The pharmaceutical sector, due to its complexity, is not for the novice investor. Further, not every pharmaceutical company represents a defensive pick. But one that meets the bar, due to its niche, is Teva Pharmaceutical.

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (ADR) (Nasdaq: TEVA), via an assertive product development program and acquisition schedule, has achieved a leadership position in the global generic segment.

Through a U.S. subsidiary Teva makes generic versions of brand-name antibiotics, heart drugs, and heartburn medications, among other drugs. The company boasts a 150-drug portfolio, including generics for blockbusters Prozac and Mevacor.

Most portfolios could benefit from a pharmacy supply play for defensive purposes, and Medco Health Solutions (NYSE: MHS) is worthy of consideration for this role. Medco Health is one of the largest pharmacy benefits managers in United States, with services provided to member health plans offered by unions, HMOs, and corporations, among other organizations.

Analysts like Medco's high account retention, new business wins, economies of scale, and the company's entry into the Medicare Part B segment with its acquisition of PolyMedica. The Reuters F2007/F2008 EPS consensus estimates for MHS are $3.60/$4.38.

The risks? Analysts have their eye on the increased market penetration of generic drugs and some pricing pressure in contract renewals. Also, the stock's PE ratio of 30 is high, even considering MHS's growth prospects, hence the stock is vulnerable to a pull-back. The problem with the 'buy on pull-back' tactic here is that MHS's pull-backs have been mild, so there's no guarantee of a 5% pull-back before a share purchase decision.

TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer sees good reason to own the automaker's stock now that a big raw cost has been reduced.

General Motors (NYSE: GM) (Cramer's Take) got what it wanted.

It reduced the largest component of a car's cost -- health care -- to something that is a lot more like what the other guys, its rivals, have.

To me this is crucial because right now, with the Fed cutting interest rates, you should have been buying these auto stocks. But the raw inputs -- namely, health care -- were too high.

No longer.

Currently the earnings per share estimates for GM for next year are in the $3s, some high $3 and some low $3.

You just got a huge boost to those numbers from the bottom-line side. I think the Fed's rate cuts are going to help the top line because the auto companies can then offer the cut-rate financing that brings people into the showroom.

I would buy this stock off this deal if the stock stays around current prices because the possibility of a 4 handle on the earnings makes it worth the taking.

RELATED LINKS:

• Cramer: A Breakout Biotech Stock
• Top 10 Dividend Stocks of the Week

Jim Cramer is a director and co-founder of TheStreet.com. He contributes daily market commentary for TheStreet.com's sites and serves as an adviser to the company's CEO. At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in any of the stocks mentioned in this post.

GM (NYSE: GM) and its rivals Ford (NYSE: F) and Chrysler have been exploring setting up a fund, managed by the union but financed by the car companies, to handle union member health-care benefits. The move would take tens of billions of dollars in liabilities off the companies' balance sheets, but funding it could take as much as $60 billion.

The union has not warned to this program as fast as GM would like, so it has proposed an alternative--huge job cuts. According to The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), this plan would results in "deeper, more-painful cuts." That would probably include jobs and benefits.

The deadline for the UAW negotiations to finish is September 14. While it would not be odd for talks to go beyond that, the tension between the car companies and union is likely to grow.

While the UAW management may be patient, its membership may feel otherwise. Benefits are important to them, but having jobs is probably higher on the list. Any hint of massive firings is likely to rub them the wrong way.

The union does not have to go straight to a nationwide strike to send its message. It could stage work stoppages at plants that produce popular cars which are in low supply.

And, then it gets ugly.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

From time to time, Google Inc.'s (NASDAQ: GOOG) reminds everyone that despite all of the talk about peace, love and the sharing of information, it is just a company.

A case in point is the idiotic rantings of a low-level executive trying to kowtow to the health care industry. Writing about MIchael Moore's documentary "Sicko," Lauren Hutton Turner laments that "Moore's film portrays the industry as money and marketing driven, and fails to show healthcare's interest in patient well-being and care."

Of course, Hutton, an account planner who works with health care companies, has a solution: buy more advertising on Google. "Whatever the problem, Google can act as a platform for educating the public and promoting your message," she writes. "We help you connect your company's assets while helping users find the information they seek. "

Hutton is being vilified and mocked throughout the Internet. But even though the criticism of her is a little unfair, it raises a bigger issue about the honesty of Google's search results. It's not in Google's interest for someone searching for the term "health care costs" to see a link to Moore's documentary come out on top or even on the first two or three pages.

