110 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. I am interested in proper investigations on both party hacks
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 07:11 PM by bikingaz
We should be investigating both parties & holding their feet to the fire, not just the repubs.
Otherwise, you are just a pary hack. We have enough of those.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Did you miss the headline?
:shrug:

Or perhaps not read who Raw Story is quoting and where they got their information?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. So let me get this straight. You advise only reading headlines?
Just admit ya goofed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. No but apparently you do.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 08:06 PM by Barack_America
Raw Story attributes the story to the AP throughout the article.

Did you read it?

Just from the bit the OP posted.

AP: White House ‘met early and often with lobbyists’ on health care

By Raw Story
Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 -- 4:15 pm

White House officials "met early and often with lobbyists" involved in the health care reform effort, visitor logs obtained by the Associated Press show.

The White House on Wednesday released some 1,600 records of visitors to the White House since the inauguration of President Barack Obama in January. AP reports that among the visitors were several health care experts who advocate a more radical overhaul of the health care system than the one being debated in Congress. Eliot Fisher of Dartmouth Medical School, a vocal opponent of inefficiency in health care, and David Himmelstein of Harvard Medical School, a supporter of single-payer universal health care, were both on the list.

Also on the list were a plethora of health insurance CEOs and lobbyists, including the CEOs of Blue Cross Blue Shield, Kaiser Health Plans and the heads of pharma lobby group PhRMA and the American Hospital Association...

This is little more than a rehash of an AP story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #44
50. Ugh, I was wrong.
Fwiw I read the story down to the FULL STORY FOLLOWS BELOW and still don't see anything below. Then I reread the White House released the records and googled that. I jumped the gun but I think we were both wrong not that it gives me any pleasure to say so. The 1600 records out there are hardly something to challenge the AP on and it is with that I still raise the question, what does AP have to do with an official WH record.

That it may be a complete rehash, I just don't know since you are correct, I had difficulty reading the whole story and still do.

Apologies for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #50
92. Don't worry about it.
It's just that with the media so polarized these days, we have to be very careful about where we are getting our "news" from, whether we are inclined to believe the source or not. Bias is everywhere.

The AP used to be an unbiased source and that it clearly no longer the case.

I don't doubt the 1600 records the AP obtained, I question the handful of visits they decided to report and why they chose that particular handful.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #30
39. I'm trusting AP less and less. Lately they seem to enjoy getting LW mad at Obama. /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. I can't stand AP either, but it is irrelevant wrt this story.
On Progressive Radio am1090 in Seattle they use AP for the on the hour newscast which is often filled with rightwing slant. I called more than once to express my anger and I have noticed less. It could be my imagination or I am better able to ignore it, not sure. Still plenty of slant on NPR which I listened to for years and unfortunately complaints are ignored. I pretty much try and avoid AP or any other rightwing slanted news.

This reporting is originally from Raw Story btw.

Thank FSM for progressive radio.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #41
47. No, the reporting is not originally from Raw Story.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 08:17 PM by Barack_America
They're reinterpreting an AP story, which is why they mention that the information comes from the AP both in the title and throughout the article.

BTW, it seems you may need some backstory on what has happened to the AP:
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200807220006
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. Thank you, please see my post 50 for my apology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. It's been an issue ever since Fournier took over the DC bureau.
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 08:14 PM by Barack_America
You may find this an interesting read.

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200807220006

The AP has a Ron Fournier problem

"Karl {Rove}, you might think the media are liberal, but you can trust me. And give me access and return my emails. Because I'm on your side."


So yeah, I think it's understandable to be skeptical of the AP and question why a so-called liberal source would take a story like this carte blanche.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
38. I think this was stated on numerous occasions
The visitor logs prove what the Administration has stated since the beginning. Some "news"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. When Obama blocked the list of visitors to White House he made it news.
Some "news" indeed.

"The Obama administration is fighting to block access to names of visitors to the White House, taking up the Bush administration argument that a president doesn't have to reveal who comes calling to influence policy decisions.

Despite President Barack Obama's pledge to introduce a new era of transparency to Washington, and despite two rulings by a federal judge that the records are public, the Secret Service has denied msnbc.com's request for the names of all White House visitors from Jan. 20 to the present. It also denied a narrower request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which sought logs of visits by executives of coal companies.

CREW says it will file a lawsuit Tuesday against the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31373407 /

But you knew that already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
46. Compromise in action.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
49. Didn't Obama say that NO lobbyists were allowed at the WH back in January?
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #49
60. Oh, but that's so yesterday
Old news, and all that. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #60
106. indeed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bryn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
52. Lobbyists are still accepted? WTF
x(

They were the ones who wrote the new bankruptcy law which both parties bowed to and helped it to pass.

