Does the White House Really Think People Are That Stupid?

[marmar]

http://www.workinglife.org/2014/02/19/does-the-white-house-really-think-people-are-that-stupid/#sthash.EM8STsW3.dpuf


from the Working Life blog:


Does the White House Really Think People Are That Stupid?
Posted on 19 February 2014.


C’mon, seriously, has it gotten to the point of such desperation to pass middle-class crushing, poverty-enhancing trade deals that drive inequality that the White House treats its allies, members of Congress and activists as if they are idiots? That’s a rhetorical question.

This is a head-slapping, WTF moment:

Michael B. Froman, the president’s trade representative, tried to reassure Democrats on Tuesday that the administration would be sensitive to their concerns about workplace and environmental standards in putting together the new trade pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. He noted that as a candidate, Mr. Obama promised to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, known as Nafta.“And that’s exactly what we’re doing in TPP, upgrading our trading relationships not only with Mexico and Canada but with nine other countries as well,” Mr. Froman said in a speech at the Center for American Progress, a liberal research group in Washington.

That assertion drew scorn from critics. “I don’t think that expanding on the Nafta model and extending it to nine more nations was what the unions, environmental groups or Democratic Party activists had in mind when Obama said he would renegotiate Nafta,” said Lori Wallach, a trade expert at Public Citizen, a liberal advocacy group.

Uh, well, first, in case Mr. Forman and the White House cannot add, candidate Obama existed roughly six years ago. I think that campaign ended already, no? In the period since, the president has done nothing, zilch, nada to renegotiate NAFTA.The opposite: he continues to press for trade deals that as Lori Wallach points out above are precisely in the NAFTA-mold, including the TPP whose passage he so badly wants that he is willing to sacrifice the environment, which is precisely NAFTA-like.

And the Orwellian speak of Froman promising “upgrading our trading relationships” via the TPP is the exact opposite of renegotiating NAFTA.

It’s locking in that very model.

Stop lying.

Stop treating people–in theory, your on base, your supporters, the middle class, workers–like idiots.

[cantbeserious]

1. One Step Forward - Two Steps Back

eom

[xchrom]

2. du rec.

[ProSense]

3. I read

Uh, well, first, in case Mr. Forman and the White House cannot add, candidate Obama existed roughly six years ago. I think that campaign ended already, no? In the period since, the president has done nothing, zilch, nada to renegotiate NAFTA.The opposite: he continues to press for trade deals that as Lori Wallach points out above are precisely in the NAFTA-mold, including the TPP whose passage he so badly wants that he is willing to sacrifice the environment, which is precisely NAFTA-like.

And the Orwellian speak of Froman promising “upgrading our trading relationships” via the TPP is the exact opposite of renegotiating NAFTA.

...that piece, and I also read Froman's speech.

A VALUES-DRIVEN TRADE POLICY U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL FROMAN

FEBRUARY 18, 2014

<...>

Twenty years ago, the idea that labor standards should be part of trade agreements was at best an afterthought.

That was certainly the case in NAFTA. But it is not the case anymore.

As a candidate for President, then-Senator Obama said he would renegotiate NAFTA, put labor and environmental standards at the core of trade agreements and make those standards enforceable like any commercial commitment.

That’s exactly what we’re doing in TPP, upgrading our trade relationships, not only with Mexico and Canada, but with nine other countries as well.

As in the case of the three trade agreements signed into law by President Obama, in TPP we are seeking to include disciplines requiring adherence to fundamental labor rights, including the right to organize and collectively bargain, and protections from child and forced labor and employment discrimination.

We are pressing for regular consultative mechanisms, and a means for the public to raise labor concerns and demand action.

And we are working to include new commitments to address trade in goods produced by forced labor and regarding acceptable conditions of work.

We are working with Vietnam and the other TPP parties to make sure they live up to the high-standard, enforceable commitments of a final agreement.

Countries such as Vietnam face serious challenges in this regard, and we see TPP as the mechanism most likely to incentivize these countries to make progress in reforming their labor system and upholding worker rights.

We expect that T-TIP will lay the foundation for cooperation with Europe in promoting high-standard labor practices around the world.

But the negotiation of disciplines is only the first step.

We need to remain vigilant as to the implementation of commitments.

Under this President, a joint submission from U.S. and Guatemalan labor unions prompted the first trade-related labor rights enforcement case in history.

