Well, it's not quite as bad as Paul Krugman critiquing the Fox Business Network, but a little troubling because tax dollars are being spent to undertake such an effort.
A Nov. 27 post by incoming White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer on the The White House Blog attempted to fact check a Nov. 27 column by Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, proving the left-wing noise machine isn't the only shop in Washington, D.C. criticizing conservative voices (h/t Amanda Carpenter of The Washington Times).
"In today's Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer takes great pains to paint a bleak picture of health care reform as ‘monstrous,' ‘overregulated,' and rife with ‘arbitrary bureaucratic inventions,'" Pfeiffer wrote. "The columnist's argument may be cogent and well-written, but it is wholly inaccurate."
While Krauthammer may be pleased to know someone within the White House find his column to be "cogent and well-written," it appears to be business as usual with the Obama administration taking on a media personality head-on. (CNBC's Jim Cramer and Rick Santelli, Fox News Channel's Glenn Beck and conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh are other such examples.)
Pfeiffer took umbrage with the final paragraph of Krauthammer's piece that suggested the "better choice" for health care reform should contain specific components.
"The better choice is targeted measures that attack the inefficiencies of the current system one by one -- tort reform, interstate purchasing and taxing employee benefits," Krauthammer wrote. "It would take 20 pages to write such a bill, not 2,000 -- and provide the funds to cover the uninsured without wrecking both U.S. health care and the U.S. Treasury."
According to the incoming White House communications director, the Senate's proposal does all that and more. However, it doesn't go to the extent of "tort reform, interstate purchasing and taxing employee benefits" as Krauthammer suggested. Pfeiffer explains the Senate version offers a "voluntary state incentive grants program" for tort reform, imposes a fee on "high-cost health care plans" as the taxing component and an allowance for "interstate health care choice compacts" for the interstate purchasing provision. However, none of the components are guaranteed to make it through the Senate's amendment process and/or the House-Senate conference should the bill make it through the Senate.
But Pfeiffer doesn't attack one of the main complaints in Krauthammer's article - the creation of massive bureaucracies in the name of this so-called health care reform.
‘The fundamental problem with the 2,074-page Senate health-care bill (as with its 2,014-page House counterpart) is that it wildly compounds the complexity by adding hundreds of new provisions, regulations, mandates, committees and other arbitrary bureaucratic inventions," Krauthammer wrote. "Worse, they are packed into a monstrous package without any regard to each other. The only thing linking these changes -- such as the 118 new boards, commissions and programs -- is political expediency."
That's a notion Pfeiffer seemed to embrace in his response by suggesting commissions and programs were an essential part to health care reform.
"And while Mr. Krauthammer may try to label reform legislation as a package of programs linked only by ‘political expediency,' the legislation actually is designed to take health care off the unsustainable path it is currently on by improving the health of all Americans and reducing costs for families, small businesses and the government," Pfeiffer wrote.
NewsBusters is turning 5. Enter our free t-shirt contest to help us celebrate!
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
When the WH issues a statement like this...
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 03:27 ET by Army Brat"The columnist's argument may be cogent and well-written, but it is wholly inaccurate."
...I know the columnist has struck the nail directly on the head and sent it home.
If the WH calls it a lie...
islam is a lie and Truth is killing it.
You could say he
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 06:26 ET by AmmoManKrauthammered the point home...
The WH communications staff reminds me a lot of the Three Stooges. I really miss Anita Dunn. Reminded me a lot of Larry. If only she would have got a perm...
Damn...
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 18:13 ET by Army BratHow could I have missed that....?
islam is a lie and Truth is killing it.
3 Stooges
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 21:36 ET by Jerry MackLighten up on the 3 Stooges insults. They are some of the greatest comedians in history. They were paid to look and act foolish. The white house comm. staff is supposed to be professional and honest. Their foolishness and lies are natural and is driven by Messiah protection.
Wholly inaccurate????
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 08:52 ET by motherbeltSo is Pfeiffer claiming that thes 2000- page bills are NOT ‘monstrous,' ‘overregulated,' and rife with ‘arbitrary bureaucratic inventions,' ?
<Chris Matthews imitation> HA!!
Come on, Dan, tell us in 100 words how these bills are going to go about improving the health of all Americans and reducing costs for families, small businesses and the government,"
I am about to refuse to pay
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 13:28 ET by d1carterI am about to refuse to pay my part of the White House costs to refute an honest and accurate point of view. This is nothing but state run propaganda and I will not pay for this.
So you think we can afford
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 04:42 ET by jdhawkSo you think we can afford a $2.5 trillion dollar increase in the federal budget. Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZA0qNsf4m0
Obamacare will make you sick; it could quite possibly kill you.
Spew alert
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 05:33 ET by KC Mulville"Section 2531 of the House bill also includes a voluntary state incentive grants program to encourage states to develop alternatives to traditional malpractice litigation."
The spin here is obvious. It's so obvious that it makes you wonder if they just don't care whether it's obvious or not.
A Wolf In Sheeps Clothing
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 08:08 ET by Gat New YorkAlmost 60% of Americans do not want Obama's healthcare overhaul.
The fact that Americans reject this legislation is of no concern to Liberals in both Houses. The reason is that there is the paramount agenda of nationalized healthcare by Obama and Pelosi.
To accomplish it they recklessly constructed legislation to accomplish what they want and use smake and mirrors to deceive the public about what its actual contents are. Afterall how many Americans are going to read 2000 pages of gibberish?
I have always found it interesting that conservatives deal with facts while liberals avoid the facts and use deception to make their case.
There they go with their
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 06:20 ET by RowaneThere they go with their new favorite word again--"unsustainable."
"You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you
know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would
necessarily skyrocket" - Barack Hussain Obama
Right, our current health
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 07:31 ET by ReaverRight, our current health care system is “unsustainable” but a new multi-trillion dollar health care bureaucracy is “sustainable”. The real joke here is that the new incoming White House communications director believes that his office has the credibility to fact check anybody. It’s a close race between unsustainable and unprecedented for most overused word by this White House.
I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. - Hunter S. Thompson
Just What I Want!
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 07:34 ET by GeneralAlJust what I want, my government taking my great insurance plan and making it better! This from the producers of TARP, Fanny and Freddie [Did Barney Fag come up with those names?], the Stinkulous bill, and countless others. More importantly, led by the team of Digger O'Harry, Morticia Pelousy, Barney Fwank, Stinkey Hoyer, and Eddy Haskal Durbin!
Charles was Right!
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 07:48 ET by PJManA very smart man, I disagreed adamantly with him on one occasion, and he was on the right side of the issue at the time, and time proved him to be right again. Charles, Thank-you for your wisdom.
I suppose
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 07:52 ET by 10ksnookerIt would have been fine if Bush had run a propaganda operation out of the White House like our dear reader does. Maybe Bush could have turned around public opinion ...
There is just something very wrong with a White House propaganda organization ... It will take years to wash off the Obama stench.
Typical White House communication
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 08:06 ET by TheHistorianThis is a typical White House communication. Very long on calling names and bombast, very short on fact. The creation of new agencies is typical; they got caught with their hand in the "grow government" cookie jar, so it is Krauthammer who is "wholly inaccurate".
Anybody who believes that this White House understands how free enterprise works just needs to refer to the fact that Obama only has about 10% of his cabinet-level people who have ever held a private enterprise job. That is less than half of the next worst, Jimmah Carter. And explains why there are no free enterprise solutions ever offered by this administration, only more regulation.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
G. W. F. Hegel
Pfeiffer is attempting a
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 08:08 ET by marvlPfeiffer is attempting a battle of the wits with Charles Krauthammer, and the poor sap is fielding a stick to counter Mr. Krauthammer's high powered rifle. The outcome is obvious, and typical of what we have come to expect from the BHO administration, regardless of the field of endeavor.
I was
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 09:05 ET by jacktherippergoing to say Pfeiffer brought a knife to a gun fight but your analogy will do marvl ; )
Proud HillBilly from NNY
How about he showed up to a
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 10:26 ET by motherbeltHow about he showed up to a battle of wits, unarmed?
