Oh Shit... 'Democrats' Frustration With Obama Boils Over In Trade Battle' - HuffPo

[WillyT]

Democrats' Frustration With Obama Boils Over In Trade Battle
Michael McAuliff & Laura Barron-Lopez - HuffPO
Posted: 04/23/2015 3:31 pm EDT Updated: 3 hours ago

<shrug>

WASHINGTON -- Democrats' frustration with President Barack Obama's trade agenda bubbled over Thursday, with key opponents accusing their party's leader of putting more effort into a bid to aid corporate America than anything he's done for the middle class.

Calling it "maddening," Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) told reporters that the Obama administration was putting on a full-court press unlike anything Democrats have ever seen in his presidency in order to win the authority to fast track enormous trade deals.

"I think if you could get my colleagues to be honest, on the Democratic side, with you -- and I think you can mostly -- they will say they've been talked to, approached, lobbied and maybe cajoled by more cabinet members on this issue than any issue since Barack Obama's been president," Brown said.

"That's just sad," he added.

Brown and Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) spoke to reporters about their frustrations a day after the Senate Finance Committee advanced a package of legislation that would grant Obama Trade Promotion Authority, as fast track is more formally known. With it, the president would be able to use expedited procedures to pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership with a dozen Pacific Rim nations and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe. Together, those two deals represent about two-thirds of the world's economy. Once Obama signs the pacts, Congress would then have no ability to amend or filibuster them, having only an up-or-down vote.

"I wish they put the same effort into minimum wage. I wish they put the same effort into Medicare at 55. I wish they put the same effort into some consumer strengthening on Dodd-Frank," Brown said.

Casey added that he thought it would be better if the administration took "that intensity to lobby folks on trade" and applied it to the Democrats' efforts to focus on the middle class.

"My God, we should be spending our time on that, not having the debate we're having," Casey said.

On the other side of Capitol Hill...

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/23/democrats-fast-track_n_7129276.html

[AzDar]

1. K & R

[Scuba]

28. Where was this zeal when universal healthcare was on the table?

[haikugal]

47. ^^^^ this.... SSDD

[Enthusiast]

58. It couldn't be any more clear.

[Rockyj]

99. Caller ties Obama with Commericial Club Of Chicago

&feature=youtu.be
CCC Agenda is to get rid of Unions, Public Schools & Pensions.
Paul Ryan actually was invited to speak @ luncheon.
I remember in one of Obama's first speeches after he was elected was his support for Charter Schools just like his buddy, Rahm Emanuel. This is all about neon-liberalism ideology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Boys

[Art_from_Ark]

40. That's what I was going to ask

[A Simple Game]

96. Oh the zeal at least for single payer was there , unfortunately like now, it was on the wrong side.

Didn't they threaten to arrest the advocates for single payer, or at least had them escorted out of the hearings?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

130. Obama knew the Clintons failed and needed to appease insurance co's.

Plus he's been trying to "pivot" from the Middle East to Asia ever since the ACA fight was over. That had been a high priority:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/12/21/the-american-pivot-to-asia/

[Cosmocat]

140. OH FOR FUCKS SAKE

Where was the zeal from these assholes?

This crew has left this president out in the wind for 6 years, let republicans tear his head of 100 times a day and cowered in a corner.

There is NOTHING he could have done to change ACA, and spare the fantasy that it was "on the table."

He signed what congress got him, and it barely got passed with reconciliation.

These rat fuckers have been hiding in the dark for 6 years, completely worthless.

You want to ball about him fighting them on this, well, that cuts both ways.

These assholes are showing more energy and emotion fighting him on this than they have shown in the last 6 years combined.

[bbgrunt]

35. shades of Bill Clinton and NAFTA. He's been

playing us like a big bassoon.

[99Forever]

3. This is President Obama's Legacy.

This monstrous, middle class killing, sovereignty sacrificing, 100% sellout to the 1% of the 1% will be what no one will EVER forget about this President and the Democratic party that is complicit with him doing it, IF they don't stop this.

[HereSince1628]

6. I think he may also see it as something of a 'closing of the circle' on his life

the formative half of which was within the pacific rim.

[Enthusiast]

59. Permanently damaging the Democratic Party might actually be part of the goal.

I would put nothing past this bunch.