- more -

http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Center-for-American-Progress-Remarks-Ambassador-Froman-2-18-14.pdf

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024528844

Seems to me that fast track is the problem. Congressional scrutiny of this agreement is imperative because if it can accomplish the above, then it could be a good thing. The thing is no one is going to take Froman at his word.

[kelliekat44]

9. How can anyone here criticize the President in the face of what just happened in SC? Y

We are talking out of both sides of our mouths. US voters and their GOP reps fight against unions while Germany and other countries try to get us to have unions to equate with their workers' pay and benefits. WTF are we talking about?

[mountain grammy]

14. Yes, exactly. WTF ARE we talking about?

[WCLinolVir]

102. I don't see the relevance. We can't criticize bad policy?

WTF? Two separate issues.

[MannyGoldstein]

16. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren were two of only four to vote against Froman

Since I know that you're very respectful of their votes, I thought you'd like to know if you don't already.

It was great to see such bipartisanship other than the four grumblers.

[ProSense]

22. Yes, and I know

"Since I know that you're very respectful of their votes, I thought you'd like to know if you don't already. "

...how "very respectful" you are of Wyden.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024467470#post1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024467470

[MannyGoldstein]

56. I'm not always in love with Wyden

But he seems to be OK lately. He's been quite good on transparency issues, I believe that he forced the issue on TPP being kept secret even from Congress a couple of years ago and secured (limited) access to the docs.

[grasswire]

84. so now it's bad to respect Senator Wyden?

I'd better tell my friends and neighbors. We think he's wise and full of integrity.

[lark]

62. Congress mostly is bi-partisan when it comes to screwing workers.

Too bad this government is doing the same with the TPP lies. The environmental section has NO TEETH whatsoever, but the foreign corporations power to over-ride local environmental and worker laws is given precedence and a formal mechanism for overriding any country's rules to the contraray of the foreign corporations actions.

[sabrina 1]

128. Are you for or against the TPP?

[Enrique]

4. maybe he doesn't know this video is a joke?

[zeemike]

24. No I don't think they do.

[Puzzledtraveller]

5. No

They know that most of America isn't paying attention.

[Glitterati]

6. That's exactly what they think

Hell, we Democrats are being told to shut up and clap louder!

The Obama Cheerleading Squad is out in full force.

[ann---]

46. I gave

up on him a long time ago - two words - "drone strikes."

[Glitterati]

47. Me too, but

it took multiple food stamp cuts for me to see the light.

Starving the "least of us" is a bridge too far for me.

[Phlem]

89. me too.

4 words in his acceptance speech. "I'm a new Democrat"



-p

[ctsnowman]

7. There are very few

things I think the government should do in secret. Trade deals is not one of them.

[clarice]

17. +1 nt

[Autumn]

8. They will do what they want, what we think does not matter to them.

They know we will vote for the democrat. Even when the democrats not a democrat. They think we are suckers, and they are right.

[JDPriestly]

41. And they've picked Hillary.

But we have Bernie Sanders and maybe Elizabeth Warren.

Our message is strong. We just have to organize to get Sanders' and Warren's voices heard everywhere. Warren was on Jon Stewart a few years ago. I'd like to see her on there again. And I would also like to see Bernie Sanders on there.

[Autumn]

44. Elizabeth isn't going to run, I really doubt Hillary will run. Biden will.

Bernie said he will run if he has to but that's just a symbolic move. Tell you what I think, TPTB and the corporate owned media will decide who our next president will be and we will get to vote for them.

[imthevicar]

48. And as soon as you

Point out the down side of Hillary in some Ra,Ra, Group, you get disappeared from said group.!

[Autumn]

50. Then don't go into protected groups and ignore the rules. Then you don't get

disappeared from said group. It really is that easy. And I say that as a host in the Hillary Clinton group and the Elizabeth Warren group.

[imthevicar]

74. That a trap when you ask for an opinion.

[Autumn]

76. It's not a trap. Those are protected groups where supporters of

the person can go in and discuss the person they support without having to wade through a bunch of posts trashing the person they support. You are free to say what you want to about the person elsewhere like GD within reason and as long as it does not violate the terms of service or the community standards.

[RC]

81. What about when a protected group comes out here and tries to treat a hapless participant

in one of their flame bait threads, the same as an intruder in their protected group?
You don't have to go to them. They come to you.

And I am not talking about Cooking & Baking either.

[Autumn]

82. Yeah but they can't block you from the main forums.

Yeah I know what you are talking about. 106 blocked members and 17 hosts?

[cui bono]

63. Same with the BOG. That kind of discrimantory behavior is a real ugly and dangerous side of DU.

It allows people to live in a bubble, ignoring facts just because they don't like them. That sounds a lot like teabagger/BushCo behavior. Don't pay attention to reality and scrub whatever you don't like.

[imthevicar]

75. That's what happened,

The discussion asked for an opinion. I gave them mine. Disappeared.

[JDPriestly]

60. I never miss voting, but if my choice is Hillary or some Republican fool, both picked by the 1%,

I just may stay home. It's a sham democracy. We have no real choices in who gets to run. We need publicly funded elections and no political ads in the media.

Or alternatively require the media to pay to the government fund to publicly fund elections any money they receive as payment for a political or issue ad.

[SunSeeker]

61. You would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Hillary is NOT the same as a GOP candidate. She will NOT appoint Scalias to the Supreme Court, she will protect Roe v. Wade. That is reason alone to vote for Hillary.

[JDPriestly]

72. I'm in California. My vote for Hillary won't make much difference. But if I vote for her, I will

have it on my conscience for the rest of my life.

[SunSeeker]

79. A decision not to vote is a vote for the Republican candidate(s).

When Dems don't vote, Republicans get elected, even in CA. Plus, pot legalization will be on the 2016 CA ballot. If every progressive followed your move, we will have a Republican state and federal government. That should trouble your conscience a lot more. Your professed plan is horribly self-destructive.

Don't want Hillary as the nominee? Work for another nominee. But if that nominee doesn't make it, vote for the Dem that does. He/she will always be better than the Republican alternative. You will never get a perfect Dem candidate.

[JDPriestly]

108. Would normally agree with you. But Hillary? I don't see much about her that is Democratic.

[SunSeeker]

111. She is pro choice, pro Obamacare, pro LGBT rights, pro women's rights.

All of which Republicans are against.

[rhett o rick]

93. Clinton-Sachs isnt the same as the Republican clowns. No one here is saying that.

The lesser of evils is why we are where we are today. We must draw the line and fight and take what comes. Clinton-Sachs wont help the 99%. She might not bleed us as quickly at a Republican but I aint playing that game. Look how we've been manipulated into having one Conservative Party and the republican assholes. I will vote for president in 2016 and I will vote for a Democrat. I wont vote for a corporatist lackey and will write in a Democratic name if I am forced to.

Besides I swore never to vote for those that betrayed us and bowed down to king Georgie the Dim-Son. They showed that they had no principles and share in the responsibility for the horrible deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi children. They will have some explaining to do when or if they get to the golden gates.

If you are worried about the Republicans winning in 2016, then dont nominate Clinton-Sachs. The responsibility is yours not Nader's.

[cui bono]

94. Agreed. n/t

[bvar22]

97. Agreed X2

No more Clintons.

[SunSeeker]

112. That is exactly what you are saying.

That's demonstrated by the fact that you say you are willing to throw away your vote or not vote at all. And yes that absolutely is playing a game--a game Republicans are delighted to see you play.

[rhett o rick]

118. Some are making a mistake thinking that our enemy is the Republican Party.

They are merely a tool of our enemy. While some are watching the Republican clown show, the corporatist Democrats are picking their pockets.

Believing the war is between the Democrats and Republicans is naive.

I clearly stated that I will support Democrats, but ONLY progressive ones. Those that kiss the asses of Wall Street are killing the middle and lower classes.

The argument that corporatist Democrats are killing us slower than the Republicans isnt a consolation. I would rather go down fighting than die a death of a thousand cuts (I think Pat Henry said that).

Some look for the easy way out of their obligation. Vote Democratic and their conscience is clear. And if Christie changed parties tomorrow, they'd support him.

[woo me with science]

120. +1000000

[SunSeeker]

123. Some would rather vilify Dems than blame Republicans.

[rhett o rick]

124. Really? That's your post? I blame Republicans but they have had some help.

George Bush needs to be put in prison but when he asked, there were Democrats that groveled before him. They kissed his feet and supported his actions to kill Iraqi children, thousands, tens of thousands and maybe more. Those Democrats that gave a REPUBLICAN carte blanc to kill Iraqi's in our name I will vilify. They choose political expediency over Democratic values. I think all Republicans are dirt. But unlike some, I dont hold all Democrats up as gods. If Christie switched parties, they would be the first to kiss his ass.

There are two sides in this class war and it looks like you side with the 1%. You support fracking, the XL Pipeline, the TPP and anything and everything that Pres Obama decides. Oh yeah, you are ok with cuts to SS if Obama says so.

If you put loyalty before principles, you have no principles.

[SunSeeker]

125. LOL. Oooooh. Guess I hit a nerve.

You are wrong about what I believe, but I see that sputtering insults is all you've got.

[tomp]

115. it's been a sham democracy for a LONG time.

pretty much since the inception.

[Dustlawyer]

10. I have just 1 question, why all the secrecy if you are pushing our interests?

[erronis]

92. Excellent question

And no response from the Executor

[jsr]

11. Secrecy is good for presents. I'm sure the White House has a very nice present to surprise us with.

Just like superlative CPI, no government option, et al.

[juajen]

107. What is superlative CPI?

[OnyxCollie]

12. Who else you gonna vote for? Ha ha ha.

Keep hoping for change, suckers.

[Glitterati]

15. How about None of the Above?

Staying home and not bothering to vote IS an option, you know.

In fact, it's the option that most Americans exercise.

But, keep demoralizing the base and more will freely exercise that option as well.

[OnyxCollie]

20. Since the majority of the public

doesn't really understand politics, they only go by how they are treated when they vote.

Vote for Democrat- nothing improves- vote for Republican next time. No change in ideology necessary. (They don't have one.)

If that fails, stay home.

Of course those who really know what's going on, a very small group of actual "liberals," will be blamed when a Republican is elected, even though their small number means they had little affect on the election.

[jsr]

35. +1

[QuestForSense]

45. +1 more.

[Autumn]

65. Just curious, are you advocating not voting? Just in case you want to weigh in.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024541396#post31

[Glitterati]

66. ROFL, I have no intention of dignifying that juvenile foot stomping

with a response.

[Autumn]

67. I gotta say, in terms of the conversation your remark seems to fit and I didn't take

it as advocating not to vote. just kind of stating a fact of being taken for granted

[Glitterati]

68. Right...reminding that there ARE other options

and MOST people in this country exercise it.

Sadly.

[Autumn]

69. The beatings will continue until morale improves

[Glitterati]

70. Evidently

But, I've had my fill of the juvenile behavior today.

I'm gonna go head over to Facebook and watch my 18 yr. old and her friends behave more like adults for a while.

[Lizzie Poppet]

18. Yep, that's exactly their thought process.

They know we're never going to vote for Republicans, so they're free to do the bidding of their corporate masters.

I hate to be this cynical and negative, but meaningful positive change isn't going to come from within any more. The system has become far too thoroughly corrupted We're fooling ourselves if we think otherwise.

[Glitterati]

26. And, that's how they got the 2010 result

Democratic voters just exercised the None of the Above option.

Do you know why None of the Above doesn't appear on a ballot? Because election officials realize it's likely to be the winner, thus creating perpetual elections just trying to defeat None of the Above.

[polichick]

95. That's the Dem motto these days!

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Our President probably reads DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024536564

[jsr]

21. You never loved the President if you don't register your like there

Where either you are with us or you are with the Republicans. Oh wait.

[L0oniX]

29. I like the bumper sticker "We Suck Less".

[Gary 50]

55. We suck less...

That should be the catch-phrase for the next Democratic nominee for the presidency. Maybe it's not inspirational but God damn it at least it's honest.

[RC]

85. And even accurate - most of the time anyway.

[Fumesucker]

36. That's what staff is for n/t

[Mass]

19. Yes, sadly

[madrchsod]

23. we have voted for sociopaths to run this country

why would we be surprised at the outcome?

they could care less about their base because they know they can con us by saying the other side is worse.

[jsr]

25. The old good cop/bad cop strategy.

[xocet]

42. Maybe the good corporatist/bad corporatist strategy? n/t

[jsr]

43. Yep.

[pampango]

27. If 'free trade' caused poverty and inequality, Europe would be the poorest and most unequal place

on Earth. It is not.

In the period since, the president has done nothing, zilch, nada to renegotiate NAFTA.

I don't like what I have seen of TPP, but Obama is 'renegotiating' the trading rules with Canada and Mexico that are now governed by NAFTA. He claims that 'renegotiation' includes labor rights and environmental standards, but I have not seen them. TPP negotiations do not just apply to NAFTA countries, but I can see how Obama could claim that it represents 'renegotiation' of NAFTA current trading rules.

[JDPriestly]

57. Actually, Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland?????

None of those countries are doing very well.

Germany and Austria are doing the best.

The ones I named above have all imposed oppressive austerity measures on themselves or had them imposed by others.

[Kolesar]

87. Spain's standard of living was improved hugely by the EU--it's in Sherrod Brown's book

"Myths of Free Trade". The other countries helped Spain to develop industries to counter jobs that would be lost.

[pampango]

90. Austerity is indeed stupid, terrible fiscal policy. It has nothing to do with trade.

It is bad policy whether your country trades a little or a lot.

[maddiemom]

28. At the time NAFTA was negotiated, I was teaching a class of high school

students in a summer "remedial" program. They were mostly good, willing kids above "special education" level, but struggling to hang on. Discussing current events in the news was part of our classes. None of them could see any advantage to the U.S. with NAFTA. I had to agree with them that it seemed "crazy" on our part.

[L0oniX]

30. Well at least he isn't going to offer to sacrifice seniors anymore.

[jsr]

33. Social Security Cuts Still ‘on the Table’

http://blogs.rollcall.com/wgdb/sanders-applauds-obama-for-dropping-social-security-cuts-from-budget/
Social Security Cuts Still ‘on the Table’ but Not in Obama’s Budget
By Steven Dennis | Posted at 1:27 p.m. on Feb. 20, 2014

[JDPriestly]

59. That is not what Obama said. He is the master of double-talk, and people fall for it.

He just said it would not be in HIS budget but that the cuts are still possible if the Republicans want them. He is simply challenging the Republicans to put the cuts on the table. Don't worry they will. And then the elderly, especially elderly older women who get less Social Security to begin with will really, really be hurting.

Remember. The average monthly Social Security benefit for a retired person was $1,269.

http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/basicfact.htm

Women receive less than men but live longer.

n 2011, the average annual Social Security income received by women 65 years and older was $12,188, compared to $15,795 for men.

http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/factsheets/women.htm

The chained CPI will disproportionately reduce the retirement income of women since women live longer than men, and the chained CPI cuts will incrementally and gradually reduce the amount of benefit a recipient gets as the recipient ages.

The chained CPI is a ridiculous measure because as seniors are reduced in income, more of them will qualify for other government programs like Medicaid, which when coupled with Medicare reduces co-pays, etc. and food stamps, rent assistance, free types of transportation for certain situations, etc. The tiny amount the government will save on a senior's Social Security could push the person into real dependency on government programs and make seniors more likely to move into subsidized nursing homes.

Further, reducing Social Security payments will hit the nursing homes hard because that take indigent seniors and cover the cost of their housing and care with their Social Security income.

Te entire idea of the chained CPI is daffy and dumb and should not be on the table or even discussed. Seniors have a lot of medical costs.

[X_Digger]

31. Really makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Was candidate Obama not entirely truthful? Or what did he see/hear as President that made him change his mind on this and so many other things.

[Mr Dixon]

32. IMO

I think it is pretty clear that this agreement will unite all 3 countries and the citizens will pay the cost. Everyone will be paid wages equal to labor south of the border, the rich get richer and the poor population triples “what’s not it like” says the rich CEO making 300 times more than his employee’s. Our government has been brought off by the rich corporations; who doesn’t know that? The Supreme Court brought off, the justice system brought off this country was founded on money and nothing has changed, blame whomever you want but the bottom line is the system is pretty much the haves and have-nots.

[treestar]

34. I don't think the WH thinks you are stupid

or that anyone is stupid. The POTUS does what he thinks best, if you believe that is stupid, there's not much he can do about that.

[Fumesucker]

38. It's certainly not stupid for members of his social class

For the rest of us I'm not so sure.

