Dear President Obama, Please shut the f' up about TPP rainbows and unicorns...

[whereisjustice]

The Democratic Party has become obsessed with polishing the asses of Wall Street billionaire CEOs. These charismatic/celebrity CEOs are rich from exploiting slave labor in Asia. Now Obama is determined to set the stage for the next big step function increase in poverty and wealth disparity with TPP.

The critics are correct, just like we were about NAFTA and banking deregulation. TPP is a job killing, wealth sucking device to move wages and benefits from American workers into the pockets of Wall Street CEOs.

That isn't a pot of gold waiting for American workers at the end of the TPP rainbow. It is a giant pile of shit comprised of endless lay-offs, underemployment, lost wages and benefits.

You can smell it from here to Vietnam.

Jesus Christ, I cannot believe how hostile the Democratic Party has become to workers and their families.

TPP is literally punishing the American worker for expecting more than a cardboard shack to live in.

[rhett o rick]

1. Sen Sanders Says No to TPP – Why Do Conservative Dems Say Yes?

Cross posted in the Populist Reform of the Democratic Party Group: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12772162

Why are some Democrats willing to look the other way?

1. TPP will allow corporations to outsource even more jobs overseas.
2. U.S. sovereignty will be undermined by giving corporations the right to challenge our laws before international tribunals.
3. Wages, benefits, and collective bargaining will be threatened.
4. Our ability to protect the environment will be undermined.
5. Food Safety Standards will be threatened.
6. Buy America laws could come to an end.
7. Prescription drug prices will increase, access to life saving drugs will decrease, and the profits of drug companies will go up.
8. Wall Street would benefit at the expense of everyone else.
9. The TPP would reward authoritarian regimes like Vietnam that systematically violate human rights.
10. The TPP has no expiration date, making it virtually impossible to repeal.

This information came from Sen Sanders. Support Sen Sanders opposition of the TTP here: http://www.sanders.senate.gov/stop-the-tpp

Please contact your Senators and tell them to side with Sen Sanders and vote no on the TTP.

[Autumn]

2. A conservative dem is a fantasy. A conservative dem is a republican

[MissDeeds]

35. Thank you, Autumn

That is so true! I find the term "Reagan Democrat" to be equally offensive and contradictory.

[Autumn]

37. I am so sick of moderate republicans hiding behind a magic D. They can call themselves

whatever they want they are republicans.

[MissDeeds]

42. I could not agree more.

[Mojorabbit]

101. + a kabillion. nt

[whereisjustice]

23. +1

[Fred Sanders]

30. Since when did America get virtuous and all about what it does to other countries economically?

Each of those points may be valid, but where's the beef?

Meanwhile the Democratic Party leader faces 2 full years of a viciously hostile Congress and Supreme Court and we be rec'ing even more vicious attacks on him based on questionable economic assessments....??

How many own goals do you think we can afford to give up?

No wonder the folks stayed away in droves at the mid-terms, mixed messaging has that effect on folks.

[djean111]

40. Each of those points will be happening to AMERICANS.

Where's the beef? Well, thanks to TPP's no county of origin labeling, we won't fucking know where it came from, anyway.
You honestly have no problem with the TPP? And - why does Obama even have to do this? He does not.
The TPP is a shitty goal. For most Americans. anyway.

[Fred Sanders]

43. You raise an interesting issue. Country of origin labelling for meat is being used by America to

make imported meat more expensive...if the nation's have a uniform industry safety code there would be no excuse or need for such labelling and an even playing field for sales.

No one should dabble in generalities when it comes to trade treaties, is more my point.
And "fucking" something is not a point.

[djean111]

46. I want to know where the meat comes from. Or I don't buy it, period.

Already I see pictures of the way the Vietnamese feed the shrimp they sell us. They keep chickens over the shrimp ponds, and chicken shit rains down on the shrimp. Which are not washed too well. So, I don't buy shrimp unless I know it did not come from Asia. I can do without.
Do you really think, in a time when we are actually going to let chicken producers police themselves, that regulations will be followed, either here or overseas? And, after all, too many regulations will cause corporations to lose profits, and then they can sue.

Generalities? We have been posting what specifics we can ferret out. Here is a web site with some specifics....
http://www.exposethetpp.org/

[PearliePoo2]

152. Thanks for the link!

And yes, I could not agree with you more about shrimp.
I love shrimp (and most seafood), but it's become difficult to find a safe source. Small salad shrimp for Oregon is good and I look for prawns that come from Panama or the West Coast of Mexico. The Gulf is now out thanks to BP.

[merrily]

65. Gee, and I thought your real point was that no one should

criticize Obama about anything ever.

Since you object to generalities, why don't you tell us exactly how costly is labeling meat for country of origin?

[Fred Sanders]

67. No telling what folks will label other folks with.

[merrily]

70. Didn't label you with anything, just pointed out

that your posts have a "johnny one note" tendency, at least those that I've seen.

[nilesobek]

111. Meat labeling changes is another whine

constantly used by corporations to resist needed regulation. It doesn't cost much to buy more ink and printers and change labeling that protects the consumer. I think its an out and out lie that labeling laws will increase costs substantially and have made it a practice to point it out wherever I can.

[Fred Sanders]

113. The system required to track each piece of beef is expensive. Instead of guessing the cost, ask

Canada how much it is costing them?

[nilesobek]

117. I'm only talking about country of origin labeling right now.

A simple click of the mouse is all it takes to change a label. Excuses.

[NewDeal_Dem]

104. It's not costly to label it. It's costly to produce it in the US, under minimal standards of

hygiene, with minimal labor protections.

Think of the profit to be made by producing it overseas with no hygiene or labor standards. Beef cattle fed on shit, living in shit, tended by workers who work in shit.

Think of the profits!

Oh brave new world, that has such wonders in it!

[JDPriestly]

95. A uniform safety code is no value if the safety codes in some countries are not enforced.

Same with labor codes.

The US is not ready for the TPP. We have no industrial or commercial policy with regard to encouraging industries that will at the same time produce high-paying jobs for Americans and products that people in other countries want and can afford to buy.

The TPP offers absolutely no gain to ordinary Americans. And its very existence eats away at the structure and sovereignty of our government. In fact, the TPP combined with our other trade agreements that create courts that supersede our courts at the state and federal levels will destroy our national sovereignty and our democracy.

We cannot have the TPP. It will destroy the US. Absolutely destroy us. It takes from our Congress much of the authority our Congress has. We have already given up too much of our national sovereignty and our right to govern ourselves with the trade agreements we have.

I say no to the TPP.

[merrily]

63. What's your beef with valid points?

No wonder the folks stayed away in droves at the mid-terms, mixed messaging has that effect on folks.

Keep telling yourself that people didn't vote at midterms because of the TPP, if that's what you need to feel better about a historic loss.

Personally, I believe most of America never heard of the TPP or DU, let alone mixed messages at DU. People don't vote when they don't think their vote matters as far as making significant changes in their situation and that of their families--and I am not talking about culture war issues.

[Nay]

120. Thank you. I'm disgusted at the number of people here on DU who

say that if we don't act like lockstep Republicans, standing behind our guy (or gal) no matter what, then the masses won't vote for us. Bullshit. People don't vote for us because we don't even have the guts to stand up for liberal values against the damn Republicans.

[merrily]

148. You're welcome.

If we're talking national politicians, I don't think we're talking guts. Maybe some town meeting members or city council members somewhere are acting out of fear. (In Boston, I don't observe even that, but maybe.) However, I simply don't believe that Presidents of Congressional Reps or Senators are hiding in some cloakroom quaking with fear. I believe most of them are doing pretty much what they want to do. Sure, compromise is necessary, but I don't think we're talking true compromise here.

[ChiciB1]

91. Totally DISAGREE With Your Reasoning About WHY

people didn't vote. I live in Florida so am dubious about our recent election of Governor even though the consensus is that Rick Scott won fair & square. Personally I'm not so sure. Very few people I've talked to from in state or out are STILL scratching their heads that he got re-elected.

Regardless, far too many people spend too much time staring at their navels or some other device and won't take the time to register, much less actually vote. I worked very hard trying to get people to vote and did have "some" success. The American people are either too lazy or apathetic to participate with elections. Very few take the time to get informed or too many just listen to the lies that get repeated over and over until it becomes truth to them. More and more when I try to engage people about politics they tell me they don't think their vote counts. Too many tell me that I'm too obsessed and need to find another outlet that doesn't cause me stress.

The stress I feel is that I'm UNABLE to make them SEE for themselves truth or reality. More times than not I'm told they don't WANT to talk about politics, let's just focus on something else that makes them happy. I'm told I NEED to understand that not everyone cares about what goes on politically and they want to look at a glass half full. They actually tell me that if I'm going to talk about political issues they aren't going to listen. We just need to change the subject. It's offensive to me, but I'm told that I'm the one who needs to get a life!

My reality is that too many people just don't want to have to THINK ABOUT IT. There was a time when I could have discussions, but as time goes by I feel like a "Debbie Downer" and others really don't want my input. It's just easier to focus on something else or do something that's more fun... you know "life's too short" and all.

I doubt I can find very many people who even have any inkling as to what TPP means! So now I'm really, really upset about this issue and extremely upset with what I'm hearing about Obama and what he wants to do. I know he's much more moderate than me, but now it almost seems he's joined the other side. Actually, I'm very pissed off!

[drynberg]

118. WHAT'S YOUR PIECE HAVE TO DO WITH TPP? WE HAVE A REAL THREAT ABOUT TO BE UNLEASHED. INFORM.

[sulphurdunn]

123. I admire you loyalty

to the party, and I disagree with those who says conservative democrats are just moderate republicans. They are worse than republicans, but in their defense, they would never get elected to a de facto, permanent minority party otherwise. The two party political paradigm goes something like this for democratic party leaders: You can pass any social justice or welfare legislation you can to play your bast if you can get through congress, but it will take years if ever and take one hell of a fight that requires many giveaways to the business community. Wall Street doesn't much care about that one way or another, with the caveat that it doesn't cost the investment class. When it comes to financial, economic, national defense and trade policy, you tow the corporate, free market line and always see to it there are enough of the "right" democratic votes to pass desired legislation in such areas without too much delay and without too much concern for any detriment to the US as a functioning democracy.

[rhett o rick]

146. Glad you asked but surprised that you needed. The TPP will cause extreme harm to the 99%.

I know that doesn't bother you but that's why progressive are against it. Those that support it won't provide any arguments, but only disparage those that dare question the President.

I hope you can explain your point of this:

Meanwhile the Democratic Party leader faces 2 full years of a viciously hostile Congress and Supreme Court and we be rec'ing even more vicious attacks on him based on questionable economic assessments....??

You seem to be saying that because the Republicans are going to be attacking the president, we progressive should knuckle under and stop trying to save the Middle and Working Classes.

Now I have to agree with you on this:

No wonder the folks stayed away in droves at the mid-terms, mixed messaging has that effect on folks.

Exactly, when the Democratic President is willing to overlook torture and try to secretly Fast Track a job killer like the TPP, IT GIVES DEMOCRATS A MIXED MESSAGE. If the Democratic President isn't for the 99% then what do we do?

[L0oniX]

145. Check this out...

http://billmoyers.com/2015/01/02/horrifying-reason-fruit-unblemished/

While the produce is coddled, the workers face a different reality. Pay languishes at the equivalent of $8 to $12 a day. Marosi summarizes conditions that often approach slavery:

Many farm laborers are essentially trapped for months at a time in rat-infested camps, often without beds and sometimes without functioning toilets or a reliable water supply.
Some camp bosses illegally withhold wages to prevent workers from leaving during peak harvest periods.
Laborers often go deep in debt paying inflated prices for necessities at company stores. Some are reduced to scavenging for food when their credit is cut off. It’s common for laborers to head home penniless at the end of a harvest.
Those who seek to escape their debts and miserable living conditions have to contend with guards, barbed-wire fences and sometimes threats of violence from camp supervisors.
Major US companies have done little to enforce social responsibility guidelines that call for basic worker protections such as clean housing and fair pay practices.

This is what their trade deals bring to real working people.

[FiveGoodMen]

4. Note to DU (especially those who run it):

This is what comes of worshipping the letter 'D' and not the principles of someone like, say, FDR.

There's been LOTS of complicity on this site.

[crim son]

10. Well said. n/t

[L0oniX]

20. You think they give a shit about the complicity?

They can't take a stand either way or the site will see members dropping like dead flies. IMO by the term underground it is implied that it is not main stream unless main stream means voting D no matter what. Somewhere truth and conscience enters in and that will be at odds with "just vote D" or "don't think ...just vote D". That course is one that puts us in this bad mojo of ...R's vote lock step and we must vote lock step to beat them. It's a game I am wondering away from. I'm of the same mind set as Russell Brand ...it's time for mass revolt because voting only means that you approve of the oligarchy system that doesn't really give a fuck about us.

[NewDeal_Dem]

107. voting only means that you approve of the oligarchy system that doesn't really give a fuck about us.

indeed

[Hekate]

108. So don't vote already.

[L0oniX]

154. Enjoy your voting for the oligarchy.

[DeSwiss]

110. Voting IS the oligarchy's system! Brought to you by Diebold™!

- Duh. They also provide us with character actors to play the roles of the politicians. And Satan's minions all play lobbyists. And as you might expect, the American public all get the role of ''rubes.''

The Oligarchs made all this for us to play with so we'd think we were in-charge. And out of their way.....

Two men both speaking the TRUTH:

[center]

[/center]

[Hekate]

109. You know very well that "Underground" refers to our place during the BushCheney regime...

It's not like we're supposed to be the Weather Underground here, or in a state of "permanent revolution."

Read the founding documents, all that stuff about supporting DEMOCRATIC candidates and getting DEMOCRATS elected. Nothing in there about worshipping them once they get in, but sure as hell a lot about getting them into office in the first place and keeping them there. That's about as mainstream as it gets.

[sabrina 1]

142. It doesn't say we have to vote for poseurs, people pretending to be Democrats. Democrats

do not support Bush policies. No matter what letter they slap on their names.

And underground at this point should mean rooting out all those pretend Dems who are dragging this party further and further to the right.

To blindly vote for a letter is simply wrong.

That is what we accused the Bush supporters of doing. No matter how wrong he may have been on issues, they turned a blind eye.

We have good people running who ARE Dems but who do not get the backing they need from this party.

Underground should mean helping to get THEM elected rather than the Corporate funded plants who run in both parties.

The Dem Party is supposed to be party of the Working Class, of Labor, of Equality, not of Corporations. They already bought the other party.

[L0oniX]

155. I'll vote for a REAL DEMOCRAT!

[1StrongBlackMan]

119. I think this is a ToS violation, or at least a call to abandon the franchise; but, ...

I'm of the same mind set as Russell Brand ...it's time for mass revolt because voting only means that you approve of the oligarchy system that doesn't really give a fuck about us.

If you really believe this, discuss what our world looks like the day after this mass, unvoting, revolt.

[randys1]

126. Has this person answered yet? Pretty irresponsible to make that statement and then walk away

[1StrongBlackMan]

128. Nope ...

but that's probably because I'm, no doubt, on his/her ignore list.

[randys1]

130. I can understand ignoring you, you seem to ask uncomfortable questions all the time, who in the heck

needs that

[1StrongBlackMan]

132. LOL ...

It's the 3rd-Way, corporatist, authoritarian, (President) Obama hero-worshipper in me.

[ellenrr]

25. yes.

[truedelphi]

31. And very interestingly - a pro-Keystone Pipeline ad is now on the

Site.

Go DU!

Worshipping the principles of sold out Democrazy since 2014!

[Dr Hobbitstein]

137. The site admins don't chose the ads placed.

The ad server (Google AdWords) does that. If you find an ad offensive (or against our principles), let the admins know, and they will usually block that ad from appearing again. Google AdWords isn't a perfect algorithm.

[truedelphi]

140. Very good to know.

Will amend my message to them regarding the ad.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

141. Screen cap it if you can...

On a PC that would be Shift+PrintScreen, then paste that to a Paint document.
On a mac, it's Command+Shift+3, and it'll put the image on the desktop for you.

Also, if you're using FireFox, install the FireFox extension AdBlockPlus. You won't see an ad again. I don't even get YouTube ads.

[AtomicKitten]

36. it's exhibit A

game over

[markpkessinger]

49. To be fair . . .

. . . I have many times posted things that were critical of this President over the years. Not once have I ever been told that I could not post such things, and I've never had a post hidden here. Yes, there are some here who attempt to label any voices of criticism towards the current administration as being those of "trolls," but many of us regularly manage to post our criticisms. So I think it is fair to say that there has been complicity by some on this site, but that is not a fair statement about the site as a whole.

[merrily]

81. Critical or factually accurate?

I've noted a couple of things about my own allegedly critical posts.

A good number of them were made, not because I started an OP for the purpose of criticizing Obama, but because people were making claims that were simply factually incorrect, like Obama ended the war in Iraq. (This was before we overtly returned to Iraq.)

That is "merely wrong," as one of my former bosses used to say. So, I would reply with facts, sometimes with links, but not always (because I got tired of googling the same stuff again and again); and, somehow stating the actual course of events made me a critic of Obama, rather than a corrector of factually inaccurate information that someone else had put on the board..

But I am not sure that actual censorship is the boundary of being complicit. Maybe the willingness--eagerness-- to make excuse after excuse, true or not, also has something to do with it.

[markpkessinger]

84. Both

I have refuted factual claims as well. But I have also freely expressed criticisms of things the President has done, and have often been critical of some of his priorities. Mind you, when I criticize, I also offer at least arguable support for those criticisms. I make my criticisms when and if I disagree (and that has been fairly frequent with this President, I'm sorry to say). But I also have not hesitated to commend the President on those occasions when I felt he really got it right.

I just don't see any evidence, at least based on my experience here, that tells me that the site admins are quashing honest dissent or disagreement.

[merrily]

85. I wasn't referring to the site admins at all.

[markpkessinger]

86. The post I originally replied to was titled, "Note to DU (especially those who run it)"

See post number 4 above.

[merrily]

153. Thanks. "Especially" is not a synonym for "exclusively;" and the 3 admins are by no means all

there is to DU.

[840high]

55. Yep.

[sabrina 1]

66. Exactly. The FFs warned against party politics and we are seeing now what they

feared.

What is a Dem forum about if it isn't about issues? THAT should be the primary purpose of a Dem forum.

[muriel_volestrangler]

131. If you believe the FFs warned against party politics, then a Dem forum is about fighting the FFs

because they would have been against the Democratic party.

Can we all agree here that the 'Founding Fathers' stood against what this website is about?

[sabrina 1]

144. 'Warned against' meaning they predicted that political parites would

divide the country. Were they wrong? They didn't offer an alternative. They merely warned of the pitfalls of a two party system.

And proved it themselves, when former allies such as Jefferson and Adams, ended up as bitter political enemies until shortly before both of them died (on the same day, ironically July 4th) persuaded them to forget their past disagreements after which they reunited and left a record of their thoughts when both were old men.

They did not say 'don't form political parties', they DID warn of the vulnerabilities of such a system which they themselves participated in.

If this website is about equality, opposed, as it once was, to all of our 'foreign adventures, droning of people in far off lands, which it once was, for the people having a say in their government, against the control of our government by Wall St Bankers, among other things, they would not be against it.

However, DU has changed regarding many of the issues it used to almost unanimously oppose. So, no doubt, if they came here today and wrote the Declaration of Independence, some here would call them 'purists'.

During the Bush years, some on the right DID call them 'purists' because whenever WE produced opinions from them on 'engaging in foreign wars' eg, or wrt to the Bankers they no longer supported them.

It's amazing how opinions appear to change depending on which politicial party is in power. Well not ALL opinions change, but some definitely do. A study ought to be done on that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. who does that?

My grandparents were lifelong loyal FDR Democrats....did THEY "worship the letter D" too?

[Katashi_itto]

114. Lol!

[TheKentuckian]

149. What did they tell you about why they were ardent devotees? That is the story of the answer to your

question.

