PharmaGate: Obama's Newest Scandal

Thursday, August 13, 2009

PharmaGate: Obama's Newest Scandal

You'll remember that I mentioned Obama's secret deal with the bigpharmaceutical companies..the one even Lefty shill Robert Reich wasoutraged about.

In exchange for Big Pharma's support for Obamacare to the tune of $150 million in advertising money, Obama said he would prohibit his government run healthcare from bargaining with them to get lower volume prices on drugs for the American people, import drugs from Canada or pursue Medicare rebates or to shift some drugs from to different Medicare plans, which would save Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements. Knowing Obama, there was also likely an undertone of threatening the drug companies with retaliation if they didn't play ball.

Since the knowledge about this viciously corrupt deal went public, thedeal's apparently off...but the scandal remains. Legally, an unsuccessful conspiracy is just as actionable as a successful one.

The Lefty Huffington Post of all people helped drop the dime on this, for which kudos to them:

A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the past week.

The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.

It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma billions in reduced reimbursements.

In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut $80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says: "Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion."

This is interesting on several fronts.

While the president is likely allowed to make deals with private corporations for the purposes of public policy, he's not allowed to do so secretly. And especially not for what amounts to $150 million in campaign contributions. By contrast, John McCain spent only $126 million on his entire campaign.

Second, the fact of the matter is that both the White House and the drug corporations have been blatantly lying in concert about this for weeks to the public in about the deal. That's normally known as a conspiracy to defraud.

Obama's also lying again when he claims that he was going to get even more savings from savings from drug-makers. Read the above memo. The exact amount of all savings had already been agreed to in exchange for the $150 million to Obama - $80 billion and not a cent more.

Naked Emperor has a video based on Obama's frequent statements that not only would this kind of negotiations be transparent 'they'd be on C-SPAN.' I feel like I neeed a shower even watching this.



So what does all this amount to? Unfortunately not much.A Republican president caught pulling this crap would end up with 24/7 coverage on 'the scandal hovering over the White House' and a special prosecutor insisted on by Congress. Cries on 'what did he know and when did he know it' would fill the air, and people like Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and JohnConyers would be drooling so heavily that they'd have to hire a special towel delivery service.

That kind of action isn't going to happen with the Democrats and Obama, and the media will likely use the upcoming weekend to let this all blow away like it never happened.

And that's too bad. This stinks to high heaven, a Chicago-style backroom deal that had no place in th eWhite House.

When Richard Nixon was accused of obstruction of justice, it was the Republicans in the Senate led by Barry Goldwater than essentially forced him to resign.

Bill Clinton, on the other hand, was actually indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice and impeached by the House. But it was the Senate Democrats who used their majority to refuse to even allow an impeachment trial and saw to it that he finished his term in office.

Some things just don't change.

Ed Schultz: "Conservatives Want Obama Shot"

Lefty Mess NBC host and radio 'personality' Ed Schultz is at it again...his latest claim is that conservatives want Obama shot.

I'm not surprised at ol' Ed really. He needs to do something to get his audience into four digits, so he runs off at the mouth. But he really doesn't, you know, understand how things work. We don't want Obama shot ( President Biden?? Shudder!).

Dragged out of the Oval office kicking and screaming while we giggle like schoolgirls,hell yeah..but not murdered.

On the other hand, Ed's not nearly as concerned when it comes to Republican office holders. He's fine with death wishes for people like Dick Cheney 

And I don't recall him having anything to say when his Air America co-host Randi Rhodes said that President Bush should be treated like Fredo in The Godfather: "hey you take him out fishing, bang bang two in the head and no more problem."

No lying about that one, Ed. I heard her say it on the air with my own ears. 

Of course Ed's the kind of macho guy who's into punching out women, so this kind up discrepancy on his part when it comes to common sense is to be expected.

Let's just say he's not known for calm rational judgment and leave it at that.

As I've always said, to really understand the Left, a knowledge of child psychology is a distinct advantage.