Please outlaw the lobbyists! They're nothing but parasites!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
54. Of course, they did. The White House is carrying water for the health care industry.
They're protecting the insurers who have helped make this mess.

We aren't getting health reform. Not since the Houston Oilers blew a 30 plus point lead in the Superbowl has anyone blown such a huge lead. The president could have pushed through a real reform bill six months ago, but he's been too busy taking care of the health care industry biggies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 10:47 PM
Response to Original message
55. cuz god forbid he make an informed decision.
ferchrissakes. he talks to stakeholders in a major policy decision. what an ass, eh.
:eyes:
some of you people can spin anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #55
68. Lobbyists are vital to an informed decision? Some of "you people" can explain away anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #68
89. and some of you people
understand nothing. nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
61. Okay, so even though the 3rd line of this article states that he met with
single payer advocates, because the headline says "Obama met with lobbyists" the usuals on DU come screaming that he's a sellout again??

Good Lord...

It even says in the article "The records show a broad cross-section of the people most heavily involved in the health care debate, weighted heavily with those who want to overhaul the system." but that still doesn't stop the cries of "is this change I can believe in??!one!" from people here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Yep. See post 39.
The M$M knows that when it spins, people listen!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #61
66. Obama said no lobbyists would be welcome in his White House, and this isn't what's happening.
Not that you would care.

By the by, the !!!11 comes from frenzied people who let up the shift key too early and get the number one instead of exclamation points. They don't type "one"

Finally, you are also one of "the usuals" in case you didn't know. You are just "usually" apologizing and pretending that Obama never utters these promises which are later "amended".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #66
73. !!!11
and elite is spelled with an e and letters instead of the numbers 1, 3, and 7, but that's how we roll on the information superhighway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #66
101. Didn't you leave DU?
I could have sworn you had a big ol' goodbye post a few months back.

Your post is the dumbest thing I've seen today. From the thoroughly unnecessary "explanation" of the "one" characters that are typed to your actually trying to pretend that you have even the FIRST clue as to what I'm about or what I think about anything. Go find someone else to try to analyze, dear. You are not good at this -- at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #61
72. The AP will play us for chumps every day
and twice on Sunday until we wise up and learn to look beyond their inflammatory headlines. They are trying to turn us against one another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #72
102. Right. Some don't need AP. They're happy riding the Ferris Wheel of Foolishness all day, every day
without help from anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unblock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
67. well duh! this was obvious the day he stood there with all those insurance ceos behind him
the day he announced the health care initiative, with all those insurance ceos behind him, well, due, he had to have had major negotiations with them to get them on board.

they were the FIRST people to get a seat at the table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
69. Oh I would have, I'd have been all, "So let's hear it. Lemme hear what a forked, $300K tongue...
"...sounds like." But then I'd be all, "So that's it? Yeah? Then get the hell out of my oval office!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
70. And yet, insurance companies HATE the proposed bills
in both the House and the Senate and are spending millions of dollars to try and block both bills.

And this is the question everyone needs to consider - if these bills are just a big "give-away" to insurance companies, then why are insurance companies so strongly against them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #70
71. They are paying nearly $500,000,000 for influence. Not block, write.
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - It's not just spending on U.S. healthcare that is breaking records. Drugmakers, insurers and industry groups are on track to spend an all-time high of more than $500 million this year to influence Congress' revamp of the healthcare system.

Lawmakers, especially Democratic Senators up for re-election next year, have seen a flood of campaign donations from hospitals, device makers and others with billions at stake.

The healthcare sector spent $486 million on lobbying last year and nearly $400 million through September of this year, according to the non-profit Center for Responsive Politics."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

"The industry and interest groups have spent $380m (£238m) in recent months influencing healthcare legislation through lobbying, advertising and in direct political contributions to members of Congress. The largest contribution, totalling close to $1.5m, has gone to the chairman of the senate committee drafting the new law.

A former member of Bill Clinton's cabinet says fears that the industry could throw its money behind the populist rightwing backlash against public insurance have scared the Obama White House into pulling back from the most significant reforms in return for healthcare companies not trying to scupper the entire legislation.

Drug and insurance companies say they are merely seeking to educate politicians and the public. But with industry lobbyists swarming over Capitol Hill ‑ there are six registered healthcare lobbyists for every member of Congress ‑ a partner in the most powerful lobbying firm in Washington acknowledged that healthcare firms' money "has had a lot of influence" and that it is "morally suspect"."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/01/lobbyists-m...

