If The President Supports The TPP... I Should Support The TPP...

[WillyT]

NO !!!

28 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	NO !!!
	27 (96%)
	YES !!
	1 (4%)
	Obligatory Other !
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NYC_SKP]

1. I refuse to live without TP, I'm drawing the line RIGHT THERE.

Give me TP or give me death!

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. what a charmin' statement!

[NYC_SKP]

4. It's quilted. If it ain't quilted I'M OUT OF HERE!

You nut, you!

[NRaleighLiberal]

6. Great SCOTT - you aren't serious?

[Takket]

5. You're on a roll!

[mindwalker_i]

10. Not to be cornfused with a TPS report

Those things are the shit.

[rhett o rick]

47. Are you saying you support 2/3rds of the TPP? Well that's crappy.

[Rex]

57. But this is TPP TTP PTT PT er better than toilet paper!

It cleans so well, astronauts can see your butt glowing from space! COME ON...can be seen from SPACE! What more do you want!? Okay fine, I will also throw in my last sham-wow!TM, but I get to keep the Ron-co salad shooter, it was a gift!

[hrmjustin]

2. I don't support TPP.

[sheshe2]

7. ...

[840high]

8. Hell no.

[beerandjesus]

9. No point in this poll....

The "If Obama's for it, I'm for it" crowd never allows for the possibility that they might be led astray.

So they drown out criticism of TPP with cries of "ODS! ODS! RAND PAUL! RAND PAUL!", and decline to vote in your poll.

[nationalize the fed]

14. Ironically Rand Paul supports fast track approval of the TPP

Rand Paul to Obama: "Prioritize" Passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership

Politics, the saying goes, makes strange bedfellows. In presidential politics, the cozy compromises with the unconstitutional seem even more unsettling.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a man whose personal popularity and political fortunes have increased in direct proportion to his spreading of his libertarian-leaning ideals, has now publicly embraced the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an unprecedented sovereignty surrender masquerading as a multi-national trade pact.

Paul’s speech coincided with the TPP ministerial meeting conducted October 19-24 in Sydney, Australia.

Speaking at the Center for the National Interest dinner in New York City on October 23, Senator Paul said:...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/19439-rand-paul-to-obama-prioritize-passage-of-trans-pacific-partnership

[pampango]

25. And Michele Bachmann and Louie Gohmert oppose it.

The Republican opposition to the TPP includes Tea Partiers Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and over 20 others. According to Arthur Stamoulis, executive director of the Citizens Trade Campaign which is leading opposition to the TPP, the stance of these Republicans goes beyond their seemingly-reflexive opposition to any Obama initiative.

While a number of Tea Party Republicans voted in favor of the three Obama-promoted free-trade agreements in 2011, they are viewing the TPP differently because of its magnitude and due to pressure from the Republican base. “Because of its massive size, the TPP has captured a lot more attention from the Right than the Korea pact ever did,” Stamoulis says. “With Republicans’ base much more engaged on the TPP—the Tea Party Nation and others opposing it —I expect to see a lot more Republican opposition this time around, and indeed, we already are seeing that.” The visceral dislike of Obama by many on the Right may add fuel to rightist opposition to the TPP and the fast-track procedure, Stamoulis concedes, but he points out that opposition to corporate-style globalization has been mounting among Republican voters for some time. “Polls showed that Republican voters’ opposition to free-trade agreements existed back during the Bush administration as well,” he notes.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/22547-obamas-pacific-deal-would-deepen-income-divide

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. Clearly he knows on which side his bread is buttered.

[djean111]

30. Well, sure he does - the TPP and other agreements like it will speed up his goal

of no regulations. Interesting, the people who evidently agree with him.
More expensive drugs, less generics? Interesting who has no problem with that, too.

[Jeff Rosenzweig]

11. Said no one

ever.

[Number23]

13. There's still recs to be counted in the DU DAMN YOU OBAMAAAA!!!1 allegedly anti-TPP parade

Half of GD has suddenly sprung into action to take part and the outrage isn't going to make itself, you know!

[Jeff Rosenzweig]

15. True.

Apparently it's more edifying to wallow in tail-chasing, navel-gazing speculation than to get one's beautiful mind dirty with all that icky empirical evidence of institutionalized racism and police violence and militarization stuff.

[Number23]

16. Whooo boy, you fucking NAILED. IT.

And damn some of these folks could not be more obvious. Which makes all of the braying that much more fake and phony as hell.

[Jeff Rosenzweig]

17. Actually, some of your comments today opened my eyes to it.

It's all been sadly educational.

[beerandjesus]

39. 17,000 posts, and you haven't seen anything about police militarization?

And you're calling US phony? Maybe you should read before you type!

[Number23]

56. I'm sorry, is police militarization and police brutality the same thing?

If you're white, I guess they are!

Here's a friendly hint: black folks have been brutalized by police LONG before the militarization of police forces began. Cops could have muskets and there would still be police brutality in minority neighborhoods. So, instead of telling me to read maybe you should do the same with some history books. From the sound of your post, ANY book would be a good place to start.

[beerandjesus]

59. Completely irrelevant response. Nice hysteria, though.

You and your pal are pretending that here on DU, we actual liberals are so upset about TPP that we're ignoring institutionalized racism. A cursory glance at DU shows this to be quite obviously false.

You can sling around sanctimonious accusations if they make you feel good, but (a) it's a piss-poor way to try and show us why TPP is the great thing you apparently think it is, and (b) your braying is pretty far removed from reality--within the confines of DU, if not the world at large. (If we were talking about the world at large, not economic populists on DU, you'd actually have a very strong point.)

[Number23]

60. "we actual liberals" does it hurt to pat yourself on the back so hard??

Too bad it's not about anything important.

And I will stand by everything that I've said and written. If you have a problem with what I (and a SHIT LOAD of other posters here including a majority of posters of color) have seen then it's a very good thing that I don't know you from a can of beans and TRULY could not give less than a damn what you think.

[beerandjesus]

61. Funny, we get called the "TeaLeft"... but you're happy to stand by naked falsehoods!

How bout giving us one good reason to support TPP? No one seems to be able to do that, least of all you.

And by the way, If I were patting myself on the back as hard as you are, the palm of my hand would have come right through my chest by now!

[Number23]

63. You need to stay focused

Your post is so incoherent and pointless I don't even know what you're TRYING to say. I was talking about police brutality and you somehow pivot into trying to force me to state my support for the TPP. Why the hell are you asking me to "give a reason" for supporting the TPP? Where/when the hell have I ever supported the TPP?

What I and a bunch of other people have noted is that DU was awash in discussions about police brutality and racism. Alot of the folks that are now SCREAMING about the TPP were as silent as a fart in church when these threads were happening but are now hopping around like bunny rabbits on crack now that Obama-bashing season is back in action in GD.

And the TPP is only the latest megaphone used to scream at this president. A few months ago, people were screaming that the Keystone Pipeline was IT -- really and truly IT -- in terms of how betrayed they were by this president. Now that that didn't happen, it's back to screaming about TPP although nothing has happened on it in weeks. It's fake, it's phony and the timing of it is beyond interesting to me and a bunch of other people here.

Now, after reading your posts, I'm not even the tiniest bit surprised that much of this may have flown over your head. But it's here nonetheless.

[beerandjesus]

64. Does it really feel that good to just pretend everyone else is racist?

Cuz quite honestly, I can't imagine it does, although you seem to be getting a lot of mileage out of it.

In any case, I've got no time for that kind of horseshit. That's the sort of thing that gives all Democrats a bad name.

Have a nice life.

[Number23]

66. Sweet Jesus. You could absolutely NOT have proven my initial

post and point better. That "pretend everyone is a racist" crap (as if that is even close to what I've said) wouldn't have sounded any better coming from the revolting lips of Rush or Mike Savage himself. Two other individuals who are far better at pretending that someone is calling them racist rather than take three seconds of self-reflection or even easier, actually listen to what is being said to them.