Ann Coulter Takes Out Kathleen Parker

Like watching Bruce Lee in "Enter The Dragon'...just beeyootiful:

Just as the left pioneered "AstroTurf" protesters -- homeless people lured to demonstrations with the offer of a free T-shirt and a box lunch -- liberals have also specialized in producing fake "insiders" denouncing their alleged group.

There were the "winter soldiers" -- fake Vietnam veterans claiming to have personally disemboweled babies in Vietnam. It took 30 years and the publication of the book "Stolen Valor" to establish that the bulk of them were utter frauds who had never seen combat -- some had never seen Vietnam. (Shockingly, to this day, the Wikipedia entry on the winter soldiers treats their phony war records as legitimate.)

Then there's Barry Lynn, alleged "Christian minister," whose stock in trade is to denounce any mention of religion anyplace, anytime. Look, I'm a Christian minister, but even I have to admit that the sight of a kindergartner praying is terrifying to most folks. (The first person to post Barry Lynn's bar mitzvah photos or birth announcement (mazel tov!) wins a free copy of my latest book, Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America.)

The latest fake insider/whistleblower is Kathleen Parker, the Barry Lynn of the South. Fresh off her mainstream media tour as a Sarah Palin-hating "conservative," Parker is now a self-proclaimed Southerner blaming opposition to Obama's policies on the region's reputed racism.

Uncannily, this claim struck a chord with Northern liberals!

Throughout the presidential campaign last year, liberals were champing at the bit to accuse Americans of racism for not supporting Barack Obama. That was a tough argument on account of the obvious facts that: (1) for every vote he lost because he's black, Obama picked up another 20 votes for being black; (2) Obama won the election in (3) a country that's 87 percent non-black.

So the accusations of racism had to be put on hold until ... the first note of dissent from his agenda was sounded.

Inasmuch as Obama was just elected and his policies have turned out to be the most left-wing the country has ever seen, it wasn't going to be easy to claim the electorate suddenly decided they didn't like the mammoth spending bills or socialist health care bills because they just noticed Obama is black.

But Kathleen Parker has leapt into the fray to explain that the opposition to Obama's agenda is pure Southern racism. And she's from the South, so it must be true!

As she put it on Chris Matthews' "Hardball": "One word, Chris -- one word. 'Confederacy.' I mean, you know, the South is very -- I live there, OK? I want to make that clear, too, because I'm not bashing Southerners."

No, she was certainly not bashing Southerners. This she made clear in her Washington Post column calling for the Republican Party to "drive a stake through the heart of old Dixie."

How one gets from "we don't want socialized medicine" to "we hate black people" was a tough equation. As my algebra teacher used to say: "Please show your work."

Yee-hah! (cue rebel yell). Read it all.

Is The White Housing Now Clearing Its MidEast Policy With Hamas?

According to US law, any contacts between our government and a designated terrorist entity like Hamas are strictly illegal.

So riddle me this: why is Hamas suddenly endorsing Obama's upcoming peace plan even before it's been announced?

Hamas is prepared to deal "positively" with US President Barack Obama's Middle East peace plan, a top political aide to Ismail Haniyeh, the organization's prime minister, said Thursday.

"We have an initial readiness to accept it and deal with it positively, but we will also reject it if it doesn't include an American recognition of the Palestinian rights," Yousef Rizka told the Chinese Xinhua news agency.

"The plan should endorse Palestinian statehood with Jerusalem as its capital," Rizka was quoted as saying. "Hamas will take an in-depth study of the plan when it is made public."

According to various reports, Obama is soon set to unveil his plan for comprehensive Middle East peace, according to which the West will intensify sanctions against Hamas if it doesn't respond clearly to the initiative.

Rizka stressed that Hamas makes up its positions "mainly from the level of meeting the Palestinian rights."

He said that Hamas now accepts a two-state solution "but only in exchange for a long-term truce" with Israel.

Now this is highly interesting. The spokesman for Gaza's PM Ismail Haniyeh goes public with a statement that Hamas would actually accede to a two state solution in exchange for a truce IF the Palestinians get everything they want? All of a sudden, out of the blue?