You assumably knew them, the poster probably didn't and so it is you who should be able to provide insight or if you are asking .someone else's opinion then at least you can provide data for them to format one around.

There are plenty of solid reasons for being a life long FDR type Democrat but that does not mean any of those were the rationales for your grandparents, might be family tradition not so different than religious fostering.
How would an completely outside person have any individual perspective?

[VanillaRhapsody]

162. No I asked YOU....they are both dead....WHAT do YOU mean...

I am a Democrat because they told me that ALL boats rise under Democrats....and it seems to me....the same is true today. They told me Republicans get power by claiming to reduce government...always did...then they proceeded to EXPAND the govt....then when the Democrats start paying for their misdeeds they claim "Tax and Spend Democrats"! So where is this "worship" part YOU claim?

Do you have a viable alternative that polls higher than the Democratic Frontrunner? That polls ahead of ALL Republicans? IF not....talk to the hand about "worship".

[TheKentuckian]

164. Why are you going to ask a stranger about the motivations of your relations?

I don't have to ask you why my Grandfather was an FDR man.

Further, no you didn't ask me anything. Your question was addressed to another poster and I could give a crap about talking to your hand, you can stick it up your ass for all I care.

[VanillaRhapsody]

165. I am not going to ask that.....I am ASKING why YOU think being a loyal Democrat....

Just like my FDR lifelong Democratic voting Grandparents were...equates to "worship of the D" by YOU!

[MrMickeysMom]

79. You inspired me to say this...

If, as a Democrat, I don't want to be a "team worshiper", especially when they take on the traits of the other team, I continue being the kind of Democrat who, like a cat, cannot be herded. Am I not acting by the principles I historically was drawn to as someone who questions, question, questions? I think I am. I think we forget how to be that way when our brainwashing mantra is beat into us day after day, a la MSM.

I'm quite sure this party used to have more stomach for people who stuck their damned foot out to apply the breaks, who reeled a representative acting like a fascist, or someone who outright changed the platform of the party, like WJC. And, I will CONTINUE to be that way, never minding that I take it on the chin for thinking with my brain… not the limbic brain, but THE brain some Democratic presidents have fired up. One was FDR, and the other sadly was murdered in 1963 and was ready to be 10 times better than FDR.

[NewDeal_Dem]

105. A lot of complicity indeed. And it gets more obvious day by day.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

138. Principles like locking up Japanese Americans in

internment camps?

Every President has had their faults. Ignoring the faults of FDR to denigrate current Dems is dishonest.

[wildbilln864]

5. k & fucking r! n/t

[gregcrawford]

6. Take a look at my 'toon at the top of "GOOD READS."

This pretty much sums up the TPP.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. But..but..some of those CEOs give money to the party that wants money out of politics!

Funny how that works.

[progressoid]

9. Strangely, it may be the the Party of No (R) that puts the brakes on TPP

They are calling it "Obamatrade".

[daleanime]

17. Strange bedfellows indeed...

[brentspeak]

134. The GOP is working hard with Obama to ram TPP through

Mitch McConnell has stated that granting fast-track authority on TPP is one of his highest priorities. Republican leadership is brushing aside the few tea party protests on the matter.

[kentuck]

11. How dare you!

Criticize this President!

Now you are in big trouble.

[blue neen]

12. Link, please, to President Obama's quote about TPP rainbows and unicorns.

I haven't been on DU for over a week and have apparently missed something.

[MADem]

27. Really--i'd like to see it, too....and gee, did we miss the SENATE VOTE on the TPP?

They're on the Front Lines as "deciders" -- not the POTUS. They can shoot it down, or they can approve it (or override a veto). It's got to get past the Senate before Obama does anything with it...so why is he being raked over the coals?

[former9thward]

44. No, it has to be agreed to by the White House and then submitted to the Senate for ratification.

The Senate does not do trade negotiations.

[Maedhros]

32. From here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6032129

Under the auspices of the December meeting of the President's Export Council, Obama lambasted opponents of the free-trade agenda he adopted from Presidents Bush and Clinton, arguing that opponents are ignorant of the benefits of trade and admonished them to back off in their effort to oppose passage of TPA and TPP by stating: "Don't fight the last war. You already have."

http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/2014/President-And-CEOs-Meet%20To-Pass-TPA-And-TPP-1217141.html

"Rainbows and unicorns" is editorial sarcasm, but the President is pretty much telling us to sit down, shut up and take it.

[blue neen]

58. RE: Editorial Sarcasm

I don't know much about the TPP, admittedly because I haven't done the research. It is time do so, as it does seem at this time to be a Trojan Horse. Let the reading begin.

With that being said, the title of this OP is, at the very least, sensationalized. If the goal of this OP is to educate those of us who don't know enough or are undecided about TPP, a tactic such as attributing extreme words to the President is a turn-off.

If the goal of the OP is to get a bunch of recs and pats on the back from posters who agree with him or her, well, that seemed to work out pretty well.

Personally, I'd rather see some honest and genuine discussion of the pros and cons of TPP so I can make an educated decision. Disingenuous posts that are made to seem like quotes don't cut it.

Thank you.

[Maedhros]

74. Agreed.

This OP is part of a larger meta-discussion taking place over a number of different OPs about the TPP, so you're stepping into a debate that has already heated up.

[paleotn]

82. heated between....

...those who keep track of such things vs. those who suffer from OCDNW syndrom (Obama Can Do No Wrong), with the bulk of DU'rs somewhere in the middle or not paying attention. Substitute Bill Clinton for Barrack Obama and you've got NAFTA circa 1992 / 1993 all over again. We all know how well that worked out for us.

[Maedhros]

89. I posted elsewhere a theory I'm formulating:

The Republicans have relentlessly, brutally attacked Obama for altogether imaginary things such as his alleged "socialism", secret Muslim agenda, etc. What they have not done is even mildly criticize Obama for the actual horrendous things he has done (expanding military ops in Africa by 217%, indiscriminate killing of civilians with drones, executing citizens without due process, etc.).

The net effect, as calculated, is to force both the Democratic leadership and the rank-and-file to circle the wagons around Obama and defend him from everything based upon blind partisan loyalty. This lets Obama (e.g.) push hard for the TPP - a Republican wet dream - while at the same time using the Democrats' own rank-and-file to defend it.

Look at all the crappy things that Obama has done (chained CPI/SSI reform, bombing Libya, trying to bomb Syria, reinserting troops into Iraq, criminalizing adversarial journalism, cracking down on whistleblowers, shielding torturers from the law, etc.). The same playbook has been used in each case: use Republican obstructionism and nonsensical character attacks to justify defending whatever Obama does, despite how contrary it runs to traditional Democratic ideals.

Brilliant. It's as if the two Parties were really working together to do all these things.