How much are they spending to block it outright? I don't know, I am curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #71
74. I have a way around this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #74
77. Sounds right. Or we could work for public financing of elections
which disallows opt out or at least guarantees opt in. Nah, will never happen.

If I really thought we could never get there, I wouldn't be here still. DU, that is, or politically active either.

I shudder to say this, but maybe there is something to the idea in Nader's latest book.

Our government seems impotent while our army seems all powerful, weird, no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #77
78. Public funding would be awesome.
And we gotta do something about the military grabbing more and more power. That ain't healthy. :/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 02:02 AM
Response to Reply #78
82.  Thom Hartmann regularly mentions Portland's Campaign Finance Fund.
http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?c=38751

I am a little bothered by all the private armies as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #82
83. When the hell did that become OK?
Were there any Blackwater-style outfits in Vietnam?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #83
85. Contractors yes, but I just don't know
Someone who has studied this problem could answer that question. Another DU'er for sure, or maybe Jeremy Scahill's book?

Am doing some googling, I think I am going to spend some time on his website, wouldn't have looked for it if we hadn't been talking, looks good.

http://rebelreports.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #83
86. Hey, have a Happy Thanksgiving. I am signing out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sudopod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 04:17 AM
Response to Reply #86
87. You too! :) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
winyanstaz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
80. I think the people have been screwed...again....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 02:46 AM
Response to Original message
84. If Obama had wanted to, he could've got a single payer system enacted.
All this "negotiation" on watered down hand outs to massive insurance companies is a joke-- on us. Obama came out of that election with a hell of a lot of political capital, and the public wants a single payer system anyway. Had he wanted to, he could've spoken directly to the public and put such pressure on Congress that few would've dared side with lobbyists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
91. Rahm's brother must've helped, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
California Griz Donating Member (140 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
93. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
I've heard a lot of I'm going to wait and see. That may be better than foretelling doom and spreading despair but it's not helping. Get out and do something put your energy to good use. Obama doesn't need a bunch of armchair quarterbacks he needs foot soldiers. Stop whining and try and make a difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
94.  ‘Met Early and Often with Lobbyists’ = Loaded language.
"Early and Often" is a phrase used to describe illegal voting techniques.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dpbrown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
95. So that's where Single Payer went

Change a lobbyist could love.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneGrassRoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
97. It's not about the OP's, it's about the comments that ensue....

DU is officially Free Republic Lite.

:(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
98. But hey, the President would have been happy to meet with any one of us
If we had come up with $ 30,000 so we could buy our way into one of the "Health Care Reform" lunches that Rahm and his people sponsored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #98
108. did you read the full article proper and not only the headline blasted?
Edited on Thu Nov-26-09 07:27 PM by Bodhi BloodWave
Since the headline is somewhat misleading

The records show a broad cross-section of the people most heavily involved in the health care debate, weighted heavily with those who want to overhaul the system. Among them were Dr. Eliot Fisher, a Dartmouth health researcher who has estimated that nearly one-third of health care dollars are wasted on unneeded services, and Dr. David Himmelstein of Harvard Medical School, who is among the top advocates of a single-payer health care system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #108
110. But that does not undo the terrible damage done to this country when Obama's initial meme
Edited on Thu Nov-26-09 07:50 PM by truedelphi
"I believe that Single Payer Universal Health Care is the only logical solution to the health care crisis," being watered done to the following meme: "Uh, well, now public option is only one of many tools that we may use in the Health Care Reform Bill, and it may not even be in the final bill."

The first statement is from Obama when he ran for the Senate back in 2004. The second is from Obama this summer when he was asked by A Univ. Of CO at Boulder student about how the Big Insurance industries could compete with the public option.

If we had a free press in this nation, the fact that Obama switched from his early, totally logical statement to a totally frivolous one once Industry showered his campaign coffers with their monies would have been daily news.

If we had a free press, the media would have mentioned the INSANITY represented by Obama's 2009 stance that "Single Payer would be the best option, if we were not already caught up inside a system and needed to work within that system." How lame is that statement - "we need to have a HC reform because we are in crisis, but hey, let's not disturb the siystem we have."??

SO yeah and yeah, BIG CAN OF WHOOP ASS for these two people showing up to discuss the HC Reform situation. Problem is, Fisher and Himmelstein didn't get much done for us did they!?! as the lobbyists rule inside this Admministration, not the solution oriented people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
100. Was it a cash or credit card transaction...er..meeting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
109. I take this as a good thing. Shouldn't the President listen to ALL Sides of an Issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-26-09 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
111. you gotta listen to all sides. not unusual imo. unfortunately lobbying is 100% legal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 27th 2014, 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC