2009 - White House Advisors Told Obama To Drop Obamacare

Well at least some people had the right idea. Jon Favreau, Obama's previous speech writer, revealed to a group at the American University in Washington DC, that in in 2009 Obama's advisers suggested that Obama drop Obamacare. They wanted him to replace it with something more along the lines of, "Patients Bill Of Rights", legislation. But Obama did not take the advice of his advisers.

So what we have here is the first sign that there were senior people in the Whitehouse that knew Obamacare would be a failure. later on, Obama eventually started feeling the heat from his signature program. And at one point, on Air Force One, Obama commented to Favreay:

“I wake up every morning and get nothing but hate from half the country.

And well, I would have to say the above comment would be right on the money. But I think it is much more than half at this time. If you think about it these advisers are closest to Obama, so this next comment from another previous speech writer, Josh Lahey, didn't surprise me.

For Obama, “Governing could be a distraction from the campaign.

So I do have a very good question for you all. Who else in the Whitehouse thought Obamacare was a good idea? Anyone besides Michelle and the kids? I now wonder if Obama was going it alone and we are now all paying the price.

White House Advisors Told Obama To Drop Obamacare

Obamacare wasn't so much just a law for Obama and the liberals. It was some kind of malformed Utopian dream they thought they could bring to fruition no matter the cost. I think they actually thought if they could just get it passed and started, flowers would bloom early, the sunshine would fall on everyones face and the U.S. would be miraculous transformed in socialist paradise.

It was a law that needed to be passed, so that is could fail in spectacular fashion. It will be a good lesson for those in the United States that supported this nonsense. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

reply to post by elouina


I'd love to know which advisors supposedly told him to drop Obamacare. I'd bet a box of donuts that it's not Valarie Jarrett (who really runs things). If she had said it, then he would have.

reply to post by elouina


So many people advised Obama against it, and he stood up to that pressure (like a profile in courage, in which you had to impress Ted Sorensen to get into the book), so it will be in honor of that courage that it will be known as Obamacare. Folks, people can't be denied health insurance for preexisting conditions, your older children will be covered under your work or personal plan, and many other great things will occur.

The GOP nightmare is the program will become known as a success before the next round of U.S. elections. Makes them shake in their boots, which is now covered!

reply to post by Helious


I disagree 100%. Obama never, even for one second, thought this would benefit anyone but himself and his connected friends.

Look at the news. Secret Service agents saying Obama treats Government like a "shiny new toy". Michelle's friend's company fleecing the American economy for a cool billion with a damn website, etc, etc.

This crap is cronyism at its finest.

I don't believe this for a second. Presidents are controlled and managed to such a great extent that they're essentially talking puppets, dominated by those who prefer to remain in the shadows.

What you're seeing here is simply the puppeteers setting up Obama to take the fall. They need to paint Obama as the bad guy while maintaining the illusion that the system itself tried to do the right thing. They need to maintain the illusion that the system would've worked to help the people, but for the actions of one "rogue" president.

Naturally, this is laughable. What they really want is the American people blaming Obama--just like they wanted the people blaming Bush for the insane policies of his administration.

Because what they DON'T want, is people seeing through the puppet president to point fingers at those operating things from behind the curtain.

So yeah, Obama needs to become the "villain" before 2016 so the REAL powers-that-be can prop up the next presidential figurehead as the savior. Just like Bush needed to be the villain so Obama could promise to "save" us. Just like Clinton's policies needed to be demonized so Bush could take the throne. Just like...

History moves in circles, folks, and evil only has so many tricks. See through the illusions that TPTB use to keep you enslaved, and you'll never be fooled again.

reply to post by Aleister


The patient bill of rights would have covered the very things you have mentioned.
Although, covering my kids until they are 26 is ludicrous.
Obama should have dropped the individual mandate, which is what this is referring.

reply to post by elouina

In this meeting, President Obama rejected their suggestion, claiming that he wouldn’t abandon his signature legislation, no matter what the outcome. Favreau claimed Obama would stick to the plan even if it meant losing in 2012.

So he's saying that Obama said that he would stick by the PPACA despite being warned by advisers that it might cost him the election. Throw some spin on this and it becomes "because they knew it would be a failure." Taken in context, that bit of information actually appears to support a conclusion that the President actually believes in the value of the PPACA and was willing to lose the campaign over it. Yet the author bizarrely concludes that it means he "placed his own selfish agenda ahead of the well-being of the nation." So putting what you think is right above winning elections is a bad thing?