[merrily]

76. What is disingenuous about the OP? Do you doubt that the OP sincerely objects strongly to Obama's

attempts to make the TPP seem more acceptable? Did the OP seem actually to expect ANY reader to believe that Obama literally spoke of unicorns and ponies?

Sorry, but your request for a link that you knew full well did not exist--and you know that exactly because of the OP's hyperbole, seems disingenuous, while the OP seems totally sincere.

[blue neen]

99. Actually, I did not know full well that it did not exist.

Also, you used "the OP's hyperbole" and the "the OP seems totally sincere" in the same explanation.

I don't understand why you feel so threatened by my simple requests. I told the truth----I don't know what's going on with TPP and need to get started on that...and that respectful replies and OP's without "hyperbole" might be more helpful.

So, keep on keeping on and have a good evening.

[merrily]

151. What on earth makes you think I feel threatened by your posts?

And, yes, it's perfectly possible to use hyperbole to make a point and be totally sincere about the point you are using hyperbole to make.

If you did really think Obama actually said something about unicorns and rainbows to try to sell TPP, well, I don't know what to say to you. If you didn't really think Obama used those words in that connection, then, yes, asking for a link to something that proves he did is insincere.

[paleotn]

80. Did you even follow the link provided?

Another taste of TPP as you begin to educate yourself.....

From JP Morgan...."One area worth mentioning is the services sector, which accounts for most of developed countries’ GDP but is currently only a small share of trade. The TPP agreement would potentially expand trade in services and help reduce the cost of activities such as shipping, banking, education and healthcare."

https://www.jpmorgan.com/tss/General/Trans-Pacific_Partnership_Outlook_and_Impact/1394949863683

Oh, that's just wonderful. Driving additional service, R&D and other back office functions to cheaper countries.

Sorry folks, but tariff free, unrestricted "free trade" does not work to the benefit of US citizens in any way shape or form if the same job can be done overseas for a small fraction of US labor costs. Plain and simple. Easy to understand.

[blue neen]

100. Actually, I did.

Thank you for asking.

[paleotn]

77. "opponents are ignorant of the benefits of trade"

....seems Obama is channeling Big Dog on this trade pact.

"NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement." - Bill Clinton statement while signing NAFTA.

How did that one work out for us? Not so good I think.

When are these people, who otherwise have the people's best interests in mind, ever going to understand the basics of cost structure in a semi laissez faire capitalist economy? Unless forced to do otherwise, corporations will always drive production to the country with the lowest costs for import into higher cost countries. And that includes R&D and other back office functions once deemed difficult if not impossible to outsource. From a purely business viewpoint, given the current global economic structure they'd be crazy not to. Such corporate views don't take into account or really give shit about the well being of our populace or any nation's populace for that matter. All they're beholding to is their fiduciary responsibility to maximize investor profits. Either Obama is listing to such people far to much or is beholding to them or both. I fear Obama is cut from the same cloth as Bill and Hillary Clinton in this respect.

[merrily]

73. Hyperbole is both an acceptable device in writing and widely-recognized by readers.

It's over the top quality is precisely why no one is intended to take it literally, nor should.

[blue neen]

103. That's true.

It's over the top quality could also lead people to not take a subject seriously or to ask for clarification.

[merrily]

150. Taking a subject seriously or asking for clarification are both different from asking for a link,

as though it were a direct quote, rather than clearly hyperbole. I've been seeing that lately around DU for a number of things that are not direct quotes.

[sabrina 1]

143. I believe he stated that those who oppose this disaster are 'ignorant' of

how much good it is going to do.

Well, of course if it wasn't 'secret' they wouldn't be.

I guess he wants us to trust him to provide all this 'good' we don't know about.

I would suggest that they simply release the whole thing, that will eliminate any ignorance on the part of the people, and rather than just 'trusting' him, we can see all this good stuff for ourselves.

Why do you think they are so afraid to simply release it?

[L0oniX]

156. I'd love to find out what the corporations want from TPP.

[pa28]

13. My new year prediction is . . . the administration's pile of TPP horse manure will grow ever larger.

And then . . . we'll be told to dig harder into the pile because there must be a pony somewhere inside!

[MisterP]

14. why would he? why would the party deviate from its current path?

the 99% of us aren't going to give it more money than the superrich
we're not going to not vote for them
we're not going to primary them (and even if it pulls ahead they'll just torpedo it, as they've done over and over)
we're not going to even replace Wasserman who completely punted in November: in fact if you bring it up they'll say we're preventing Dems from getting elected
we don't even mach for things that 70-90% of the country supports, since marches only last a few hours

[aspirant]

24. We must invest wisely

Not a penny to DNC,DSCC,DCCC or corporate Pacs

What results did we get from the progressive/populist groups phone banking in 2014? You have to get face to face contact to motivate.

Which progressive/populist groups with their mega-millions are funding local activists and community organizers?

[hughee99]

127. Will make them more likely to listen

Or make them easier for the wealthy to buy?

[aspirant]

135. When they reveal their true colors

we can move beyond color-blindness.

[daleanime]

15. K&R....

[WillyT]

16. K & R !!!

[Katashi_itto]

18. Vote Hillary! UNDER EITHER PARTY WE GET A 1ST WORLD VERSION OF SOMALIA

BUT AT LEAST WHEN WE VOTE FOR HILLARY WE CAN FEEL GOOD WE VOTED FOR A DEMOCRAT!

GO HILLARY!

[hedda_foil]

19. And... the jury is back.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Fri Jan 2, 2015, 04:14 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Dear President Obama, Please shut the f' up about TPP rainbows and unicorns...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026032579

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Telling the President of the United States to "shut the fuck up" is not appropriate on this board, even if the topic does make people emotional.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 2, 2015, 04:22 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I couldn't disagree with the alerter more.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: In condemning the TPP, no language is too strong for me. The TPP is a very dangerous threat to the United States. No more trade agreements until we Americans have a strategy that will allow us to compete. That means decent investment in education and training for our workers, a mandatory voice for our workers in the management of the companies they work for, fair pay, safe working conditions and a social safety net that insures that no American goes hungry or is homeless. We also need to reform our police an intelligence agencies to conform with the spirit of our Constitution before we enter into trade agreements, and we need a national strategy about taxing corporations that unifies the country and does not divide us into 50 competing states.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

0-7 to leave it has a nice ring to it.

[L0oniX]

22. A pathetic alert. They are getting desperate to shut out the truth.

[Skittles]

97. REALLY desperate

they're pathetic beyond belief now

[BrotherIvan]

26. I think "shut the fuck up" *is* inappropriate and disrespectful

That said, I think Democrats need to take a very firm stand against the TPP. It's too important to let it slide to save the President's face. He has chosen his path: if Obama is willing to fight his own party, well then...let's fight.

[Maedhros]

33. Obama is, essentially, telling US to "sit down and shut the fuck up."

Under the auspices of the December meeting of the President's Export Council, Obama lambasted opponents of the free-trade agenda he adopted from Presidents Bush and Clinton, arguing that opponents are ignorant of the benefits of trade and admonished them to back off in their effort to oppose passage of TPA and TPP by stating: "Don't fight the last war. You already have."

http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/2014/President-And-CEOs-Meet%20To-Pass-TPA-And-TPP-1217141.html

What's good for the goose...

[BrotherIvan]

34. I don't disagree that the President and Rahm have all told liberals to STFU

But, I guess I pause because it is a Republican thing to do and not strictly necessary. I think the truth is sufficient to fight the TPP. There are very powerful forces at work, including all corps and Wall Street, all of whom I spit on and tell them to go fuck themselves. I don't know, it's too big of a fight to worry about semantics, so to each his own.

[Maedhros]

50. If it were my OP, I would have chosen other words simply to avoid the semantic argument altogether.

But I suppose I don't object to the tone of the OP. The TPP is so amazingly anti-Democratic that strong language is justified in criticizing it.

[BrotherIvan]

53. Yes, especially on this board, the language will be discussed, not the policy

I say fuck the TPP to the highest hills. I think the President is dead wrong to back it. I hope someone somewhere can stop it. Because if you have to defy your own party and side with the Republicans--BEFORE THEY EVEN ASKED YOU TO--then you have quite a lot of criticism coming. It's shameful to sell out all those who believed in you and worked for you and voted for you and defended you to side with the the guys who did nothing but give you the finger just so your masters can get rich. Shameful. On that we agree.

[randys1]

54. TPP is wrong, disrespect of Obama is not new, here or anywhere. I think TPP is his payback

to certain people who helped him get where he is.

I am a fan of Obama in many ways, but he is a product of a system that is rotten to the core.

I can like him and his family and many things he has done and criticize him when necessary, like now.


TPP is very very very wrong, it is a bummer that he feels he owes them this much...gives you an idea of what would happen to Liz or Bernie if they were to make the bargain to be president.

[BrotherIvan]

56. Agreed

But I don't think Sanders (100% sure) or Warren (75% sure) would make that deal. That's why people are supporting them. It's publicly funded elections that are the key. I'm still pissed that Obama walked away from that in 2008; and yes, it shows he owes too many favors that we are and will pay for.

[randys1]

60. For them to NOT make the deal, they have to be elected President, right?

Unless we unleash a populist movement like nothing before seen, I dont think even Bernie or Liz can get elected without making these type of promises.

Maybe they wouldnt expect Bernie or Liz to make this promise given their agendas being so pro average person economically speaking, but compromise would occur somewhere

[BrotherIvan]

62. I don't know the answer

Even with publicly funded elections, we still have the fucked up media who would try to Dean Scream them. Some people on DU are already making fun of Sanders. It will be a fight, but what else is there to do?

[randys1]

64. Great you mention that, I remember hearing him say on "hardball" special edition college

show saying he would break up the media moguls, and that was when the hit went out on him

[paleotn]

83. Well said! (nt)

[840high]

57. It's appropriate.

[BrotherIvan]

61. I'm not saying the post should be hidden and I do think it's important to fight the TPP

But I guess my mother would be disappointed in me to say that to the President. We got him to back down on a few things like Syria and lucked out on Keystone, so I'm gonna scream and shout about it until it's gone.

[L0oniX]

157. He got our vote ...and that's enough respect.

[Curmudgeoness]

39. I am grateful to this jury.

This post is appropriate based on the facts we have at this time. I love that it was a shutout.

[rhett o rick]

52. I thank this jury also. I personally don't think the language is necessary but I also

think that the lock and hide squad needs a time-out. This is a "politically liberal" message board yet some here are determined to stifle discussions that don't agree with their world view.

I notice that those that apparently support the TPP are not willing to present their arguments.

[840high]

59. Excellent.

[ellenrr]

112. yes, good jury decision, but what an asshole move to alert in the first place,

who did it insult?

One of the few freedoms we have left is the freedom to criticize the president and other politicians.

[99th_Monkey]

28. Dear President Obama: if the TPP is so wonderful why the dark cloak of secrecy?

This one thing should repulse anyone who calls themselves a "Democrat" ... What could
be less democratic than an international agreement binding on the USA, an agreement
crafted in complete secrecy, save for a handful of Wall St. CEOs.

And then even after it's drafted, no one gets to know what's really in the document,
but our democratically elected Congress-peeps are supposed to vote on it anyway.

Fuck that. Fuck the TPP. Fuck Wall St.

Despite the wide-ranging effects on the global population, the TPP is currently being negotiated in total secrecy by 12 countries. Few people, even within the negotiating countries’ governments, have access to the full text of the draft agreement and the public, who it will affect most, none at all. Large corporations, however, are able to see portions of the text, generating a powerful lobby to effect changes on behalf of these groups and bringing developing country members reduced force, while the public at large gets no say.

Julian Assange, WikiLeaks’ Editor-in-Chief, said:

The selective secrecy surrounding the TPP negotiations, which has let in a few cashed-up megacorps but excluded everyone else, reveals a telling fear of public scrutiny. By publishing this text we allow the public to engage in issues that will have such a fundamental impact on their lives.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/updated-secret-trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-tpp-freedom-of-information-civil-liberties-and-access-to-medicines-at-stake/5408730

[L0oniX]

158. Because the oligarchy runs the show.

[Jester Messiah]

29. Looks like the megacorps are gonna get their way.

I'll start moving my assets into nuyen. "Watch your back, shoot straight, conserve ammo, and never, ever, cut a deal with a dragon."

[SomethingFishy]

38. Grayson is out talking about this provision:

The feature of TPP which has outraged the most men and women, one of the few provisions which has become known – through “leaks” by Wikileaks and other avenues, is given the legal term “Investor-State-Dispute-Settlement”. This is how every dispute will become resolved among the signatory nations and their people. The angering aspect is that corporate tribunals – not traditional, neutral, government legal institutions – are given the power to make all the legal determinations.

A fellow in the following video gives an example of how this controversial feature of the TPP works. The people of Germany have decided to phase out nuclear power in their country, and a corporation whose business is nuclear energy has sued the German government for over $2 billion dollars for “future lost profits”. He notes there are 500 similar cases in litigation now. If Vietnam signs on to TPP, the trade bill passes, and down the road the people of Vietnam decide to raise their national minimum wage, corporations will be able to sue the Vietnamese government for “lost profits” as a result of wage increases.

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/alan-grayson-explains-why-we-need-stop

[oldlib2]

41. Excuse my ignorance

I don't know what TPP is? I will not tell President Obama to shut up, and the reason for his vote is a need to compromise towards a greater interest. Obama is for all people, including Republicans, at this time and he may have to give something to achieve a greater goal.

[djean111]

47. There is really no excuse for your ignorance about the TPP, if you are going to post about it,

but here is a place to start learning:
http://www.exposethetpp.org/

In addition, the list in the OP should make a nice start for you, too.

The greater interest for his compromise is to further enrich the corporations, Wall Street, banks, the 1%.

What, exactly, is this "greater goal"?

[oldlib2]

78. I now know what TPP means.

From what I gather they, including the USA, are negotiating the issue. It is critical that we Democrats exclude items that don't meet our interests and to include terms that do. This is through negotiation, and if the final TPP is not in our best interest, it should be defeated.

[Tommymac]

75. Educate Yourself before you post something. This is not a faith based message board.

NAFTA on Steroids The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which would grant enormous new powers to corporations, is a massive assault on democracy. By Lori Wallach The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/article/168627/nafta-steroids

Ten Reasons Why the TPP Must Be Defeated by Bernie Sanders
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/12/31/ten-reasons-why-tpp-must-be-defeated

Alan Grayson Explains Why We Need To Stop The Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement
By Susie Madrak January 2, 2015
http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/alan-grayson-explains-why-we-need-stop

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Job Loss, Lower Wages and Higher Drug Prices
http://www.citizen.org/TPP

Trans-Pacific Partnership
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) WH Official Site
http://www.ustr.gov/tpp

Press release: Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - Environment Chapter
https://wikileaks.org/tpp-enviro/pressrelease.html

Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) - IP Chapter
https://wikileaks.org/tpp/

[L0oniX]

88. "faith based message board" LMFAO

[48lowes]

139. Dear President Obama, Please shut the f' up about TPP rainbows and unicorns...

Tommymac
Thanks for the links. We need to all get together on this TPP, and anything else we can find common ground. There really is common ground for the 99% be they the tea party, dems, republicians. We will loose everything we continue split up into little groups and everyone has a separate agenda.
Can you think of any common ground that would carry the majority of the public?

healthcare

citizens united- get the money outta politics

corporations are not people _ move to amend

way I see it we to deal with the (TPP) Trans Pacific partnership , (TISA) The Trade in Services Agreement, (TTIP) Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. Obama and the Republicans have already found common ground on the TPP. Please study up to the TPP, start calling you representatives. The time is now as soon as the new congress get to session.

[jtuck004]

90. Compromise is how 10 million people moved into poverty during this administration.

Compromise is how we wound up making bank$ters rich on the backs of working people after those bastards foreclosed on 7 million families.

More? Not enough lives destroyed yet? You need more hungry and crying children? Tens of thousands of jobs will leave this country with that bill. Maybe that will give you a warm feeling.

The only people that seem to be for this are millionaires of any party, their lap dogs, and the government of Vietnam, of course. They stand to benefit greatly from our loss in this.

[drynberg]

116. INFORM YOURSELF ABOUT THE TERRIBLE TPP, NO EXCUSES. ACT.

[Enthusiast]

45. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

[stonecutter357]

48. link to the rainbows and unicorns

Are you stfu

[Thespian2]

51. K & R

Compared to the damage about to be done by the TPP, NAFTA is nada. Obama is pushing with all his might to get the worst "trade" deal ever shoved through Congress. Why would anyone try to deny what he is doing?

Keystone XL next?

[randys1]

68. Shut the what up? I am not familiar with your posts, if you show respect to Obama

in some cases and you are just angry here, understandably, then fine.

I dont have the time to look and see if you have shown respect to him in the past or not, have you?

You dont have to answer, just curious.

I am sure he has been told to shut the fuck up before

[fbc]

69. Democrats are hostile to labor because we don't hold them accountable.

Vote Hillary I guess...

[SidDithers]

71. "You can smell it from here to Vietnam"...

All I can smell is the scent o' pine.

Sid

[blkmusclmachine]

87. TPP is a job killing, wealth sucking device to move wages/benefits from American workers into the

greedy pockets of Wall Street CEOs.


Like Obama doesn't know, right?!?!

Obama does what his puppet-masters demand. They yank his strings and he dances their little jig..

[treestar]

92. Freedom of speech and all that

Why should he shut up? He gets to express his opinion the same as you do.

[RiverLover]

93. Kick....for all the great links & info above on this thread. here's a few more~

Obama Ready To Defy Base In Order To Advance Trans-Pacific Partnership
http://www.mintpressnews.com/obama-ready-defy-base-order-advance-trans-pacific-partnership/199643/

Obama Ran Twice on Anti-NAFTA Free Trade; He was Lying to Us. Big TPP Push.
https://ringoffireradio.com/2014/12/obama-ran-twice-on-anti-nafta-free-trade-he-was-lying-to-us-big-tpp-push/

NAFTA, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Clinton Global Initiative
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-swenson/nafta-the-transpacific-clinton_b_5523327.html

President Obama, Wall Street Financiers, Corporate CEOs And Members Of Congress Meet Together To Plan Strategy To Sell And Pass Free-Trade Agreements
http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/2014/President-And-CEOs-Meet%20To-Pass-TPA-And-TPP-1217141.html

Senator Elizabeth Warren fights the White House over the Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership #TPP #TPPA
https://medium.com/@DrRimmer/senator-elizabeth-warren-fights-the-white-house-over-the-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp-3cd7bb0a1c91

[whereisjustice]

94. +1, thanks for these

[Skittles]

96. I APPROVE OF THIS MESSAGE

YES INDEED

[RiverLover]

98. Over $400 mill has already been paid out to corps in a series of investor-state FTA cases

Among the most dangerous but least known parts of today's "trade" agreements are extraordinary new rights and privileges granted to foreign corporations and investors that formally prioritize corporate rights over the right of governments to regulate and the sovereign right of nations to govern their own affairs. These terms empower individual foreign corporations to skirt domestic courts and directly challenge any policy or action of a sovereign government before World Bank and UN tribunals.

Comprised of three private attorneys, the extrajudicial tribunals are authorized to order unlimited sums of taxpayer compensation for health, environmental, financial and other public interest policies seen as undermining the corporations' "expected future profits." There is no outside appeal. Many of these attorneys rotate between acting as tribunal "judges" and as the lawyers launching cases against the government on behalf of the corporations. Under this system, foreign corporations are provided greater rights than domestic firms.

This extreme "investor-state" system already has been included in a series of U.S. "trade" deals, forcing taxpayers to hand more than $400 million to corporations for toxics bans, land-use rules, regulatory permits, water and timber policies and more. Under a similar pact, a tribunal recently ordered payment of more than $2 billion to a multinational oil firm. Just under U.S. "trade" deals, more than $14 billion remains pending in corporate claims against medicine patent policies, pollution cleanup requirements, climate and energy laws, and other public interest policies. Continue reading...

http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=5329

FYI,

Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) is an instrument of public international law, that grants an investor the right to use dispute settlement proceedings against a foreign government.