[pampango]

61. Destroy the Democratic Party and, don't forget, make himself extremely wealthy after he retires.

"He is evil and corrupt." They don't just say that at Tea Party gatherings anymore.

[Marr]

86. That was one of the DLC's openly stated goals.

They phrased it in friendly corporate speak, of course-- something like, '...freeing candidates from traditional constituencies to allow for pro-business policy', but yep.

I'm sure Obama and others on the rightward fringe of the party see alienating unions while pushing the TPP as a win/win.

[Ed Suspicious]

106. '...freeing candidates from traditional constituencies to allow for pro-business policy'

Gag.

[Marr]

118. Full disclosure-- I'm paraphrasing.

I remember reading some sort of mission statement from them at some point, and that's what the message was. They described traditional Democratic Party constituencies like labor unions, teachers, etc., as limiting factors who had too much influence and said replacing them with business was the way to go.

[Doctor_J]

4. Amen.

He hasn't fought for one god damned thing of a liberal or populist bent since he's been in office. Most disappointing president in my lifetime.

[LiberalElite]

8. I had some misgivings in 2008 -

I recall telling a friend that I wasn't so sure about Obama because I'm more liberal than he is. My friend responded that "Oh he's liberal; he's just keeping it under wraps till he gets elected." I wasn't so sure but I voted for him anyway. From time to time in the next few years I wanted to ask my friend when she thought Obama was coming out of the Liberal closet, but I never did so as to not start an argument. My friend did get as exasperated as I though, sometimes yelling into the phone; I'LL NEVER VOTE FOR HIM AGAIN!
My point is, he never was a liberal.

[Plucketeer]

13. He knew liberal phraseology alright

He even sort of adroitly vocalized it to his advantage. But when he dismissed Single Payer out of hand, I could smell the stink. Then there was the proclamation about getting us out of those "illegal wars". Right.

[Enthusiast]

60. That was pretty stinky alright.

[markpkessinger]

17. First it was "keeping it under wraps until he gets elected" . . .

. . . then it was, "11-dimensional chess" or "rope-a-dope";

. . . then it was, "Just wait until his second term";

. . . then it was, "But . . . Republicans."

Wonder what they'll think of this time around?

[RedCappedBandit]

81. This time around we're just too stupid to understand and should "trust" politicians blindly. nt

[Jamastiene]

129. They will resort back to calling us "low information" and generally

hurling as many insults as possible. When their other rationalizations don't work on us, that is what they resort to, 5th grade schoolyard name calling.

[Art_from_Ark]

43. When somone compares himself to a "moderate '80s Republican"

it's a dead giveaway that he's not a liberal.

[whathehell]

127. Yes, not to mention his early expression of admiration for Ronald Reagan

during his first campaign. He called him a "transformational president". He was, of course, just not for the better.

[haikugal]

48. He held himself up like a rhoesach test...

And let us project onto him what we wanted. Never again...specifics only, facts, figures, and documents. We should have kept up the noise these 6 years..he said. "Make me"...well, here we are and he needs to respond in some meaningful way.

[cui bono]

139. Those that did make noise were accused of ODS and being a 'hater' by his fans. n/t

[haikugal]

142. I remember, we were denigrated and called names.

Nothing has changed...we (the 99%) need to organize...soon striking won't matter because they can ship in cheap labor from anywhere in the world..they already use the visa system to undermine our workers.

[LondonReign2]

87. "just keeping it under wraps till ...elected"

That's one of the rationalizations the pro-Hillary crowd trots out as well. "She'll be more liberal once elected!"

Uh-huh

[BeanMusical]

134. It sure is an irrational rationalization. Like most of the other ones.

[deutsey]

116. I voted for him (twice), but I've never been on his bandwagon

In '08, especially, I reeeeeally wanted to join my friends and usually apolitical parents and rally enthusiastically behind Obama as he emerged as the front runner.

Then I saw that Geithner and Larry Summers (among others) were in his inner circle, though, and I just couldn't.

People tried to assure me that it was all about "keeping your friends close and your enemies closer" but I couldn't swallow that.

[Blue_In_AK]

149. I had misgivings in 2008, too.

I was basically told to "stuff it."

[840high]

42. Yep. Good thing he's

not running for office - I would not vote for him again.

[Fuddnik]

69. He is running again.

Under the name Hillary Clinton.

Same shit, different flies.

[Marr]

74. +1

Yep, same political faction.

[840high]

79. She won't get my vote.

[tazkcmo]

112. Have to agree with you.

To be fair to President Obama, I expected very little if anything at all, from the previous presidents I've voted for. I never drank the Clinton kool-aid although I did vote for him (and got pretty much what I expected).

[betterdemsonly]

5. I hope they apply this lesson

and keep our party from nominating another known centrist. We know in advance Hillary will treat us this way.

[Baitball Blogger]

7. I cannot wait for him to write the memoir so we

can finally learn what a president with his constitutional background was thinking when he decided to take this route.

[blkmusclmachine]

14. Just because you are a scholar of X does not mean you are for X.

[BrotherIvan]

9. Many on DU have been shouted down for saying the same thing

"He didn't even fight."

The Public Option, Bush Tax Cuts, Minimum Wage, protecting homeowners and not banks...the list is long. Even when the Democrats had the Senate and the House. Even when he had a sweeping mandate given him by the people of this country in 2008. President Obama proved to be very different from Candidate Obama. He gave great speech, but he didn't fight. But the answer to anyone pointing it out is "purist," "hater," "racist," "Paulbot," "Fringe Left" and any other epithets that could be hurled to the left.

And now we hear from a leading DEMOCRATIC Senator

they will say they've been talked to, approached, lobbied and maybe cajoled by more cabinet members on this issue than any issue since Barack Obama's been president

So it wasn't just lack of power or 11th Dimension Chess, it was lack of will. It wasn't because those Republicans are just so damn smart that even when they are the minority, they set the agenda. Because time after time, we've seen that President Obama can get what he wants when he wants to. He knows how to fight and how to win; he's just not fighting for the 99%.

And now we have the TPP which he is pairing up with the REPUBLICANS to ram through. It seems that yet again, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

[blkmusclmachine]

15. http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/19300/19346/trojanhorse_19346_lg.gif

[MissDeeds]

23. Exactly

I've thought this for a long time.

[kath]

46. Ding ding ding!

Like the poster above me, I have also thought this for a long time.
But certain people here get pissed off when you call him that. i even had a post hidden for it once.

[FiveGoodMen]

93. No room for doubt anymore

That's exactly what he's been.

Hillary will be the same.

[red dog 1]

26. + 1000

Well stated!

[haikugal]

49. Well said, THANK YOU!!!!

[Enthusiast]

63. +1 You nailed it.

[leftstreet]

83. +1

[LondonReign2]

88. +1,000

[cui bono]

98. +1 He's definitely shown his hand now.

As I've said in the past, he sure fought hard on the campaign trail. He fought back against everything thrown at him. But then he was fighting for himself at the time, fighting for his next job, an extremely prestigious one.

Fighting for the people? Not so much.

[BrotherIvan]

137. I think this is the part that no one dares to admit

He always hits back at personal attacks. He's a great campaigner that can play rough and win the biggest game of them all. That was the goal, the only goal. That's why there was no vision, no marching orders for the administration once they got into power. They didn't have any goals past winning. Clinton, for all of his faults, had been a policy wonk since the beginning and truly loved politics, so had a plan to bring in new, fresh faces with big ideas to contrast with the the Republicans we'd been living with for twelve years. He visibly turned to the Dark Side during his presidency. But Obama has been hands off since the beginning. Some feel his approach is too apathetic for the serious crises we face as a nation, others praise him for being unflappable and the only adult in the room. It's odd, maddening and mysterious and has led to the great schism of interpretations we see on DU.

Right now there is this thread and another thread--diametrically opposed--chiding Sen. Warren for daring to disagree with the President whom we should trust implicity on the TPP because he "always fights for us" and has a nice smile. It's absolutely surreal. But it's got lots of nice pictures with memes which I think is about as far as the thought process goes for some.

[cui bono]

138. Yes, exactly.

If it's something so great we shouldn't have to blindly trust anybody about it, the details about it - just it's very existence - should be being shouted from the bully pulpit. But oddly PBO has been working on this behind the scenes for years and didn't want us to know. Why?

The blind trust is a scary thing. We ridiculed the GOP when they did it with BushCo, so why is it okay to do it now? Apparently democracy is as quaint as the constitution these days. And those teen magazine threads are definitely surreal. No purpose to them at all except to swear allegiance to one person, a politician. As you said, no real content, just a show of support because they are hurt that he is being - rightfully - criticized. One person posted yesterday that sometimes she posts pics of him just to piss people off. Hey that's great, isn't it? Unity schmunity.

[BrotherIvan]

141. This has proven we have our 23%ers just like Bush

They rule DU juries and wander out of their protected area to scream at everyone else. But the party is using those types of guards to shame Democrats into staying in line. There is actually a meme picture on that thread that calls the TPP the most progressive trade deal!!! I thought I might go mad looking at it.

[cui bono]

143. omg... progressive trade deal... how can they say that? They rail against us for criticizing

something that is not known, but somehow they are allowed to promote it without knowing what's in it.

I have learned recently though, that one of the problems is there are centrists on here who believe - or want us to believe - that the center position is the left, is progressive. So either that poster who said the TPP is progressive believes it and doesn't know what progressive really is, or wants to redefine progressive to mean anything that is corporate. I don't know if this is an organized and concerted effort or if these posters are the equivalent of the Tea Partiers who just said stuff that didn't make any sense and had no basis in reality but they really did believe it.

[BrotherIvan]

147. It's obsession

That's why there is so much pushback by calling the Senator who criticized the President a liar. This is the image, but not a link to the actual post.

[cui bono]

148. That is truly sickening. We don't even have all those things in our country any more.

Like I said, I don't know if this a concerted effort to infiltrate and change the Dem Party or if it is just centrist teabaggery.

[F4lconF16]

115. Please make this an OP.

Thanks

[SleeplessinSoCal]

10. I fear I know what is going on.

We are very short-sighted with even shorter memories. Ever since downsizing, outsourcing and switching retirement benefits from pension plans to 401K's, the majority of middle class and upper middle class voters rely on a healthy return on their investments. That flies in the face of decent wages and labor practices. It also may make privatizing Social Security inevitable - in large part because we will have forgotten the true security of a pension plan.

Vilifying unions, teachers, scientists are part and parcel of getting every state to vote against its best interest.

Plus, we're hooked on cheap goods and globalization has caused that.

[WillyT]

12. Most Excellent Post... Thank You !!!

We did not have a TV for the longest time...

My parents had to put money aside (save) in order to get our first one... B&W...

Yet that's the way it was in the late '50s/early '60s.

That's the way it used to be for mortgages too... if you couldn't put up 10 %... you would not get the loan...

Things have changed.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

52. ever have that moment of clarity?

I did when trying to understand why labor has been beaten down for decades and Social Security has always bee the "third rail". No longer.

I guess we can look back to Nixon for this. FDR didn't have to contend with globalization.

[pampango]

56. "FDR didn't have to contend with globalization." Other than WWII but that was a different kind of

'globalization'.

There are many (particularly but not exclusively on the far-right) who blame FDR and Truman for 'globalization' (which they see as a 'liberal' plot, of course, along with 'open borders', 'multiculturalism', 'secularism', etc.). FDR inherited a "high-tariff, low-trade" economy from Coolidge/Hoover. Rather than leaving that alone, first he lowered tariffs starting in 1934, 'liberalized' global trade and proposed (in 1944) the International Trade Organization (ITO) which would have really kicked 'globalization' into high gear if the republican senate had not killed it.

After FDR's death Truman finalized and implemented GATT then completed negotiations with 20 other countries on the International Trade Organization and submitted it to the Senate - where it died.

Republicans routinely campaigned against this 'liberalized' trade but could not stop its advance until they won control of congress and were able to defeat the ITO.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

102. Biggest Obama supporter I know, me, is against him on this, but I believe that HE Believes

the following.

He has been advised by the real owners of this country and for that matter the world economy other than China, that Americans are no longer needed, for anything.

That we will not be manufacturing shit anymore because the way the world market is manipulated by billionaires people will do it for way less elsewhere forever.

That if Obama wants his citizens to have ANY chance at survival, he better god damn sign them up for this permanent horror story because it is better than no story.

Something like that

[ChisolmTrailDem]

105. Plausible but moreso bordering on chicken-littlist to me. nt

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

107. Only alternative is Obama is knowingly and intentionally signing us up for hell and I

cant believe that, yet.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

108. Me neither, hence my talk-me-down-from-the-ledge post. Thanks, NJNP! nt

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

110. Oh, you are in that camp, cool. I gotta tell ya, this is a head scratcher, part of me wants to

scream at Barack.

I mean Carlin told us the truth that they dont care about us, but I believe Barack at least cares some in that he wouldnt do this if it was as bad as it seems to be.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

117. Forcing an increase in minimum wage has got to be an Obama priority.

[jeff47]

123. Nah, the TPP isn't about trade.

The TPP isn't really about trade. It's about capital.

We're doing just fine with trade with all of the TPP nations. There aren't any significant tariffs or other barriers to trade with the TPP nations.

What is not flowing as well is capital. Because capital abandoned the idea of taking risk. And there's a lot of risk in an international investment. And the TPP reduces the risk for capital.

Wanna invest in a strip mine that's dumping toxic sludge in the local water supply? Pre-TPP, one of your risks was the local government deciding to shut down the mine. After TPP, you can take that government to arbitration, and force them to pay you the return you would have received if the mine stayed open.

Invest in a sweatshop that gets closed down by new labor laws? Before TPP, you lost your investment. After TPP, you get paid anyway.

Ta-da! No more risk. Nothing but sweet, sweet profit.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

124. If we really wanted to solve any of this we put tariffs back while investing in mfg here

[jeff47]

125. Bah! What are you, some sort of communist?!

Don't you know that capital is entitled to a guaranteed return on all investments?!!

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

126. Remember when if you had a transistor radio that said "Made In Japan" it meant it was

a piece of shit your friends laughed at?

Oh god, we sure didnt see this shit coming and we have done NOTHING to reverse it.

[bvar22]

144. Instead of wasting our money on WAR,

we build a State-of-the-Art high speed rail system (cargo & passenger)
using ONLY American Parts and Steel.

[SusanCalvin]

136. Might be

I sure wish *he'd* explain why, instead of just assuming we should know and asking us to trust him. I know, it's too much to expect of most politicians to tell the unvarnished truth.

But what you say sounds plausible - that he thinks he's getting the best deal that is possible - especially after all the other times he's not fought, or started his negotiating position at his actual desire and then, of course, had the corners knocked off of it.

I swear the man has never bought a car, or if he has he got taken.

[Jackpine Radical]

29. Very interesting ideas.

[GoneFishin]

31. You are right. Note that if Wall Street wasn't making a shitload of money from all of that

activity then it would not be happening IMO.

[red dog 1]

38. + 1000

[RiverLover]

41. + a gazillion!

This^^^ is what the national debates should be about, everything in your post.

Thanks for so adeptly summarizing it all in one short post.

Can you run for office maybe?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

53. i'm not all that lucid normally.

[Octafish]

67. What's Good for Walmart is Good for Shareholders.

Meaning, Waltons and their bankers and lawyers.

[raouldukelives]

77. + 1000 There are those who assist and there are those who resist.

Every dollar in Wall St is a vote for more of the same.
It all boils down to Fiduciary Responsibility. If the people truly in charge don't want it, it won't happen. Those people are the shareholders who grant the magical ability to corporations to ignore laws if it is in the best interest of themselves. They don't care about safety nets or safe highways, stable climates, clean water, healthy environments or healthy workers. They care about what is the very best for them, at that moment in time, for the next spreadsheet or the next financial statement. Come hell or high water, or in our case, both.

This hasn't happened quickly. Over decades, with every corporate dollar, true democracy, honesty, reality, has been ignored in small increments until one day the reality comes knocking and we finally realize it has become a tidal shitstorm of epic proportions. I think that is about where we are today.

[nashville_brook]

80. +100000

[Ed Suspicious]

109. I've had this epiphany as well. When I realized that I was part of the ownership society for the

end of my life working against the working man's society in my current life. Getting us all to accept the 401k as our primary retirement security system was a stroke of genius by the capitalists. Getting us to fight against our own improved salaries and working conditions as because the market says it's better that way . . . makes me feel sick that I participate in this shit.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

119. right on!

And it has to be discussed. At least more than gay marriage.

[cui bono]

146. +1

[woo me with science]

11. K&R

[blkmusclmachine]

16. http://media.salon.com/2013/04/obama_barbara_bush.jpg

[FiveGoodMen]

94. Whoa! Really disturbing.

[Curmudgeoness]

18. To say that I am disappointed about this battle is an understatement.

I knew that he was not a liberal, but I never expected to see the one thing that he fought hard for to be this.

He couldn't fight for a real health care law, or restrictions on the banks that almost destroyed this country, or a million other things that would have truly helped the USA. I hate to have to say that I am completely disillusioned.

[WillyT]

20. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

[jwirr]

39. I have defended him in the past - now I am ready to cry. Cry for him and us. He could have done

so much better.

[dorkzilla]

72. Hear, hear...

I’m in the same camp as you.

Last night when I was driving home from work I spotted a car on the parkway with a bumper sticker that had Obama’s logo in the “O” of the word “WORST” and underneath it said “President in History”. Now I’m not about to agree with the guy (who looked EXACTLY like a Neanderthal, and I nearly pulled out my iPhone to take his picture) but for the first time since ’08 i felt more in line with that sentiment than with the “Hope” I felt at his inauguration.

Remembering his inauguration, tearing up while watching him take his place in history, makes me feel even more depressed; once again President Obama is making me tear up -- but now its not hope, its disappointment.

Imagine his legacy? Hated by BOTH parties...

[GoneFishin]

19. Feigned impotence whenever the cause is for the 99%. It's like watching an actor in a B movie

pretending that a giant paper mache boulder is too heavy to push, you can tell when the effort is fake.

It's too bad that us mere peasants have never been important enough for him to put in a real effort for causes that would improve our lives.

Imagine what might have been accomplished if this same effort went into :
- A public option
- Supporting the struggle in Wisconsin
- Attaching anti-abuse regulations to the taxpayer funded bank bailouts
- Supporting OWS rather than placing law enforcement at the beckon call of Wall Street
- Supporting public schools rather than encouraging school privatization

[WillyT]

21. + 1,000,000,000 - Perfect !!!

Last edited Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:29 AM - Edit history (1)

[Doctor_J]

32. Medicare for all and prosecution of the architects of the gulf war would have been plenty

The majorities would have grown in 2010, and all of those other things you listed would have had a fighting chance. Instead, disaster

[GoneFishin]

36. Not only because of a lack of enthusiasm, but likely because of deliberate undermining

activities behind closed doors. As was the case with the public option, which was traded away behind closed doors by the President in exchange for some magic beans or something.

Working in a group to accomplish a difficult goal is complicated when there is honest open disagreement among the group members. But it becomes hellishly complex if someone in the group is pretending to be pulling for the team while clandestinely sabotaging your efforts.

[Enthusiast]

66. I am so with you! This one alone would have changed history.

"Attaching anti-abuse regulations to the taxpayer funded bank bailouts."

We had the banks over a barrel. But instead of doing the right thing we allowed the CEOs to take home obscene bonuses. Another WTF moment.

The new regulations were weak. We should have restored Glass Steagal.

[ctsnowman]

73. Exactly!

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

100. I was silly enough to think he was going to fight for such things, which is why I supported him.

Though, I'd have voted for a viable liberal over him in a heartbeat, I didn't understand just how far away from that he was going to prove to be.

[GoneFishin]

101. I was fooled one time. But the next time I voted for none of the above in that box.

[daredtowork]

113. I'd like to add some

- Actually funding community college for all instead of just talking about it
- Raise amount of social security
- Control prescription payments for Medi-Cal/Medicare and put money into...
- Rebuilding the welfare system to put housing first and support basic necessities like utilities, transportation, and hygiene products, with opportunities to earn money for money for little luxuries while rebuilding your life if you're trying to get back into the workforce.
- Affordable housing support for people on fixed incomes in areas that have become vulnerable to predatory speculation.
- Expand public spaces and idea of public services for middle class buy-in so "government" isn't something that just has to be paid for (i.e. cut) for the poor
- Universal preschool and universal eldercare options to support working women

[GoneFishin]

132. Those are the types of improvements that I hoped I was voting for the first time.

Imagine how kind history would have been to Barack Obama if he had accomplished half of that list.

There would be tens or hundreds of millions of Americans whose lives would be a tiny bit less stressful if, for example :

- Their child's daycare cost didn't offset 50 cents of every dollar they earned in wages
- Young adults could graduate from college without a $50,000 dollar outstanding loan but only a minimum wage income.
- If in your old age you are dependent on others, that you are guaranteed a secure living arrangement.

[daredtowork]

135. Just imagine "Hope and Change"...lol. nt

[tonybgood]

22. Time for a candidate to run on repeal of the TPP!

sounds like that's the only way to defeat it is to vote in a president and Congress that will take us out of this disasterous treaty.

[GoneFishin]

27. That's clever proactive thinking. Unfortunately they are trying to make it impossible to

withdraw from without unanimous consensus from all signatories. Which is itself a ruse, because if the PTB wanted out of it they would just ignore it, repercussions be damned. But it gives future administrations an excuse to keep people chained to this piece of shit agreement. They can pretend that they are powerless to change it. Which is ironic, because the current President is a master at feigned impotence.

[jalan48]

24. A liberal couldn't get elected President. The military/industrial complex won't let it happen.

[Scootaloo]

54. What, do they control your vote?

End of the day, we still have that power. it might be something of a 'final refuge" but we have it. One person equals one vote, no matter how much money is spent, how much propaganda is launched. One vote is still one vote.

[Fuddnik]

71. Yes, they do.

Not in an overt sense, but you get a choice between 2 candidates from the same party. The money party. Two sides of the same coin.

I wrote a post, back in 2008. McCrazy had already secured the Repuke nomination. And Hillary and Obama were the only 2 left fighting for the Dem nomination. I said then, that all 3 choices sucked to high heaven, and they still do.

The money will control who you get to vote for.

[jalan48]

92. It controls our government. A liberal winning would have little effect on the status quo I believe.

Perhaps I should have said a person who calls themselves liberal may get elected President but will soon find he or she is confined by the demands of the MIC.

[bvar22]

128. No. I don't believe that.

Somewhere there is a Democrat like Teddy Roosevelt or FDR
who will drive the money-lenders and thieves from our temple.

The BIG problem is getting them past the Primary Process where good Democrats are regularly torpedoed by conservative, "Business Friendly" "Democrats" with deep money
with the help of the DCCC and DSCC.

[jalan48]

131. I wish I shared your optimism. Do you really think any new President could 'clean house' with our

National Security State? I think it's the other way around, the President gets in office and when meeting with the generals is told how things work. Obama even kept Bush's Secretary of Defense after taking over.

[FiveGoodMen]

95. Pat Robertson has millions of (proxy) votes

Just to name one case.

[suffragette]

25. Sherrod Brown makes excellent points on this.

K&R

[red dog 1]

33. HUGE K&R

When he had a Democratic-controlled Congress, he could have closed the tax loopholes that encourage large corporations to offshore jobs and also allow many corporations to avoid paying any federal taxes at all.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/sep/26/bernie-s/sanders-one-out-four-corporations-pay-no-taxes/

He also could have gotten a tax hike for the top 1 percent if he had wanted to.
(I'm sure the American people would have supported him on that)

[Broward]

34. This says it all, shameful.

[Autumn]

44. This is the battle he chooses to fight.

I remember some of his supporters saying that in his second term he would be free to be himself and put up a fight. I had thought it might be for the people who need a champion.

[Skittles]

45. true colors come shining through

[cui bono]

50. Wow. That certainly is stunning.

And yet people on here are fine with Fast Track for this. Even though they don't know what's in it. Which, if you recall, is their reason why we're not supposed to be criticizing it.

[Enthusiast]

68. ^^^^^perfect^^^^^

And yet people on here are fine with Fast Track for this. Even though they don't know what's in it. Which, if you recall, is their reason why we're not supposed to be criticizing it.

[Marr]

97. +1

[sabrina 1]

51. I wish he had fought this hard for the Public Option!

Thanks Sen. Brown, it's good to see Democrats standing up like this. I hope more of them do.

[demwing]

62. Emma...seems there ARE some things worth fighting for

apparently the poor and the middle class don't qualify

[cali]

55. shameful and sickening that this is what he chooses to fight for

And to some of us, not a bit surprising

[Enthusiast]

57. We would have a public option right now if the President had shown the passion

that he is showing promoting this trade deal.

Don't bother to disagree, swarm. My statement is a matter of opinion.

No discernible bully pulpit until a devastating trade deal? And then what we hear from the bully pulpit promotes the wrong position.

WTF?

The only way we can stop this thing is if all Democrats jump on the President and tell him he is wrong. Hold his feet to the fire.

[Progressive dog]

64. Would the administration have had to lobby Brown on the ACA

or minimum wage?

[Octafish]

65. Stupid Democrats Don't See Strategic Pivot to Superprofits

They're crazy if they think the .01% are going to share them. What do they think this is, a commune?

[tomsaiditagain]

70. I'll say it again.

New World Order.

"If you aint got money, you aint nothin"

[father founding]

75. pull my strings

Obama is just another puppet for the ogliarchs.

[ibewlu606]

76. Kicked!

Now we are expected to elect HRC for 8 more years of being kicked around?

[riqster]

78. That's my Senator!

Now we need to boot Portman out.

[RedCappedBandit]

82. Amazing that all of the sudden the republicans aren't going to obstruct his every effort

[Marr]

84. This has been clear about Obama from far outside Washington since he

unceremoniously dropped even the pretense of pushing for the "Public Option" in the healthcare debate. It's very clear what he actually prioritizes, and what he just gives lip service to.

And Hillary Clinton is from the same tiny political faction.

[biglib63]

85. Casey is ready for Hillary

In other news, Casey endorsed Hillary for President yesterday, and I'm pretty sure she is in favor of TPP. This seems like another make or break moment, very much like the Iraq War vote, where Hillary will disappoint.

[frylock]

89. anybody have the jury results?

[rhett o rick]

90. No one has come out to give any good reasons to support this corporate piece of crap. nm

[Faux pas]

91. Kickin'

[riderinthestorm]

103. Noticeably absent from these threads are those who want to "wait and see"

or who "trust" this president or who believe everyone is "overreacting" and it's not "that bad".

Kicking for some perspective for lurkers and the "wait and see crowd" et al (you are conspicuous in your absence).

[lumberjack_jeff]

104. Where was that cajoling and lobbying during ACA debate? n/t

[polichick]

111. The prez is showing his true corporate colors.

[bvar22]

145. The Obama Acolytes DID promise that we would see the REAL OBama after 2012 election.

They were right.

[Sunlei]

114. what should President Obama do? pass up the trade opportunity with the 'dozen Pacific Rim nations?

Plenty of other countries will go for that HUGE trade opportunity.

What should President Obama do? Let our dysfunctional Gov. wait years more for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with Europe? Think Europe will wait?


After all these two deals are only as the expert quoted- "those two deals represent about two-thirds of the world's economy"

Those other countries will not wait for the USA to catch up to speed, this has taken years already. The signing is now, very soon.

In the worse case those deals will go on without the USA and other countries will grab the trade opportunity.

[Elwood P Dowd]

120. I've been hearing the same promises about each and every one of the previous fake free trade

agreements from NAFTA to CAFTA to the recent Korean agreement. We cannot miss this opportunity. It will create jobs, raise wages, and reduce or trade deficit. After each and every one the opposite took place. Over 50,000 factories have moved offshore, millions of middle class jobs have been lost, real wages are declining, and our trade deficits (current account) now exceeds 8 trillion dollars and is growing.

Now we're told the same shit plus this one is going to be different. We were told to trust Obama on the Korean deal and that it would yield different results. Well, turns out it was no different at all. We have lost 75,000 jobs because of that deal, and our trade deficit with Korea has increased.

[jeff47]

122. Your argument would make sense if there were any significant trade barriers.

But there aren't. Trade is flowing just fine. Tariffs have not been statistically significant for a very long time. We already have lots of trade with the TPP countries.

What is not flowing as well is capital. Because the people with the capital abandoned the idea of taking risks a couple decades ago. TPP reduces the risk for capital as it flows between the TPP countries through mechanisms like eliminating the ability for government to kill a profitable enterprise just because it's destroying the local environment. If a government does that after the TPP, that government has to pay the investors their expected return.

Wanna start a strip mine and dump toxic sludge in the local drinking water? Now you don't have to worry about those little people getting their government to stop you. You make a nice, safe profit either way.

[bvar22]

121. I wish he had worked THAT hard for a Public Option.

[riderinthestorm]

133. PM kick for those who missed this....