These comments follow other comments made by Former DNC 2012 Speechwriter Josh Lahey where he admitted that for Obama, “Governing could be a distraction from the campaign”

No we're supposed to be angry at the President because a speech writer thought that Obama's campaign suffered at times because he was too busy doing his job? Don't you think you massaged those already cherry picked quotes a bit to better fit your purposes?

Aleister
reply to post by elouina

 

So many people advised Obama against it, and he stood up to that pressure (like a profile in courage, in which you had to impress Ted Sorensen to get into the book), so it will be in honor of that courage that it will be known as Obamacare. Folks, people can't be denied health insurance for preexisting conditions, your older children will be covered under your work or personal plan, and many other great things will occur.

The GOP nightmare is the program will become known as a success before the next round of U.S. elections. Makes them shake in their boots, which is now covered!

Reality check - Most of the costs of this program are to be financed on the backs of the young and healthy. They specifically need the 18 to 35 year olds to sign up for coverage and pay for policies that will eat up a significant portion of their monthly pay, paychecks that are already eaten into by a huge margin just to pay for food, clothing and shelter. Then you have to figure in the cost of college loans coming due which can take as much or more than your housing each month ... oh, but now they need to pay out another bill that will be nearly as large as those two?! What will they eat?

Oh, and while you're at it, let's not forget that many of them will just stay on their parents' health care until they're 26, so you just effectively cut that demographic that needs to finance this monstrosity in half.

And that's just one problem.

Aleister
reply to post by elouina

 

So many people advised Obama against it, and he stood up to that pressure (like a profile in courage, in which you had to impress Ted Sorensen to get into the book), so it will be in honor of that courage that it will be known as Obamacare. Folks, people can't be denied health insurance for preexisting conditions, your older children will be covered under your work or personal plan, and many other great things will occur.

The GOP nightmare is the program will become known as a success before the next round of U.S. elections. Makes them shake in their boots, which is now covered!

LOL!! Thanks for the laugh. For a minute I thought you were actually serious....oh, wait. You ARE serious.

Don't you think that denial for pre-existing conditions and covering children that are older could have been achieved without turning the whole thing into a torpedo that sinks the working class? They cannot deny a person for a pre-existing condition, but they sure as hell can charge them unaffordably high prices for it. Plus, they are FORCING people to buy a private product now. If you consider this a success, I have bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Nice try on using a "Profile in Courage" analogy, to try and make Obama sound more like Kennedy. No "great things" will occur, and this will only further divide the country into chaos. In that sense, a la Alinsky, Obama is successful. But ONLY in that sense. I thought we couldn't do any worse than George Bush....boy, I was I wrong!

JayinAR
reply to post by Helious

 

I disagree 100%. Obama never, even for one second, thought this would benefit anyone but himself and his connected friends.

Look at the news. Secret Service agents saying Obama treats Government like a "shiny new toy". Michelle's friend's company fleecing the American economy for a cool billion with a damn website, etc, etc.

This crap is cronyism at its finest.

You may very well be completely right. I guess for me to sleep better at night I like to view Obama as a naive and inept president who tries too hard to impose his love for socialism on the American people for their best interest instead of a malicious radical authoritarian hell bent on the destruction of not only America but it's core values.

But lets be honest, who am I kidding?

reply to post by therealguyfawkes


You are absolutely correct. Obama is the "fall guy" in this disaster. HOWEVER....although I do understand that he is but a sock puppet doing the bidding of the Shadow Government, he is their representative. So yeah, he's taking the blame for this crap fest. But do I imagine him to be the sole decision maker on this? No. I don't even believe that he came up with this idea on his own. He was put in the presidency in order to do a job (a wet, messy job), and so far, he is performing exactly as expected.

reply to post by FissionSurplus


Agree 100%.

There are shadow government coaches on the sidelines calling the plays, and Obama is just QB'ing the whole procedure.

The playbook is even online for everyone to read. Obarrycare, brought to you by Cloward and Piven and Agenda 21, and Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars

The plan to ruin the middle class is intentional, deliberate, and malicious. They want you poor, indebted, and destitute, because that's the only way you'll agree to go along with their tyrannical plan for the world.