And I thought that privileged cluelessness from people who love to pat themselves on the back about how "liberal" they are while ignoring the vast majority of the problems that affect their allies was the kind of thing that gives Democrats a bad name. And you came along and not only corroborated my opinion beyond all shadow of doubt, but then took upon yourself to actually act out EXACTLY the kind of behavior I was referring to.

So, seriously -- thank you. Didn't break a nail or into a sweat digging that hole. You did it all yourself and then graciously jumped in without even having to be asked.

[Feral Child]

32. He's got 80 posts.

How about we let him test the water before tossing him to the sharks?

I've got 2000 posts and haven't posted any OP yet, even on the very important topic this guy is supporting, which I feel is one of our most important issues.

[QC]

42. He's been here for over twelve years.

Hit the link in the sig line.

He is allowed to have (at least) two DU accounts, for some reason, despite the clear and longstanding DU policy against multiple logons.

[Feral Child]

45. Understood.

Retracted.

[Number23]

58. It is an important topic, FC. And I've been loving your posts on the issue

And aside from assuming that Jeff was new to DU, you are spot on in your post.

[Feral Child]

67. Thanks, #23.

Your comment is most appreciated, sincerely.

[Jim Lane]

34. Are you seriously suggesting that opposition to TPP facilitates institutional racism, etc.?

First, you imply that anyone writing negatively about TPP (presumably including Bernie Sanders, the AFL-CIO, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Sierra Club, among others) is engaging in "tail-chasing, navel-gazing speculation". Presumably you refer to the line of argument that wants to exclude any criticism of TPP until the final agreement is made public. It's not just speculation, however, when a draft is leaked -- when the draft is the product of years of negotiation, it's unlikely that the final agreement will be hugely different.

Second, and more serious, is your statement that anyone writing negatively about TPP is motivated by a desire to avoid discussing "institutionalized racism and police violence and militarization stuff." That's ridiculous. Are the people discussing those topics thereby trying to avoid the subjects of reproductive freedom or voter suppression or LGBT rights or etc. etc. etc.? People can address different issues. I've posted more about TPP because I know more about it than I do about institutionalized racism, but I'm glad there are DUers who post more about racism so that I can learn from them.

[RiverLover]

37. +1....along with most Democrats in congress.

Jim Lane, thanks for making a very good point here. There's a reason most Democrats are ag the TPP and it doesn't have anything to do with avoiding institutionalized racism. (duh)

"People can address different issues"<<<this should be obvious to the thinking person.

Obama hopes to enlist GOP in push for trade pact, despite Democratic resistance
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-hopes-to-enlist-gop-in-push-for-trade-pact-despite-democratic-resistance/2014/12/26/81236a34-8600-11e4-b9b7-b8632ae73d25_story.html?hpid=z1

[beerandjesus]

36. What a perverse--and unfounded--accusation against other DUers

If you look around on here a bit, you'll find that the economic populists are quite unhappy about the institutionalized racism, police violence, and militarization stuff for which you find so much empirical evidence. In fact, Obama has taken a fair bit of heat for not prosecuting the biggest militarizers of the last administration, and believe me, it hasn't been from the BOG. So on top of being heinously insulting, you're shitting where you eat.

Fortunately, we're quite capable of having opinions on more than one topic at a time. Hopefully, you're intelligent enough to likewise do so--and not have to choose which single issue you're going to care about--and will come around to our, in fact, quite well considered and articulated position.

I'm trying really hard to be nice, but yours is seriously one of the most offensive posts I've ever seen on here.

[rhett o rick]

48. Funny thing is those among us that favor the TPP never want to debate the issue.

I wonder why?

[Douglas Carpenter]

12. Oh come one! Name one single poster here who defends President Obama when he goes against their core

principles!

[Union Scribe]

19. I'm not convinced they have core principles. nt

[Recursion]

20. That would be a stupid reason to support the TPP

There are less stupid reasons to, and non-stupid reasons to oppose it. I remain in "meh" land, personally.

[Union Scribe]

27. For being "meh" on it

you certainly spend a lot of time opposing its opponents.

[Recursion]

28. Not really, I just find the hair-on-fire stuff tiresome, and call it out

In particular, the majority of people writing about it on DU seem to think it involves China. It's just kind of embarrassing.

[OrwellwasRight]

44. As I recall you like that

"hair on fire" insult. Yet I have still to find out what you mean by that, other than "appropriately disturbed that the TPP is the largest trade agreement -- outside the WTO, which is still "last generation" in trade terms -- and will permanenetly lock in neoliberal economics policies and we'd rather be able to continue to have a chance to turn the country's policies around and back toward New Deal progressivism."

The TPP does not involve China. But it is also the first preferential trade agreement that is specifically designed to be "open architecture" so that China and others can join in the future. And even if China does not join, it is aimed at China:

Former USTR Ron Kirk said he would "love nothing more" than for China to join the TPP: http://www.salon.com/2012/10/23/everything_you_wanted_to_know_about_the_trans_pacific_partnership/

The President has also talked about the TPP is designed to reign in China's behavior, to wit: "One of the ancillary benefits of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is to create high standards in the region that then China has to adapt to, as opposed to a race to the bottom where there’s no IP protection, for example, and China is really setting the terms for how trade and investment should operate."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/12/03/remarks-president-business-roundtable

USTR Froman also indicating the same thing, that the TPP will force China to adopt US standards (which are good for US corporations, but not necessarily good for workers anywhere): http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/11/us-to-china-play-by-our-economic-rules/281433/

So anyone who is not talking about China when talking about the TPP doesn't get it.

But, yeah, go ahead and dismiss everything by saying my hair is on fire.

[Marr]

62. And pushing the memes of such policies' backers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6034782

[pampango]

22. If we disagree one of us must be motivated by blind support for or opposition to Obama?

One of the best things about DU is that we get to accuse those we disagree with of being idiotic supporters/opponents of a politician. Anyone whom we disagree with is not just wrong (by definition since we are always right) but a blind minion of a greater power who cannot think for his or her self.

[joshcryer]

26. You are braver than I.

And a valued contributor to DU.

Almost want to change my vote, but the poll is pretty clear, and I will stay where I am.

TPP isn't supportable, though I understand why it is US policy, geopolitically. It has nothing to do with Obama or anyone else. It's all about boxing Asia and Russia in, and letting the US get some meager trade concessions. Raise the minimum wage here and it is rendered moot.

[beerandjesus]

35. Boy, do I wish I were seeing more of this in these threads...

...and less along the lines of "You only oppose TPP because you hate Obama, just like the baggers!!"

Seriously, I'm very, very strongly against TPP, but what little coherent I've heard in favor of it has been along the lines you outline--and from that standpoint, it does make some sense beyond just being a brazen gift to the world's largest corporations. That's what we should be discussing here, not pretending that we economic populists are indifferent to institutionalized racism, as another poster so tastelessly does above.

Kudos to you, I hope you have more to say on the topic!

[2naSalit]

40. ^^This^^

[treestar]

50. that seems to be true

There are several subjects. Take their extreme line or else! You are an authoritarian apologist. Total black and white thinking, just like right wingers do.

[rhett o rick]

54. That works both ways. In fact those that oppose the TPP are willing to debate the

issue, and those that don't support the TPP never debate the issue but only pop in to be critical of those that do.

[pampango]

55. Indeed it does. That is what I meant to say.

I wouldn't say there is never a discussion of the issue but it does too often degenerate on both sides into name-calling and assuming the worst motives to those we disagree with.

[B Calm]

23. Just like NAFTA, republicans will pass it, then sit on their hemorrhoid asses and point

their shit stained fingers for the next 30 years at democrats for TPP.

[bigwillq]

24. No (nt)

[randome]

31. He gets the benefit of the doubt.

That doesn't mean a blank check but it does mean I will mostly trust him.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]

[OrwellwasRight]

43. Don't just give him the benefit of the doubt.

Do a little reading about the TPP on your own and make up your own mind.

When the Sierra Club, the AFL-CIO, Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, the pro-business Coalition for a Prosperous America (made up of business, labor, and farmer groups), the creepy John Birch Society, and numerous internet-rights groups coalesce around an issue -- there is something there you need to pay attention to.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/on-the-wrong-side-of-globalization/?_r=0

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Free-Trade-Agreement-TPP

http://www.sierraclub.org/Trade/trans-pacific-partnership

https://openmedia.org/tpp/resources

http://www.prosperousamerica.org/trade_agreements

I won't provide a John birch link on DU as it is totally inappropriate, but if you are interested, just google "New American TPP" and you'll find lots there.

[rock]

33. No

Crazy question IMO.

[librechik]

38. it doesn't make a micron of difference what our opinions are.

The policy is set and continues from administration to administration, no matter who is president.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

[OrwellwasRight]

41. This is no more true than

having to support unjust wars or torture just because that is what the President is doing.

[SomethingFishy]

46. ROFLMAO... I just came out of Manny's thread on the TPP

and one thing I do find hilarious is this: "how can you complain about the TPP if it's all a secret and you don't know what's in it?".

You know what? That's true. I don't know what's in it so I'm gonna to trust that Obama won't sign anything that might fuck me over. After all I had no idea what was in the Cromibus bill and that turned out just fine...

[treestar]

49. Nobody said that

But to be open minded, it would require 1 - seeing what it ultimately says, and 2- since Obama seems to be for it at least listening to and considering his arguments.

Just deciding ahead of time it must be all evil and a sign Obama works for the 1% against the rest of us seems deranged. There's not going to be a French-style revolution, so all the ranting about corporations and banks and 1% and whining we are left out of some club just sounds like defeatist fringe-rage.

[RiverLover]

52. Well, I hope you aren't calling the Democrats in Congress 'defeatist' fringe.

They've been our protective wall against most of Obama's trade plans for a while now.

...Shifting majority control of both houses of Congress to Republicans is certainly a positive for progress in trade policy.

Since 2008, both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi had come out against giving President Obama “fast-track” authority for trade deals, preventing any trade agreement from previously receiving a clean up-or-down vote, a mistake which the next Congress can correct. The most important ongoing trade negotiations that could wrap up as early as next year include the Trans-Pacific Partnership (T.P.P.) with Asian nations, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T.T.I.P.) with the European Union, and reopening trade relations with Cuba by overturning the Helms-Burton Act, effectively lifting the embargo...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonhartley/2014/12/31/a-free-trade-new-years-resolution-for-congress-and-the-white-house/

...The Obama administration, though, has not had the support of Democrats in the United States Congress. Senior Democrat Representative Sander Levin has expressed reservations about the process and the substance of the TPP. Senator Elizabeth Warren has worried about how the TPP will affect the financial regulation of Wall Street. Other Democrats have additional reservations about the TPP. Senator Ron Wyden is of the view that the fast-track regime needs to be overhauled and modernised. Three House of Representatives Democrats — Reps. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), Louise Slaughter (N.Y.) and Alan Grayson (Fla.) — maintained that there are insufficient votes in the House to pass the trade promotion authority to secure the approval of the 12-nation TPP. De Lauro commented: ‘Fast-track doesn’t have support in the current Congress and won’t have support in the next Congress’. She declared: ‘The votes are not there.’

Nonetheless, President Barack Obama has said that he is willing to defy United States Congressional Democrats on his support of the TPP...

https://medium.com/@DrRimmer/senator-elizabeth-warren-fights-the-white-house-over-the-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp-3cd7bb0a1c91

[treestar]

53. Much more complex questions

And there is nothing wrong with how Harry and Nancy are dealing with it. They will at least come up with some reason not ranting about the bankers, etc. In fact, they usually also get charged with being part of the 1% club. So no, as is obvious, I was not referring to that.

[yourout]

51. No is not strong enough....no fucking way. Not now. Not ever.

[Rex]

65. Why are we shitting on the Heartland? Did they withhold cheese and milk again?

Well my used TP is probably the worst weapon to ever be flushed, poor Heartlands. Gonna rename it the Turdlands.