I cannot with even a modicum of sincerity say that the ignorance of Mr. Gibbs's remarks surprised me, but I must concede that I did find them amusing. I turned to my mother, and said: "We're against the health care bill, Mom. I guess it's really because we adore the insurance companies so damn much!"
Democrats trying to portray Republicans as only looking out for corporate interests has been a sacred pastime of theirs, second only to trying to portray Republicans as a party of hateful right wing lunatics who, as our President so eloquently put it, "cling to guns and religion." If by virtue of his opposition to the bill Mr. Brown is an advocate of the insurance companies, wouldn’t the support of the bill by his Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley, automatically qualify her as a die hard for the pharmaceutical industry? You certainly won’t hear many Republicans make that argument.
I recall once seeing a clip of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann go through a list of contributions health insurance companies made to Republicans and conservative Democrats, accusing them of having their votes bought. Liberal Democrats received weighty contributions from these companies too. Why can’t we consider their votes bought? Does their tenacious dedication to a government take over of health care make them impervious to the influences of campaign contributions?
There seems to be a double standard. Both Democrats and Republicans receive corporate endorsements, and the political positions both parties take end up benefiting large corporations. It is high time that this precarious myth of Republicans representing corporations while Democrats represent the common man is dispelled. For the White House Press Secretary to suggest that Mr. Brown’s opposition to the health care legislation is exclusively a result of his absolute love for the health insurance industry is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
