The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

While most everybody aside from elected Democrats is willing to acknowledge that President Obama broke his pledge to have C-SPAN cover the health care talks, the one thing that he could still theoretically argue is that he doesn't have control over whether Congressional leaders allow negotiations to be televised. This is partially how he responded when asked about the C-SPAN pledge at a July press conference (from the official White House transcript):

With respect to all the negotiations not being on C-SPAN, you will recall in this very room that our kickoff event was here on C-SPAN, and at a certain point you start getting into all kinds of different meetings -- Senate Finance is having a meeting, the House is having a meeting.  If they wanted those to be on C-SPAN then I would welcome it.  I don't think there are a lot of secrets going on in there.

It's a typical Obama answer. First, creating the false sense of transparency ("our kickoff event was here on C-SPAN"). Next, making the issue sound much more complicated ("at a certain point you start getting into all sorts of different meetings"). And finally, pretending that he isn't President and suggesting somebody else is responsible for the decision ("If they wanted those to be on C-SPAN then I would welcome it.")

The kick off event, of course, was a joke -- there's a reason C-SPAN's Brian Lamb called it "a show horse type of thing." I happened to have been there, too. Basically, the event started with Obama delivering some remarks. Then a bunch of people representing insurers, drug makers, hospitals, unions, etc. broke into separate rooms and discussed general principles -- some of those break out sessions were televised. Then Obama gathered everybody back in the East Room, summed up some of the discussions, and the various participants stood up and talked about how they looked forward to working to get health care legislation done. As I wrote at the time, those advocating a free market approach to health care were shut out of the process.

So then most of the action moved toward Congress, and the President has no control over what happens on the Hill, right? Er, not exactly. As the New York Times reported in August: "Pressed by industry lobbyists, White House officials on Wednesday assured drug makers that the administration stood by a behind-the-scenes deal to block any Congressional effort to extract cost savings from them beyond an agreed-upon $80 billion." (Emphasis mine).

And then yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and all the heads of the relevant committees met for eight hours in the White House. The Hill reported that, "President Barack Obama sought to muscle House and Senate Democrats to reach an accord on healthcare reform during a daylong White House meeting Wednesday." So in other words, Obama was leading the talks himself, from the White House, which he has absolute control over, and yet he still wouldn't allow C-SPAN cameras in. In fact, while he, Pelosi, and Reid released a statement saying that they had made "significant progress," they weren't offering any details. So instead of having the open process that Obama promised during the campaign, we get paragraphs like this from the Hill story:

While aides shed no light on the substance of the discussions, a senior House aide said the appearance of the key participants working into the night left the impression that Obama was looking to “force some decisions and that takes a lot of time.”

Or this line from the Politico: "Those involved in the talks sought to keep details of their progress under wraps."

Just for fun, let's watch candidate Obama again:


View all comments (4) | Leave a comment

Marinusha| 1.14.10 @ 11:20AM

Good topic! Thanks

Bob| 1.14.10 @ 3:24PM

Biased reporting again, Philip??? Here's a breakdown of Obama promises by Politifact:

* Promise Kept 91
* Compromise 33
* Promise Broken 14
* Stalled 82
* In the Works 273
* Not yet rated 9

Politifact did not keep stats on Bush, but here are a few of his broken promises:

http://www.americanprogressact.....omise.html

We are both old enough to know that transparency and Washington are incongruous because of campaign donations. If this bothers you so much, why don't you recommend that the Republicans open up their meetings to CSPAN?

Obama clearly underestimated that Republicans were going to have a strategy of "Just Say No" instead of arguing on the merits. Imagine, politics getting in the way of truth and discourse....

I don't think Obama has been a great President so far, or even a very good one. However, he is better than "W" (not very high bar to jump over). But criticisms should be relevant with perspective -- that would be a nice change for at least one side. We need some grown-ups in Washington on BOTH sides.

KD| 1.15.10 @ 12:38AM

Hey, Bob.

Is this about George Walker Bush, or is this about Barrack Hussein Obama?

Stop deflecting. It's not biased reporting when it's reporting a specific promise that Barrack Barroke. You can't deny he broke it... Have you seen any of the talks on C-SPAN? Tell me this, Bob, tell me a little bit of the details about this plan that you clearly support.

You can't, because you don't know them. Yet you support the plan anyways.

"Wait I can get healthcare without paying for it? Screw the details count me in!"

You will pay for it... And you will pay for your ignorance too. Stop trying to deflect just because you can't disprove.

That politifact looks cool, I'll definitely check it out, but democrats often use Snopes to prove or disprove things... Snopes is run by democrats and carries an obvious bias they don't seem to care about.

But I'm happy he's kept his word the majority of times but look. I can promise not to commit a crim 90 times, and keep that promise 89 times... I'm still a criminal when it's all said and done.

Stop deflecting, stop minimizing. It is what it is, Bob.

pricila| 4.24.10 @ 9:17AM

Such a definition could include human-animal hybrids, I suppose. ecommerce

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/01/14/whats-obamas-excuse-for-broken

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT