House Dems shove Obama's TPP up his ass

  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 12, 2015 7:19 PM GMT
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/politics/obamas-trade-bills-face-tough-battle-against-house-democrats.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

    or at least the TAA, which sends the TPP back to square one

    way to go Congress!

    of course Hilary hasn't taken a side on the issue, typical - Bernie Sanders is against the TPP
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    Jun 12, 2015 8:04 PM GMT
    I like Bernie but Hilary is kicking off her campaign in full tomorrow. As much as the Republicans would like to bicker with her about made-up issues, she's elected to campaign on her own terms. I don't blame her. She and Bill both got beat up on trumped up charges for eight years in the White House, none of which were true except the blow job. And then there was Benghazi! et al.

    As to TPP, we can negotiate or let China negotiate. If every detail is up to the Congress, nothing will be done and we lose. I was a bit un-nerved by the Big Pharma provision that almost made it into the pact but when Obama deleted it, I felt a bit reassured that he wouldn't let it become NAFTA redux. We need trade agreements and foreign countries won't play the silly games Congress loves.

    How do you envision it will play out now?

  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14389

    Jun 12, 2015 9:49 PM GMT
    Now you know deep down that the hapless Hillary ho wanted this TPP disaster to pass because it would mean more immense wealth in her pocket.icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 10:04 PM GMT
    I liked how President Obama's "most progressive trade deal" in the history of the world had slavery in it.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4435

    Jun 12, 2015 10:32 PM GMT
    Why don't you two ^^^ just not participate if you have nothing but stupid to offer?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 10:40 PM GMT
    Destinharbor saidWhy don't you two ^^^ just not participate if you have nothing but stupid to offer?

    How is that stupid? I thought it was witty. I have been wrong before.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Jun 12, 2015 10:51 PM GMT
    Anytime the Chamber of Commerce is STRONGLY pushing for anything (in this case TPP), you'd better do your homework and watch out.

    Pelosi went against the deal, so it's pretty much dead, even with a "revote."

    America/Congress can't pass it, so now drafts of the agreement and memorandums of understanding will be sent to China, and perhaps they can ink a deal.

    TPP is not being passed anytime soon by this Congress--and I couldn't be happier. I don't want slavery produced goods (the market iss ALREADY flooded with them), lower wages for middle America, factory closings, and unprecedented corporate profits--all in the name of "economic prosperity."

    Shove that up your rear if that's your slogan. I'll stick with average workers, unions, and (liberal) Democrats. The Chamber of Commerce and GOP can take a hike. Let China work it out. I want no part of blood money.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 11:00 PM GMT
    I still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 11:38 PM GMT
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 11:41 PM GMT
    FitnessWorker said
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson
    "An A-student tends to get complacent with acquiring knowledge, and usually puts it off until it's absolutely necessary."

    -Me icon_wink.gif
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jun 12, 2015 11:42 PM GMT
    FitnessWorker said
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson


    I believe TJ was talking about the First Amendment protection of the press. Little did he know that SCOTUS would turn that Amendment against us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 12, 2015 11:53 PM GMT
    Physiqueflex said
    FitnessWorker said
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson


    I believe TJ was talking about the First Amendment protection of the press. Little did he know that SCOTUS would turn that Amendment against us.
    "... Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. ..."
    Sound familiar?
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jun 13, 2015 12:00 AM GMT
    On yesterday's Washington Journal, Rep Luke Messer (R-IN) was playing the role of surrogate defending TPA and TPP. There were two things in particular that he said which bothered me. The first was how he kept pooh-poohing opposition to the trade deal, saying, "I understand the temptation to draw up the drawbridges and lock in America," building a straw man and completely downplaying the real concerns his constituents have. The other was a false comment he made about the trade deficit, saying, "We have a trade surplus with those countries where he have agreements. We have a huge trade deficit with countries where we don't."

    http://www.c-span.org/video/?326481-3/washington-journal-representative-luke-messer-rin

    I don't know if he is an idiot, or thinks we are, not that one is better than the other. The fact is that the bulk of our trade deficit is with China, Japan, Germany, Mexico, and Canada, with all of whom we have trade agreements.

    http://useconomy.about.com/od/tradepolicy/p/5_trade_deficit.htm

    Seems to me that if you have to lie like that to push your agenda, the agenda is suspect, to say the least.

    Or, maybe because he's a Republican he just can't help it. icon_razz.gif
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jun 13, 2015 12:04 AM GMT
    paulflexes said
    Physiqueflex said
    FitnessWorker said
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson


    I believe TJ was talking about the First Amendment protection of the press. Little did he know that SCOTUS would turn that Amendment against us.
    "... Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. ..."
    Sound familiar?


    Yes, I've had those words spoken to me before. Why do you ask? icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2015 12:11 AM GMT
    Physiqueflex said
    paulflexes said
    Physiqueflex said
    FitnessWorker said
    paulflexes saidI still don't know what TPP stands for cause I haven't bothered to look it up.

    The reason I haven't bothered to look it up is because my mind automatically thinks of it as being "Toilet Paper Politics" and that's good enough for me. icon_lol.gif



    " a well-informed electorate is a prerequisite to democracy. "

    Thomas Jefferson


    I believe TJ was talking about the First Amendment protection of the press. Little did he know that SCOTUS would turn that Amendment against us.
    "... Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. ..."
    Sound familiar?


    Yes, I've had those words spoken to me before. Why do you ask? icon_cool.gif
    I refuse to answer that question until an attorney is present. icon_cool.gif
  • ChicagoSteve

    Posts: 1279

    Jun 13, 2015 12:42 AM GMT
    Svnw688 saidAnytime the Chamber of Commerce is STRONGLY pushing for anything (in this case TPP), you'd better do your homework and watch out.

    Pelosi went against the deal, so it's pretty much dead, even with a "revote."

    America/Congress can't pass it, so now drafts of the agreement and memorandums of understanding will be sent to China, and perhaps they can ink a deal.

    TPP is not being passed anytime soon by this Congress--and I couldn't be happier. I don't want slavery produced goods (the market iss ALREADY flooded with them), lower wages for middle America, factory closings, and unprecedented corporate profits--all in the name of "economic prosperity."

    Shove that up your rear if that's your slogan. I'll stick with average workers, unions, and (liberal) Democrats. The Chamber of Commerce and GOP can take a hike. Let China work it out. I want no part of blood money.


    I know this is probably a stupid question, but why would a Democratic President be in favor of lower wages for middle America? That's what the Democrats have always been fighting against.
  • Apparition

    Posts: 3534

    Jun 13, 2015 1:03 AM GMT
    trans pacific partnership
    basicallly a lot of countries on the pacific rim, both sides.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 13, 2015 2:57 AM GMT
    Destinharbor saidI like Bernie but Hilary is kicking off her campaign in full tomorrow. As much as the Republicans would like to bicker with her about made-up issues, she's elected to campaign on her own terms. I don't blame her. She and Bill both got beat up on trumped up charges for eight years in the White House, none of which were true except the blow job. And then there was Benghazi! et al.

    As to TPP, we can negotiate or let China negotiate. If every detail is up to the Congress, nothing will be done and we lose. I was a bit un-nerved by the Big Pharma provision that almost made it into the pact but when Obama deleted it, I felt a bit reassured that he wouldn't let it become NAFTA redux. We need trade agreements and foreign countries won't play the silly games Congress loves.

    How do you envision it will play out now?



    why in the world do you need "trade agreements" for companies or nations to trade goods and services unless it needs to be rigged?

    we traded with Canada and Mexico for 250 years without NAFTA
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14389

    Jun 13, 2015 3:25 AM GMT
    All these free trade agreements are lethal poison to the US. Our great country has been screwed over and a large percentage of the American population has been driven into poverty just to make Wall Street and the Koch Brothers even wealthier. This is disgusting.icon_mad.gif
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Jun 13, 2015 3:14 PM GMT
    ChicagoSteve said
    Svnw688 saidAnytime the Chamber of Commerce is STRONGLY pushing for anything (in this case TPP), you'd better do your homework and watch out.

    Pelosi went against the deal, so it's pretty much dead, even with a "revote."

    America/Congress can't pass it, so now drafts of the agreement and memorandums of understanding will be sent to China, and perhaps they can ink a deal.

    TPP is not being passed anytime soon by this Congress--and I couldn't be happier. I don't want slavery produced goods (the market iss ALREADY flooded with them), lower wages for middle America, factory closings, and unprecedented corporate profits--all in the name of "economic prosperity."

    Shove that up your rear if that's your slogan. I'll stick with average workers, unions, and (liberal) Democrats. The Chamber of Commerce and GOP can take a hike. Let China work it out. I want no part of blood money.


    I know this is probably a stupid question, but why would a Democratic President be in favor of lower wages for middle America? That's what the Democrats have always been fighting against.


    I don't know. I SUSPECT (this is all my personal speculation) that this was a quid-pro-quo with the GOP. Perhaps to get Obamacare passed, or some nominations to the courts confirmed, Obama gave a generic "I owe you" or a specific "I'll help pass the TPP" card. So the GOP scratched Obama's back, and this is how he's trying to scratch the GOP's back. I suspect Obama thinks that while the deal is a bad deal for the middle class, Obama thinks he can structure it as the best possible deal (i.e., the least worst deal) and protect the middle class more than if the GOP and a Republican president negotiated the terms. As such, he's trying to get the deal reduced to paper and signed now, as opposed to 2017 when a Republican may be in the White House.

    I wish I knew the answer to your question, but your premise is correct. Democrats have historically been pro-union and on the "side" of workers insofar that Democrats fight for better wages, better working conditions, more paid vacation (in state/local politics), equal pay (Lilly Ledbedder Fair Pay Act) and worker's rights (anti-discrimination, anti-retaliation, whistleblower).

    Good question man.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Jun 13, 2015 3:31 PM GMT
    I must admit that I am disappointed in President Obama for trying to foist this debacle off on America.

    icon_confused.gif
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 13, 2015 5:45 PM GMT
    rnch saidI must admit that I am disappointed in President Obama for trying to foist this debacle off on America.

    icon_confused.gif


    actually it's a debacle for all countries involved (except for maybe Vietnam)

    just like NAFTA was a disaster for the average people in Mexico, Canada AND the US

    small corn farmers in all countries got destroyed, no NEW jobs were created, 700,000 US jobs went south to Mexico

    all these shitty trade bills just benefit the S&P500 types (yeah you'll find a few examples of small companies benefitting - VERY FEW - which the financail media will all taut as a success

    this asshole Obama wants the TAA passed? really? an enhanced unemployment benefits program for people HE KNOWS will lose their jobs

    as for China? fuck 'em - starve the overpopulated motherfuckers to death
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Jun 13, 2015 8:10 PM GMT
    Damn! TJ you sound like you've been coached by a neighbor - a Chinese expatriate with a twelve foot USA flag flying higher than his 2 story house.

    He and his wife are two of the whistleblowers from the 1995 "buy a president" scam China pulled with the Clintons. They still live with a house full of bodyguards and on Bob Woodward's best buddy list.

    He stays up on anything having to do with China and was telling me about TPP over a year ago. From day one he's been saying TPP is all about Walmart, China, and Brunei and has been making a compelling argument for it.

    His vehement opposition to TPP would have been enough for me. Then I found out that once in TPP laws in the United States can be changed by a 66% majority of the members in TPP. Screw that.
  • ChicagoSteve

    Posts: 1279

    Jun 13, 2015 9:25 PM GMT
    Svnw688 said
    ChicagoSteve said
    Svnw688 saidAnytime the Chamber of Commerce is STRONGLY pushing for anything (in this case TPP), you'd better do your homework and watch out.

    Pelosi went against the deal, so it's pretty much dead, even with a "revote."

    America/Congress can't pass it, so now drafts of the agreement and memorandums of understanding will be sent to China, and perhaps they can ink a deal.

    TPP is not being passed anytime soon by this Congress--and I couldn't be happier. I don't want slavery produced goods (the market iss ALREADY flooded with them), lower wages for middle America, factory closings, and unprecedented corporate profits--all in the name of "economic prosperity."