All I need to know about the
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 08:54 ET by BKeyserAll I need to know about the two bills is that they play numbers games to make the deficit projections look neutral. That's it. That makes it a lie and therefor a bad bill. But Krauthammer's column is excellent. I forwarded it yesterday to my brother as he was asking for a way to explain to his wife why what's being proposed in Congress is bad for America. Charles' article does this succinctly, and in the fewest words possible.
Pfeiffer just proves that...
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 10:46 ET by Bufordit is amateur hour in the White House. Next they will hire the woman who ran the "Bimbo Alert" wing of the Clinton era.
Lets get real
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 11:23 ET by sam12663This legislation has nothing to do with our health or our care; it is all about governmental control. Health care has been a liberal masturbatory fantasy for years, and with their majorities in congress, they realize that this may be the only time ever to pass this crap. President Obama is not commanding this nation; he is merely a front man for a George Soros led cabal of wack jobs. It is the likes of David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and Andy Stern of SEIU that are at the helm of this nation. It is plainly obvious that Obama is totally unqualified to lead, yet, so many liberals are willing to follow him, even to the extent of their own political peril. Liberals own every branch of government, yet they are still the most unhappy, mean spirited, misguided, out of touch lame brains ever assembled. This could only be due to the fact that they realize the man they have attached themselves to is a clueless, unqualified egghead. I, for one, like to see press releases such as this, it is another nail in the publicity coffin that this administration is building for itself.
President Obama is nothing more than a lying empty suit; a Hollywood
style special effects smoke and mirrors show that has shown itself to
be a total fraud.
WAKE UP AMERICA! SAVE OUR CONSTITUTION!
The real problem
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 12:04 ET by aposematicThe real problem here is not that critics on either side are able to debate; it's that I am forced to pay for the Government's side in this debate weather I support it or not.
aposematic in VA
The question on the table
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 12:04 ET by celatorThe question on the table is: who shall we believe, a man of supreme integrity, high intelligence, deep insight and genuine accomplishment-- Dr. Krauthammer,
or
A band of political wack job Chicago hoods, hell-bent on destroying the nation for their own evil purposes, willing to steal and destroy everything we have worked for in order to grow their evil power and fatten their bank accounts (onshore and offshore)?
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
These boobs couldn't win a
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 12:09 ET by tssclsThese boobs couldn't win a war of words with Glenn Beck, so they take on Charles Krauthammer?!? I love it, it's a dream come true!
opposite is probably true
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 19:57 ET by verbatimanything a liberal says, you know the opposite is most likely true.
Having looked at ...
Sat, 11/28/2009 - 21:30 ET by SentryDanHaving looked at both the House and Senate bills, I find it interesting that there is no healthcare reform in either bill. I also find it interesting that both bills are nothing more that tax increases on the American people.
There are mandates in these bills. Mandates are generally unfunded by the government. Funding for the mandates is born by the states and "We the People". A mandate is just another tax.
So what we have going on is more taxation and it is without representation of "We the People". This is bacause the majority of "We the People" have said NO to the government about healthcare reform.
"We the People" have told our supposed representatives that we will hold them accountable for not listening to us. They don't believe that we will get rid of them and quite frankly I'm not so sure either.
There are many out there that complain about what is going on but are they willing to follow in the footsteps of our Forefathers to get rid of a tyrannical government by voting them out of office?
What's worse is that the WH
Sat, 12/05/2009 - 15:37 ET by cookepaWhat's worse is that the WH media department either a) Doesn't understand the bill they cite in this post; or b) Doesn't understand economics.
Arguing that the bill will increase competition among private insurers, the WH highlights a provision in the bill that allows for states to enter compacts, where an insurer, licensed in both states, can offer the exact same plan in each state.
Here's what this means: Toyota currently sells the Corolla and Highlander in State A, and the Camry and Rav4 in State B. The bill says that, now, Toyota can sell the Corolla in State B, and the Camry in State A, if both states approve. To the extent that high health insurance costs are due to a lack of competition among insurers, this is a non-solution. Ford, BMW, GM, and Hyundai aren't allowed to come sell cars in either states under the bill.
It's sad to see those who really should, and claim to, know better consistently prove otherwise.