This won't stop until people start deciding they love freedom more than their own lives... then, we'll see some real HOPE AND CHANGE we can all believe in.

reply to post by therealguyfawkes


The real danger is that they're already started to nudge toward revolution. You can see it in the media. Look at how many are adoring followers at Russell Brand's feet, and there are other places you see it, too. There was a thread about how scientists are even urging revolution now.

One thing all these calls have in common is that the common outcome they push is socialism. They want that revolution all right, but they want to guide it toward their own ends - a world controlled from the top down with them at the top and all of us who survive at the bottom. And you better believe that this war will be as destructive and lethal as possible to ensure that there aren't that many of us or our infrastructure left to control. They'll leave just enough to build a viable slave base with.

The Hunger Games isn't that far off of what Agenda 21 has in mind.

reply to post by ketsuko


Yeah, what TPTB are hoping for is a violent attempt at revolution. That, they know how to crush.

What we NEED to give them is a Gandhi-style mass of nonviolent nonparticipation, a complete walking-away from the system en masse. That, no tyrannical government on earth has ever been able to long withstand.

Gene Sharp lays out the blueprint for success in From Dictatorship to Democracy. If we the people are ever serious about taking back our country and our freedoms, Sharp and Gandhi have the battle plan to follow.

Are any of BHO's present and former advisers to be trusted at all - ever? Any talk in this regard should really be taken with a grain of salt - as propaganda actually. We should rather concentrate on who the real enemies of freedom and democracy really are. Believe me when I tell you that nothing of any substance will happen In America until you (the citizenry) realize that the enemy of the United States, and of mankind in general is Zionism. You, and I mean most of you here on ATS are in hapless denial, which is surely evidenced by the fact that I risk being banned for the very mention of Zionism, and of the Dual citizen Zionist's in your midst as the true enemy of America. You are afraid to face the fact that the U.S.A. is totally dominated by the powers of Zionism. You are most especially in deep denial of the facts of the kind of control that they exercise over your daily lives; politically, legally, economically, educationally, and most especially the press in particular, and the media generally. Virtually every newspaper or magazine is owned by and controlled by Zionists.

Their self-serving malicious anti Christian propaganda constantly fills the TV screens of literally every home in America with perverted filth - mostly aimed at the youth of America. The Federal government is totally under Zionist control. The pentagon and all of the US military forces are the pawn of Israel. The banks, and the markets are theirs. They systematically denigrate our Founding Fathers and our heritage and our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The greatest aim of the Zionists is to completely destroy the moral fiber of the United States whose foundation is Christianity. But (excepting for a very few here) the great majority of you are in so much denial that you are living in abject fear of ever mentioning this subject. Have any of you here ever really seriously asked yourselves why that is?

Notice how I have deliberately avoided the use of the J-word. Its a shame that it has to be that way is what is supposed to be on an allegedly "open Forum" where "Ignorance is to be Denied," and ideas are to be freely expressed, but that's the way it is. Otherwise this post will have been scrubbed immediately as though it never even existed, and God forbid that I should post a thread on this topic. I already know from experience what will happen - within minutes of its posting.

Another thing to ask yourselves is why does ATS protect the Zionists as if to even make the slightest mention of them is an absolutely unpardonable thing to have done. Why is the charge of 'hate' or 'anti' immediately brought to bear so that its impossible to even have a discussion about it?

reply to post by FissionSurplus

I don't want to be the long-time defender of the program, or to keep posting on this thread, because I don't know enough about the subject. But from what I've gathered from people I trust, in the long run - when all sides agree to fix it - Obamacare will work really well. But the GOP has to stop that from happening next year, and in 2016 if they can, and they will do this by not agreeing to work on a solution to the problems and weaknesses in the program that a few posters have mentioned. So the things that could be fixed now, they won't be completely fixed for a few years. Of course some tweeks will be made long before that, and even in the next few months, but not enough to take away the issue from the GOP. That is what will cause economic suffering and political infighting, but eventually, little by little, solutions will occur. And that is why Obama's steadfastness in deciding to go ahead with the program will eventually earn him positive credit - which is all I was saying in my post.

reply to post by theantediluvian


And why were they worried about him losing the election, maybe over a tie he wore? Sheez... They were worried about him losing the election over some crap medical plan.

And no matter how you twist the second comment you can't change its contents.

wrong thread - sorry

reply to post by XionZap


Wow. I'm almost speechless. This post and the one you wrote previously... Stay on topic. You may be a bigot, but try to actually respond intelligently to the OP.