    Shove that up your rear if that's your slogan. I'll stick with average workers, unions, and (liberal) Democrats. The Chamber of Commerce and GOP can take a hike. Let China work it out. I want no part of blood money.


    I know this is probably a stupid question, but why would a Democratic President be in favor of lower wages for middle America? That's what the Democrats have always been fighting against.


    I don't know. I SUSPECT (this is all my personal speculation) that this was a quid-pro-quo with the GOP. Perhaps to get Obamacare passed, or some nominations to the courts confirmed, Obama gave a generic "I owe you" or a specific "I'll help pass the TPP" card. So the GOP scratched Obama's back, and this is how he's trying to scratch the GOP's back. I suspect Obama thinks that while the deal is a bad deal for the middle class, Obama thinks he can structure it as the best possible deal (i.e., the least worst deal) and protect the middle class more than if the GOP and a Republican president negotiated the terms. As such, he's trying to get the deal reduced to paper and signed now, as opposed to 2017 when a Republican may be in the White House.

    I wish I knew the answer to your question, but your premise is correct. Democrats have historically been pro-union and on the "side" of workers insofar that Democrats fight for better wages, better working conditions, more paid vacation (in state/local politics), equal pay (Lilly Ledbedder Fair Pay Act) and worker's rights (anti-discrimination, anti-retaliation, whistleblower).

    Good question man.
    Thanks, your response makes sense and seems logical. I am a liberal Democrat, I know I would never, ever vote Republican because they don't represent my views or support who I am as a gay man. But I am getting frustrated at my own party. I am really interested and leaning toward Bernie Sanders in the 2016 election.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14389

    Jun 15, 2015 1:48 PM GMT
    ChicagoSteve said
    Svnw688 said
    ChicagoSteve said
    Svnw688 saidAnytime the Chamber of Commerce is STRONGLY pushing for anything (in this case TPP), you'd better do your homework and watch out.

    Pelosi went against the deal, so it's pretty much dead, even with a "revote."

    America/Congress can't pass it, so now drafts of the agreement and memorandums of understanding will be sent to China, and perhaps they can ink a deal.

    TPP is not being passed anytime soon by this Congress--and I couldn't be happier. I don't want slavery produced goods (the market iss ALREADY flooded with them), lower wages for middle America, factory closings, and unprecedented corporate profits--all in the name of "economic prosperity."

    Shove that up your rear if that's your slogan. I'll stick with average workers, unions, and (liberal) Democrats. The Chamber of Commerce and GOP can take a hike. Let China work it out. I want no part of blood money.


    I know this is probably a stupid question, but why would a Democratic President be in favor of lower wages for middle America? That's what the Democrats have always been fighting against.


    I don't know. I SUSPECT (this is all my personal speculation) that this was a quid-pro-quo with the GOP. Perhaps to get Obamacare passed, or some nominations to the courts confirmed, Obama gave a generic "I owe you" or a specific "I'll help pass the TPP" card. So the GOP scratched Obama's back, and this is how he's trying to scratch the GOP's back. I suspect Obama thinks that while the deal is a bad deal for the middle class, Obama thinks he can structure it as the best possible deal (i.e., the least worst deal) and protect the middle class more than if the GOP and a Republican president negotiated the terms. As such, he's trying to get the deal reduced to paper and signed now, as opposed to 2017 when a Republican may be in the White House.

    I wish I knew the answer to your question, but your premise is correct. Democrats have historically been pro-union and on the "side" of workers insofar that Democrats fight for better wages, better working conditions, more paid vacation (in state/local politics), equal pay (Lilly Ledbedder Fair Pay Act) and worker's rights (anti-discrimination, anti-retaliation, whistleblower).

    Good question man.
    Thanks, your response makes sense and seems logical. I am a liberal Democrat, I know I would never, ever vote Republican because they don't represent my views or support who I am as a gay man. But I am getting frustrated at my own party. I am really interested and leaning toward Bernie Sanders in the 2016 election.
    How can you be a staunch blue democrat when the Democratic Party literally ruined your home city of Chicago during their 70+ year monolithic ruleicon_question.gif