Aside from the fact that the Israelis would be insane to accept that kind of suicidal deal, why the sudden change? And why now?

The answer is further on in the article, if you can connect the dots:

Meanwhile, a US envoy and Syria's foreign minister met Thursday as part of American efforts to achieve a "permanent and comprehensive peace in the region," a US Embassy official said.

Fred Hof, an assistant to George Mitchell, a former Senate Democratic leader who oversees US Mideast peacemaking efforts, met Walid Moallem shortly before ending a two-day visit to Damascus, the official said.

The embassy official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media. Syrian officials did not comment on Hof's visit. {...}

It was Hof's second visit to Syria in less than a month.

Now, who else is in Damascus aside from Syrians but...Khalid Meshaal, the head of the Hamas politibureau and Haniyeh's direct superior.

That makes it all very simple. Our envoy has obviously cleared the upcoming 'peace ' plan with Meshaal, who gave Ismail Haniyeh permission to tacitly endorse it.

It will be presented to the Israelis as a package deal, and as a way of legitimizing Hamas - after all, didn't they say they support that magic two-state solution if those stubborn Jews just knuckle under and get with the program?

The EU is already talking to Hamas and the US is already funding them, so this will be the final step in sanitizing a terrorist entity - exactly the way it was done for the PLO.

Absolutely disgusting and illegal as hell, but not unexpected with this administration.

Obama's Tactics Have a Familiar Smell

As the Obama White House sees its attempt to foist government run and controlled health care on the American people start to crash and burn, they're resorting to tactics that have a certain odor about them.

Let's see..first you start by demonizing the opposition. So you put out a high media profile bogus DHS report on 'right wing extremists', have your tame media ridicule 'teabaggers' and have people like Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi talk about swastika carrying protesters who are 'unAmerican'.You label legitimate protesters and people who merely want to talk to their congressmen as 'dangerous' and 'violent' as an excuse to stifle any honest debate.

To reinforce this, you astroturf - you have a couple of Democrats plantsposing as protesters carrying Obama as Hitler signs and have a few of your people conveniently paint swastikas on a black Democratic congressman's office.

You mobilize the vast Left wing conspiracy to flood the comments sections in newspapers and blogs.

You send out bogus talking points to the troops via David Axelrod, counting on people not having actually read the proposed bill. Of course, anyone with a fighting chance of a two digit IQ who has read it can refute Axelrod's lies and dissimulation easily, but you're going for the numbers here, trying to overwhelm the facts by repeating the Big Lie over and over again.(hat tip, ACE)

And you sic your supporters on the opposition and collect data on dissidents for future use via a White House run 'snitch line', run by somevery questionable people.

Of course, if the media questions it, you just have your people out and out lie to them:

Why stop at a snitch list? You can even put tracking cookies on government web sites!

You do your best to monopolize the public debate.You have your tame media do their best to ridicule and demonize the despised unAmerican 'teabaggers'. You set up the media with supposed neutral 'insiders' who are really long time members of your team.

You even send out fake tear-jerker letters from your people to public officials. ( hat tip. Wow)

You do your best to control the town hall meetings and limit debate by busing in supporters in advance, or even going to virtual town hall meetings, where the Congressman decides who gets to ask what questions in advance.

And you set up a widely televised fake, scripted 'town hall meeting' with the President. You even cynically use the young child of one of your long time supporters to ask about 'ugly signs' for a soundbite.

Oh, and you bring in the muscle. You have ACORN and SEIUgoons threaten and beat up Americans who have the nerve to question Obama and his policies, and do the best you can to shut down any dissent.

These tactics do have a familiar aroma, don't they? As I said yesterday, if things don't start improving for Obama, expect a major 'reichstag fire' style incident fairly soon.

The amazing thing is that in spite of what the media would have you believe, Obama's problems aren't originating from the relatively powerless GOP, but from Democrats. If the Democrats voted as a bloc, they have the votes to push through virtually anything they want, and if a number of them aren't drinking the Kool-Ade, it's because they're afraid of voting for this and then having to face their constituents next year.