This reminds me of a bizarre story I heard about the Wall Street Journal and Enron. Soon after the first Enron stories appeared in the newspaper someone in the Journal's advertising department supposedly (I am not sure if it's true or not) sent the company a letter offering to do a branding campaign to combat the negative publicity being created by its own reporters.

Hutton is probably no different than thousands of other Googlers looking to get a bigger slice of the world's advertising spending. She erred in showing publicly how Google values its advertisers over its users just like every other media company. If people get some use out of Google while it makes money for its customers, it's a happy coincidence.

Coventry Health Care's (NYSE: CVH) earnings report from late April won't make anybody ill. Operaring revenues were up 15.4% to $2.24 billion. Net earnings were $127.5 million and diluted EPS were $.80, excluding a $.04 per share debt refinancing charge. Coventry is growing both organically and by acquisition. It purchased Concentra worker's compensation business unit in order to gain a national market, and has announced plans to acquire selected assets of Mutual of Omaha's health insurance business in the near future. In order to finance these acquisitions, Coventry Health Care retired $170.5 million in debt at 8.125 % to refinance $400 million of debt at 5.95%. The company also bought back 4 million of its own shares for $221 million.

According to CEO Dale Wolf, the company is doing exactly what it promised shareholders it would do: acquire strategic assets, buy back its own stock, refinance debt to more favorable terms, and launch new products and/or policies. One policy that Coventry has been pursuing is to raise premium yields on its members. Current Coventry members yield $271.03 in premiums per month, an increase of 5.6%. But expenses increased 4.8% to $212.43 during that same period, thereby negating most of the increase in premiums.

Coventry forecasts 2Q 2007 revenues of $2.3-$2.4 billion, yielding diluted EPS of $.94-$.96. FY 2007 total revenues are forecast at $8.1-$8.4 billion, yielding diluted EPS of $3.92-$3.98 icluding $.04 per share debt refinancing charges. The stiock opened the year at $49.81, and closed recently at $59.63, a respectable 20% run-up in share price. But health care costs have become a hot topic in Democratic presidential debates recently, and insurance companies have been held responsible for runaway costs and substandard treatment complaints. At half the size of health insurance giant Aetna (NYSE: AET), Coventry is a slightly better deal in terms of its p/e multiple, but there are more attractive investments out there than either one of these.

I have owned Harley Davidson (NYSE: HOG) proudly and profitably since 1998. The idea of strikes at one of its primary manufacturing plants makes me sad. In the past the company has been able to come to agreements without strikes. Management recognized the unique relationship of it's products, and employees, and customers and shared the road to success.

There are competitive pressures on every company in a global economy and Harley's workers are acutely aware of this. From what I have read Harley Davidson has asked workers to participate in the cost of their own health care benefits, reduce the benefits of pensioned employees and establish a lower pay-scale (read 'second class') for new hires without scheduled salary increases.

If what I understand about the positions of both sides is accurate I would side with the workers; not entirely, but substantially. I do not agree that new employees should be treated differently than existing employees. To me this directly affects our democracy by continuing to erode the middle class. It is true that it would be more devastating to see Harley move manufacturing overseas. Although, part of Harley's success stems from it's status as a true American icon.

Harley's may some day soon be made in China, for sale in China. But, I do not envision Harley's made in China being sold here soon. Parts yes, finished bikes no. When and if that happens I'm selling my shares for sure -- I know, I should not allow my emotions to affect my business judgment; there are many issues to consider -- sometimes it happens.

Regarding pension benefits there is room for compromise. Existing benefits for retired workers are a pledge that should be kept. The deal was made on good faith and must be honored. The deal for current employees can be negotiable as part of an overall package and should reflect the current economic realities. Commonly 401K programs are in, pensions are out.

The area where I would most side with management relates to health care benefits. When health care benefits go up in between union contracts without limit or warning the employee is basically getting an unscheduled raise. They may not perceive it that way but it is a fact. If an employee pays some percentage of their health care cost then they are aware when the price rises, share in the burden, and can seek jointly with management to address the issue. They will also be more frugal in their choices. Connecting cause and effect is rational. The actual percentage of the employee burden should be part of a negotiated contract and not change for the duration of that contract. The company should definitely not have the right to change the employee contribution at its discretion.

Good news was reported on Monday that a mediator was called in to help settle the dispute. http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/harley-davidson-union-to-meet-with/n20070205191709990005?cid=403

The new stock symbol 'HOG' stands for 'Harley Owners Group' -- it would be very sad indeed if it took on a more unfortunate meaning, and management decided to hog the road.

Check out my other posts for BloggingStocks here.

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the vice president for design and research at an architecture & planning firm.