[gordianot]

37. Any politician needs to consider no matter politics 2 conditions.

1. Are they hungry, cold, thirsty if so you better do something.


2. Well fed, warm, entertained humans, are generally stupid,

[Populist_Prole]

40. Hey that's good. Quotable. n/t

[Populist_Prole]

39. Yes, and it's not just the white house

The utter failure of globalization/free-trade has been burgeoning for 20+ years and yet the pundits, talking heads in the business media ( read: "the media" ) all trot out the same trite canards in support of it as if either:

- We were all suddenly born yesterday

- Hoping to coalesce enough critical mass of 1-percenters and their minions, the fifty or so wonks among the general public that still think free trade is good ( about a half dozen of them are regular posters on DU ) and "by the numbers" macro economists who believe it makes sense...or at least on paper....as in "I'm standing up to my waist in ice water in a 140 degree room; statistically I feel just fine"

Other posters are right though: It aint about what we think. The appeals for support from the hoi-polloi are those from a technocrat trying to make a done-deal sound like it was reached through mutual consensus.

[proverbialwisdom]

49. Ah, geez, COI?

http://www.republicreport.org/2014/big-banks-tpp/

[WillyT]

51. Yes

[rbrnmw]

52. sitting at home on election is not an option for me.

I don't want the whacko tea party to take over the Senate and expand their numbers in the House. I will be voting on Election Day, in the meantime I will be working my off to elect as many up and down ticket Democratic candidates as I can. My parents always said if you don't vote don't bitch about the outcome.

[valerief]

53. Does that mean we'll get a free pizza? nt

[Progressive dog]

54. Why does Paul Krugman think TPP is no big deal?

Maybe he needs to be under the bus, along with the President.[link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024448002|

[pa28]

78. Because he didn't do his homework before commenting on the issue.

TPP and IP, A Brief Note
Dean Baker takes me to task over the Trans Pacific trade deal, arguing that it’s not really about trade — that the important (and harmful) stuff involves regulation and intellectual property rights.

I’m sympathetic to this argument; this was true, for example, of DR-CAFTA, the free trade agreement with Central America, which ended up being largely about pharma patents. Is TPP equally bad? I’ll do some homework and get back to you.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/tpp-and-ip-a-brief-note/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

[Progressive dog]

106. Pharma patents are owned by

US companies and developing those patents provides a lot of American jobs. If you check the link, you'll find that Krugman has a later column on TPP.
[link:http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/21081-the-pacific-trade-pact-is-big-but-is-it-a-huge-deal|

[druidity33]

83. What, you think Krugman is infallible? nt.

[Progressive dog]

104. No, but he is a Nobel prize winning economist

and I would trust him above some random blogger on economics. Trade deals do have to do with economics.

[druidity33]

113. How do you feel about NAFTA?

Because as far as i can tell Krugman was OK with that too. Face it, he likes Trade deals. I think just because someone won a prize in something, doesn't mean they will always be right on any topic near their field. And trade deals are maybe 60% Economics anyway (or should be...)

[Progressive dog]

114. So, because experts aren't always right in their field,

it is better to listen to random bloggers.

[druidity33]

116. No, it's better to evaluate the facts yourself. nt.

[Progressive dog]

117. I agree, but that doesn't explain why there

are no verifiable facts posted by the opposition to TPP.

[druidity33]

122. Well when the damn things a secret, what do you expect? nt.

[Progressive dog]

126. Well, first you told me to evaluate facts,

now you tell me there are no facts that can be evaluated because it's secret.

[druidity33]

127. The fact that it's SECRET is one of the facts i evaluated...

also that it was written by Industry insiders. Also that there were no environmental advocates that helped write it. And that trade deals have historically been terrible for American workers. I'm sure there's a few more that are relevant, but honestly i'm just stunned that there are people here on DU that are in favor of this truly SHITTY trade deal.

[cali]

58. All you need to know about Obama and trade is reflected in

his appointment of Froman and the chief ag negotiator for the USTR, Siddiqui.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

64. The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same.

The shepherd always tries to persuade the sheep that their interests and his own are the same. Marie Beyle (Stendahl)

[DeSwiss]

71. In a word: yes.

- As for their use of ''Doublespeak'' -- this White House has been positively profligate in its use. In fact, they're beginning to govern more and more like INGSOC. Except for the helmets.......

K&R

[AAO]

73. Yes - and I didn't even need to read you OP!

[Armstead]

77. I agree with the point of the article -- But the headline is a bit too much

[frwrfpos]

80. recommend

[truedelphi]

86. People are that stupid. We have a non-Democratically prinicipled man

In the WH, and for the first five years of his time in office, all we heard when we offered criticisms was that he had to do what he was doing on account of howCongress needs 60 plus votes on everything.

Or that he needed more time.

Or that once he was re-elected everything would change.

The guy is to the right of Ronald Reagan. I mean, when David Stockman, economic adviser to friggin' Reagan, was on C Span about six months ago, he thought the Disaster Capitalism policies of Bernanke and Geithner were beyond comprehension - far beyond what Reagan's people were attempting to do.

And many in the public are far more concerned about Granny getting a Social Security check
for $ 600 each month, and their neighbor "ripping off the system" on account of applying for food stamps, than the Biggest Financial Firms in the world getting trillions of Main Street's dollars.

However, with the Republican Party's candidates being far worse on social issues, I guess we have to be thankful for what we have.

[Kolesar]

88. You only heard the flawed rhetoric of the pals you were listening to

all we heard when we offered criticisms was...

[obxhead]

91. Yes, absolutely, without a doubt....

and they are right.

We'll take it, without a fight, without question, and with nothing more than a whimper.

DU is proof positive of that.

What was once the most vile sin is now the most championed victory.

The one thing corporations and our government has mastered is forcing us to fight each other. While we're busy doing that, they rape each and every one of us without a peep of discontent.

[blkmusclmachine]

96. DC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Wall Street wolves.

[bvar22]

98. They don't think we are that stupid.

They DO believe that we have no where to go
because The Republicans are Worse,
and they will ride that horse until it drops dead.
or
WE make them stop.



[font size=3]What are they going to do about it?
Vote for a Republican?
Hahahahahahahaha[/font]

[ReRe]

99. What this does...

Last edited Sat Feb 22, 2014, 07:49 AM - Edit history (1)

... is make it official. They have crossed over to the other side and are not Democrats anymore. Double speak. Talking from both sides of their mouths. Outright lying. Damnit! That is not what I am! Where do I go now? I cannot support this kind of "Democratic Party." Do I support the bold-face lies of Michael B. Froman? I do not!

Edit: I just learned at http://www.democraticunderground.com/101685846
that Michael B. Froman rec'd $4 Million for selling the TPP.

Would YOU sell your soul for $4 million? Would you?

I wouldn't.

[Phlem]

100. Welcome home ReRe.

Thanks for saying this ReRe. I have felt this way for a long time.



-p

[virgogal]

101. +1

[WCLinolVir]

103. I think they don't care.

It really is pathological to lie about what you are trying to achieve, when what you are doing is destructive to the whole planet, and serves the 1%.

[lunasun]

105. just in case some are not aware>Michael B. Froman,wiki

Prior to joining the Obama administration, Froman was a managing director at Citigroup, where he managed infrastructure and sustainable development investments.[10] He also served as President and Chief Executive Officer of CitiInsurance, head of Emerging Markets Strategy at Citigroup and a Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.[7] He also spent much of his career within the United States Department of the Treasury,[7] where he served as Chief of Staff between January 1997 and July 1999, and as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Eurasia and the Middle East. As Deputy Assistant Secretary his work related to economic policy towards the former Soviet Union and Central and Eastern Europe, as well as economic components of the Dayton Accords.[7] Between January 1993 and December 1995, Froman was director for International Economic Affairs on the National Economic Council and the National Security Council.[7]

Froman and Obama were not in touch after their time at Harvard until Obama's Senate run when Froman volunteered to advise Obama on policy and introduced Obama to Robert Rubin, whom Froman had followed from the Treasury Department to Citigroup after the Clinton administration.[9] He also served on 12-member advisory board of the Obama campaign’s transition team.[2]

President Bill Clinton said he made a mistake listening to Rubin and Larry Summers on derivatives Wonder what Obama will regret down the line

[jsr]

119. +1

[Rex]

110. They probably think the people that read Newsmax or watch Foxnews are total idiots.

So yeah, for some (sadly a huge portion) they KNOW they are stupid. Hard to ignore obvious propaganda aimed at the fears of the Republican voter. Personally I blame the Republican voter for being so stupid and gullible. For blindly following the Tea Party Clown car off a cliff! For blindly following anyone that would shutdown the government and read a children's book.

Embarrassing and pathetic.

[gulliver]

121. Gotta go with Obama on this.

I see stuff like "scorn" and "Orwellian" and "lying" and just assume that there is no argument. I need a lot of statistics and facts. From what I understand so far, working conditions and the environment are in the mix. The "no pact" option doesn't have them.

[woo me with science]

129. kick

[woo me with science]

130. kick