General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn Case You Missed This... Like I Did... Wow... Just Wow... Sherrod Brown Ain't Lying...
Why Obama is happy to fight Elizabeth Warren on the trade dealMatt Bai - YahooNews
May 9, 2015
<snip>
...
...
...
Three days after that broadside, when we sat down at Nikes headquarters outside Portland, Ore., Obama still seemed unusually irritated.
Think about the logic of that, right? he went on. The notion that I had this massive fight with Wall Street to make sure that we dont repeat what happened in 2007, 2008. And then I sign a provision that would unravel it?
Id have to be pretty stupid, Obama said, laughing. This is pure speculation. She and I both taught law school, and you know, one of the things you do as a law professor is you spin out hypotheticals. And this is all hypothetical, speculative.
Obama wasnt through. He wanted me to know, in pointed terms, that for all the talk about her populist convictions, Warren had a personal brand she was trying to promote, too.
The truth of the matter is that Elizabeth is, you know, a politician like everybody else, he said. And you know, shes got a voice that she wants to get out there. And I understand that. And on most issues, she and I deeply agree. On this one, though, her arguments dont stand the test of fact and scrutiny.
This is remarkable stuff for Obama...
...
...
...
<snip>
More: https://www.yahoo.com/politics/why-obama-is-happy-to-fight-elizabeth-warren-on-118537612596.html
WillyT
(72,631 posts)It was like a lashing out Its what you call in tennis an unforced error, Scott Paul, the president of American Alliance of Manufacturing told msnbc
Charles Chamberlain, the executive director of the Howard Dean-founded Democracy for America, criticized Obamas remarks. Its shameful to see President Obama compare Democrats who oppose fast tracking the TPP through Congress to Sarah Palin and the delusional death panels rhetoric. Frankly, its beneath this president to resort to such name-calling, Chamberlain said.
Becky Bond, Political Director at CREDO Action, also said the comments were beneath the presidency. Its ironic that he claims critics of the TPP dont know what theyre talking about when its his administration that is refusing to release the text of his secret trade agreement to the public or even to members of Congress, she said.
Progressives viewed the the criticism as a sign of desperation from the administration, which has struggled to wrangle support from Democratic members of Congress.
And...
The most frustrating thing, as some liberals see it, is that the White House is spending huge political capital to pass a trade deal the base does not support, while not doing enough in their mind to support liberal priorities.
Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown called presidents priorities maddening. 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 theyve been talked to, approached, lobbied and maybe cajoled by more cabinet members on this issue than any issue since Barack Obamas been president, Brown told reporters Thursday. Thats just sad.
Link: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/liberals-furious-obamas-trade-comments
They're all Democrats... where do we place our alliances?
DULink: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026622441
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)apparently the TPP is WAY more important than a public option
daleanime
(17,796 posts)money>people.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)quite eye opening to say the least.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)They are being politically dissected on the Internet,while playing that Angry Birds thing they just found.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)by this president. I remember that the Dem leadership under Pelosi had to go to the WH during campaign season to ask the President to 'stop lumping Democrats with Republicans' when he was speaking about Congress not doing what they ought to be doing'.
It had been noticed by many people that whenever he DID mildly criticize Republicans, he made sure to point out that it 'both sides' who needed to step up and do their jobs.
With elections coming up this was unprecedented, and he was asked to stop playing that moral equivalency game as it could hurt Dems in the upcoming elections.
I would love to see him attack Republicans with the same fervor he is now attacking some our best Democrats.
JHB
(38,213 posts)...this is a man who needed how long for it to sink in that the days of "Tip & Ronny" were over, and the Republican's main goal regarding a Democratic president has become "find a way to bring him down"?
Like I said, "stupid" isn't a word I'd use about the president*. "Blind spots", however...
*This president, at least. Does not apply to his predecessor. The whole thesaurus entry applies to that one.
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)She's honest. And she actually does stand up to Wall Street.
President Obama's contemptuous words say way more about himself than they do about her.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)has political aspirations so she is just playing political games when she stands up for the people against Wall St.
That was just unbelievable, petty, and completely uncalled for.
Especially to say 'she doesn't know what she is talking about' when IF that is true, it is HIS fault for conducting this 'deal' in secret for so many years and refusing to allow Congress to participate or even see drafts of what they were up to, until the public outrage became so intense the WH was forced to finally 'allow' some viewing of the draft.
After which members stated that 'if the public knew what was in it they would oppose it.
Thanks to Wikileaks the public did get a glimpse of some of what is in it and Dems were right, they do oppose it.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)http://thehill.com/policy/finance/241625-dems-turn-up-heat-on-eve-of-trade-vote

https://twitter.com/sensherrodbrown
Fourteen Senate Democrats on Monday urged President Obama to require that stronger labor standards be implemented before a sweeping Asia-Pacific deal takes effect, firing a shot across the bow on the eve of a crucial test vote in the Senate.
The group of lawmakers, nearly all of whom oppose fast-tracking trade agreements, warned U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and Labor Secretary Tom Perez that waiting to improve standards until after the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is enacted could diminish enforcement of labor protections in those countries.
TPP has been presented as a unique opportunity to measurably improve the lives of workers in all TPP countries, but only holds such promise if countries are required to meet and uphold the agreements labor standards before the agreement is implemented, the senators wrote.
The Democrats signing the letter were Sens. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Ben Cardin (Md.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.), Al Franken (Minn.), Ed Markey (Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Tom Udall (N.M.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Brian Schatz (Hawaii), Jeff Merkley (Ore.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.).
WillyT
(72,631 posts)enough
(13,760 posts)He must believe his own rhetoric, I suppose.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)And yet...
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Bank$ter/donors they better take it, or else. Then they let 4 more million FAMILIES fall into foreclosure and about 8 million more people into poverty, about 30 million more into near poverty, cut money to states for various programs, cut money to higher ed and ran the student loans bills up, nearly stopped hiring at a Federal level (which is about the only place a black person can count on being looked at for more than their color, eh?, so it really screwed them).
(It's all detailed in Timmy's missive "Stress Test", at your favorite book depository. And laughed at by voters during Killer's interview on Jon Stewart's show. )
Then, because we were no longer paying those bills and investing in ourselves, they paraded the decrease in our deficit around as if it is a good thing. Notice how many new people are hurting just to keep the wealthy healthy. The people might as well be in bondage, because the opportunities to leave that have been stripped away for other people's profit.
This is nothing more than a plantation for tens of millions of Americans and newly arrived people, and it is going to be for at least the next three generations. And that's a shitty thing to do to your neighbors, even if you do get some insurance for ten million of them - a hundred million are permanently injured.
So the question above - who do give your allegiance to? - is the same as it has always been. Your neighbor. You want to work with each other to make sure you both do well. Because an injury to one is an injury to all. Our choice is not which party, but between servitude and freedom.
The arguments about power notwithstanding, the day one gives their allegiance to a party instead of their neighbor is the day they choose servitude over freedom.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)the way he busted up the big banks, wasn't that enough?
Oh, wait--Shit. I popped back into THIS lousy universe again.
Marr
(20,317 posts)If that was a 'massive fight', what's a 'heated disagreement'? Maybe a bj?
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Wouldn't put it on the level of pretzeldent Bush letting the bin Ladens fly out of the USA the day after 9-11, but wouldn't President Obama want to arrest the lawbreaking banksters instead of helping them fashion a defense?
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)One of the main arguments from his promoters was "wait till he doesn't have to worry about a re-election, he will have no fear of working on a progressive agenda." That was half-true, I guess. There seems to be no fear.
Quick, someone show me a picture of Bo.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Thespian2
(2,741 posts)Sad, indeed, to have such a president who will watch Americans lose their incomes once again...
and scary as hell!
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Disrespectful and rude, and the piece de resistance is that the president is not telling the truth about the TPP. I stand with Elizabeth on this.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Out of character (at least what we've been shown) and, frankly, shocking.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Time to go, Obama. Time to go.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)Nike makes no products in the US and it cut it's less than 1% of US work force by a third in the past couple of years. Over one million foreign factory workers to a little over 8,000 US workers. Also Nike is among the most aggressive corporations that use tax haven in Bermuda and Holland to avoid US taxes.
This "in your face stupid people", isn't new. Obama appointed GE CEO as job creation Czar. Of course GE has not paid any taxes for many years while it makes tens of billions in profits each year. It also has shipped most jobs offshore and even gets subsidises from the Federal Government.
Perhaps the only thing that could be more outrageous is if he promoted TPP in DuBai at Halliburton.
The person who is nothing more than a lying politician with no convictions at all, is President Obama. Unlike him, Elizabeth Warren remains true to her word and fights everyday for America.
Old Codger
(4,205 posts)First off if this deal is so damn good and great for all concerned then there is no reason at all why it cannot be made available to anyone who wishes to read it !!
Also why the hell didn't eh fight this hard for a public option? Or in fact anything else he has tried to do at all, never seen him so hot after something....
Except on the campaign trail...after elections it all went into hiding...
nikto
(3,284 posts)O=R
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)Vinca
(53,994 posts)Of the snippets I've gleaned, I'm not impressed a bit. I don't see how he can say we won't lose jobs, although it is surprising to find there are some jobs left to outsource. Just read the post about pharmaceuticals and that is just what we don't need. I've always loved this POTUS, but I fear he's now preparing for life after the presidency and trying to "make friends" for the speaking circuit.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)to fast track a trade bill. In 2007. When he was safe from having to face the public in an election afterwards. It failed. Dems made some great arguments at the time about why they would not support it. And everyone cheered them on for their refusal to do so.
Now we have another president, at the same point in his presidency, trying to do it again. And seemingly getting so desperate he is willing to abandon all decorum to get it done.
Is it possible that this was part of a deal made in order to get those huge donations needed to even run for the WH at the time?
And what would be the consequences for failing to do so? Did the Corps think that after Bush failed, thanks mostly to Democrats, they needed a Democrat to get it done because, they may have assumed as Obama appears to be doing, that the Dems who opposed it under Bush were just doing so for political reasons?
If so, looks like they were wrong. Looks like the Dems were doing it because it really is bad for the American people.
Money doesn't buy everything after all.