...Notably, only foreign investors can sue states under investment treaties, and only states can be held liable to pay damages for breach of the treaty. States have no corresponding right to bring an original claim against a foreign investor. Thus, a decision in favour of the State means that the state has not been ordered to pay compensation, not that it has received any compensation from the investor. A state cannot "win" in ISDS in the manner of a foreign investor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investor-state_dispute_settlement

Coming to a town near you via TPP?

Check this map to see what corps can sue you, your state or city govt~

. Click here for a full list of companies based in TPP countries that operate in the United States, sorted by congressional district.
= Corporation based in Australia = Corporation based in Vietnam
= Corporation based in Canada = Corporation based in Singapore
= Corporation based in Japan = Corporation based in Mexico
= Corporation based in Malaysia = Corporation based in New Zealand
= Corporation based in Peru
= Corporation based in Brunei
= Corporation based in Chile

Public Citizen, the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and other organizations have called for a different trade agreement model that protects the environment, workers’ rights, and the public interest. This new model necessitates eliminating or dramatically scaling down the “investor-state enforcement” provisions of trade agreements which corporations can use to sue governments. Click here for a report outlining this vision.

http://citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=4083

What does Liz think?

...Warren, Baldwin and Markey are particularly concerned with a process called "investor-state dispute settlement," which grants foreign corporations the political power to challenge the laws and regulations of a government before an international tribunal. This nongovernmental court has the power to levy trade sanctions against offending nations. The investor-state dispute settlement regimen differs from those used in World Trade Organization treaties, which allow only sovereign governments to bring trade challenges.

"We believe that the TPP should not include an investor-state dispute settlement process," the letter reads, warning that doing so "would expose a broad array of critical American financial regulations to challenge by many additional foreign companies."

Investor-state challenges were rare before the new millennium, but have become increasingly popular tools for corporations to use when challenging regulations they object to. Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, for instance, companies including Exxon Mobil, Dow Chemical and Eli Lilly have attempted to overrule Canadian regulations on offshore oil drilling, fracking, pesticides, drug patents and other issues.

Unrest over investor-state powers is not exclusively a progressive phenomenon. Free-trade advocate Daniel J. Ikenson of the Cato Institute has argued against the practice, on the grounds that it gives foreign firms an unfair advantage over domestic companies....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/18/elizabeth-warren-trade-deal_n_6350312.html

[NewDeal_Dem]

102. And so many of the good liberals here are on board with the cardboard shack too.

Thank you for your post. The democratic party is increasingly hostile to labor, and so is DU.

[TheNutcracker]

106. Gee, I gave it a rec and it stayed at 149. Whis is that?

[another_liberal]

115. It will also render powerless every evironmental protection regulation . . .

All of them.

[raouldukelives]

121. Sadly we are far, very far from mainstream Democrats here.

There are many who do support TPP. Either through vocal support or by having money in Wall St. They both say the same thing. More of the same and worse please. No regulations, no looking to the future, no creating a better world for our children and wildlife. Kill it all for money now. Most of my fellow dems seem to be on board. I wish we could reach them. Even when you do, they either slink away or softly agree and then head back to investing in Potterville.
We are where they want us to be. Maligned, neglected and near dead. It is no fun to be reminded of the death they deal when they are muscling for a good spot at the trough.

[RiverLover]

122. Like labor unions? 150 Democratic house members last year? All the people ag NAFTA?

The people pushing it are in the minority. They just have more access to corporate media.

[raouldukelives]

147. While the people pushing it may be in the minority. The ones funding the pushers exist on both sides

Until people who claim to be on the side of democracy start actually living like they do, nothing will change.

A person who claims to care about democracy being invested in Wall St is like a PETA member making money off dog fights to fund efforts at protecting dogs. It is a losing battle.

[raindaddy]

124. 100% Agreed!

How long do the poor and middle class continue to support a party that no longer supports them?

[fredamae]

129. As long as they believe

Voting for "democrats" is the Same as voting for Democrats!

[RiverLover]

125. Here's what Obama promised~

Here’s what Obama promised:

Shutting down Gitmo;
Ending warrantless wiretapping;
Ending foreign wars;
An end to trickle down economics;
Greater regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector;
A public option for health care;
Protecting social security, Medicaid and Medicare;
Serious action on climate change;
Greater equality in opportunity and more broadly shared prosperity …

Here’s what we got: An administration that set up Goldman Sachs south in the Treasury, doubled down on domestic spying; expanded a drone policy that creates between 40 to 60 new terrorists for every one it kills; health care reform that is better than the status quo, but which rewards corporate insurers as much or more than it does citizens; international trade agreements that favor corporate interests, while eviscerating domestic wages, scuttling environmental performance, and crippling US industrial infrastructure. It’s so bad, they’re trying to negotiate it in secret …

The list goes on and on, and so do the betrayals.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/04/17/hillary-clinton-and-future-failure-progressive-hope-and-change

This has hurt our party. TPP will be the final blow.

[Jakes Progress]

133. When I was campaigning for Obama in '08

I sat in many a living room talking (mostly with teachers) the things that Obama was going to do - the things he promised. The one I liked most, the one I emphasized the most during the bush/cheney secret years was Obama's promise for a transparent government. Over and over he condemned the administration for doing things in hiding.

Then we got another 8 years of secret meetings and hidden programs. To me the first big hit was the realization that his landmark program, the ACA, was begun with secret meeting with big Pharma.

I have to cringe with embarrassment now recalling the things I said to potential voters in '08. I am ashamed of my naivety and my participation is such lies. Obama made a liar out of so many of us who believed him.

[RiverLover]

136. We share the same story, Jakes Progress

He pulled the best punk in history. I never would have believed it, had I had a time machine. So many hopes dashed. That's too kind of a word, obliterated is more fitting. Left many many of us feeling like fools. We know what to look for now though.

^^^Such an amazing, historic moment. I cried, even more so than when Al Gore lost the election/had it stolen. But this time, it was tears of happiness & wonder & hope.

Pfft...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

159. Whatchu got against unicorns?

[ann---]

160. What is TPP?

[ramprat63]

161. CEO's get pockets lined here too

It's not just the TPP and NAFTA killing good paying jobs. Uniteds CEO outright lied to the Senate in the hearing for the UA/Continental merger in 2010. http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4458724/tells-congress-higher-management-job-will-cut-front-line since then, 16 stations have been outsourced and 100's have lost their jobs. They plan on outsourcing 24 more this year. they take away the buying power and use the Walmart strategy. Pay them below poverty level and let the government pay for their benefits. Stop it now!
http://www.thune.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

[hughee99]

163. Jeez, all I wanted was a pony, they got unicorns now?

N/t