When is a deal not a deal?

The simple answer is when one party cannot be trusted. The rule of law ( and the sanctity of contracts)is generally held to be a sine qua non of successful economic activity, indeed all societal activity. It is also generally considered to be unacceptable to change the rules in midgame. How does this apply to present times and the present government of the U.S?
We see that Obamacare seems to have been endorsed by health insurance companies, by the American Medical Association, by the pharmaceutical companies and by the AARP (or Obama claimed it so they are fudging since they just lost 60,000 members and a competitive organization for seniors is being formed.) How did this happen? The answer is that the White House struck "deals" with each of these and they have participated in an ad campaign supporting Obamacare. A typical deal: the drug companies would "give up" $80B over ten years ( N.B. ten years is the maximum time period that the Congressional Budget Office is allowed to make projections so, when one hears that the "cost" is X, it's only X for the first ten years and likely to be much more than X for the decades beyond that.) and would be "guaranteed" not to have Medicare and other national health plans put drug supply out for bid ( as the VA evidently does.)What happened to this deal? Congress immediately denied responsibility for it or any willingness to honor it. Next is the deal supposedly struck by Karen Ignagni, head lobbyist for the health insurance companies
http://tinyurl.com/lrtomz
but Obama has turned on them as the evil villains in the situation.
Any deal with the AMA is nugatory because it only represents a sliver of the doctor population in the U.S.,any publicity is to the benefit of its "leadership", and any organization might wish to be at the table even when it itself is being served up. AARP? It has become an insurance company selling things to seniors rather than a representative of senior interests. Even so, the leadership is taking flak for going against the obvious wishes of members ( and commonsense would dictate that seniors, above all, would resist Obamacare tooth and nail.)
The Israelis could have told these folks that Obama can't be trusted to honor agreements (either made by past administrations or by campaign promises by Obama himself before actually becoming President.)Of course, Israelis are used to being lied to since the Palestinians have honored none of the agreements including Oslo and even Egypt has gotten the Sinai and Israeli-discovered-and-developed oil without going past the coldest possible "peace" deal and without interdicting the flow of rockets and other arms to Gaza. Lyndon Johnson guaranteed free passage through the Gulf of Aqaba in 1957 when Nasser initiated a blockade and then reneged on that deal.
Actually, having thrown Jeremiah Wright and his own grandmother "under the bus", Obama might be queried about other things in his personal history: how he turned on the sponsor who first put him up for the Illinois Senate and got her disqualified from the ballot ( along with everyone else! ) or how he got elected "President of the Harvard Law Review" with the support of the conservatives among the editors.
When he tells the American public that his healthcare plan can't be attacked because it isn't specific yet but still whatever it is should be passed by Congress, he is saying "Trust me." Only the Far Left and such enthusiastic supporters as Fidel Castro, Chavez et al got what they expected from Obama. Others might be well-advised not trust him either before or after he makes a deal.