People supporting the TPP are willing to throw everything out the window

[cali]

off shoring? It happens anyway. Increased off shoring? It will happen anyway.

Wage depression? ditto and ditto

Food safety? We just need to fund the USDA, hire thousands more inspectors and change how we do food inspection. Want to know where your food comes from? That's discriminatory.

Higher drug prices and fewer generic options due to extended patents from the sleazy practice of "evergreening"? Hey, that's the price of doing business and accessing big new markets.

A ballooning trade deficit? Trade deficits aren't important and/or we'll have access to big new growing markets.

Corporations and Governments cracking down on labor activists-including murdering them? The TPP is different. President Obama sez so!

By now the body of evidence demonstrating that the TPP is deeply flawed, is large enough that any sane person, let alone any liberal, should oppose it- even without seeing the full text. We have history, leaked late draft chapters, process documents, the word of people who have read it, the flawed TPA. That is more than sufficient.

[Autumn]

1. Yes that is more than sufficient. This whole episode has been

illuminating to the extreme. Who will still support it tells a person all they need to know.

[cali]

2. the harsh light cast by this episode

is all too revealing. The majority of those supporting it, clearly support it only out of some bizarre loyalty to the President.

It's creepy to see people aligning themselves with corporate and rethug pigs, because they love the President to that extreme degree.

[Fumesucker]

3. It's been going on all along

Some issues make it more blatantly obvious than others, it's particularly so when Obama changes his mind suddenly on some issue. The pivot is like a crack drill team doing a flanking movement.

[Dragonfli]

46. I have to agree, over the course of more than a decade I have poster here. For the first 5 years,

I felt at home in a place where sanity and decent human and humane values were shared by a community not brainwashed by a cruel and murderous right wing that had taken over the country and most discussions taking place elsewhere within the country.

It was a place to converse with those that shared my anti-war, anti-austerity, anti-bigotry, anti-torture and anti-corruption views with.
I was able to discuss Democratic beliefs in civil liberties, peace, fair wages, transparency in government as well as my pro progressive taxation theories and hopes for a way to return to the business of making available decent wages and decent jobs for a struggling populace, many agreed with me on most if not all these beliefs and there were good discussions to be had regarding reduction of presidential powers, wars of aggression, and war crimes as well as discussions on how to return to sanity regarding economic issues that might benefit the whole rather than the select few..

There were ill-fated but sincere "schemes" concocted by groups here to end or slow down supply side economics and for the reintroduction of Keynesianism, potential methods to reduce free trade and bring factory work back, thoughts even about Federal work programs and an end to the near complete control of our government by corporations and war profiteers, I felt I was among decent people, dreamers perhaps, but with good dreams, ones worth fighting for in the hopes that such things imagined could be made manifest as they once were in times past through hard work to achieve such dreams by any means necessary.

I knew from my younger days that such things were possible, I knew of leaders before my time that put an end to a gilded age past and watched as a kid how dreamers such as myself worked hard and sacrificed themselves to the batons, gases, water canons and even bullets directed at those that would effect positive change for the majority, changes that the elite fought against with immense power. Quixotic adventures that many thought a fools errand actually succeeded for a time, some dreams it seemed could be made manifest, because some actually were.

Sure, it seemed hopeless to address much of it back then when I first came here, but there was a feeling of being together on issues important to the survival and well being of the common man even as the country was falling deeper into pro wealth at the expense of the working class and pro war at the expense of countless wasted lives. There were few if any here, that fought us from within, few that were choosing instead the side of the hawks, the ant-civil liberties groups, the torturers and the proponents of an economy that profited the few at the expense of nearly all, in other words, we were united against the right wing and a right wing agenda that has not changed much since the time of the rise of fascism.


Now, I see proponents of policies that promote war, proponents of policies that promote poverty, proponents of policies that favor supply side stealing from the poor to further enrich the rich. I have even seen people here that promote torture via apologetic excuse and conflation of such evil with patriotism.

I see proponents of policies that are right wing and that are creating poverty and a gilded class, I see everything that once was fought against by most of us here being defended and promoted here and it has opened my eyes to the fact that many that I once thought were decent humane people were no such thing, such individuals are traitors or hypocrites or perhaps simply amoral, changing stances with the wind as if such flatulence became meaningful because of which ass such gas had passed from.

they traded their dreams for nightmares and all it took was the right individual to resell the packages of war, austerity, trickle down, death, and the corruption of our government by the power and vision of corporate money.

It may still be Democratic Underground, but much of what is now argued for here is right wing poison with little more than re-branding and a dollop of sugar from the stars of the cults of personality.

[GeorgeGist]

56. +1

[MsLeopard]

61. Well said

I've been here since the beginning (though I obviously do not post very much) and have seen the incredible change in this place. If not for the remaining thoughtful, truly progressive people who share so much good information on this site I would have fled long ago.

[Autumn]

4. It goes beyond creepy.

[sabrina 1]

68. Those in power calculated that. Things Bush couldn't pass, remember his failed attempt in 2007 to

Fast Track his Trade bill failed, Dems were mostly responsible for that, they try with a Dem.

And I don't recall meeting a Democrat at that time who supported Fast Tracking of any Trade Bill.

So, now they have a Dem president trying. And just as expected I'm sure, there is now support from the Dem side of the aisle.

Although most Dems do oppose it, it breaks down the opposition to have both parties 'personally' hooked.

[raindaddy]

11. Speaking of all we need to know....

What's Hillary's take on one of the most important pieces of legislation of Obama's second term?

[Autumn]

15. As the former SOS I'm pretty sure what her take really is but what she

will say when it's all settled is an entirely different matter.

[raindaddy]

16. Her silence speaks volumes..

[Autumn]

19. This Hillary is very timid when it comes to talking about her stand on issues

that impact the working class and the poor unless she's in a protected closed environment like paid speeches, speeches to her top fund raisers and small hand picked audiences. Timid is the last thing at this time we need in a President. And yet on foreign policy she is an proud unabashed hawk.

[Jackpine Radical]

27. Generalities and serious conversations for the poor, specifics for the rich.

Secret specifics.

[Autumn]

30. I agree with everything except serious conversations for the poor, I used that term but

unless I've missed it I haven't even heard any politician talking about them except for Bernie.

[Jackpine Radical]

33. One of our candidates keeps talking about having "serious conversations"

about things they really don't want to address.

"We have to have a serious conversation about what we should do about Social Security," etc. No plans, no statements of principle, not even conversations--just talk about "serious conversations."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called Tuesday for "a serious conversation" about rules to ensure an open Internet, noting it had helped power the pro-democracy uprising in Egypt but also served as a tool for terrorists and repressive governments.

Alighting from the rather menacing-looking black van that had borne her over two days from the East Coast to deepest Iowa, Hillary Clinton chose a deliberately low-key “conversation” with a small group of community college students to launch her presidential campaign.

The decision to go intimate rather than big-venue splashy for the debut event was part of a meticulously crafted strategy to try to dispose of the celebrity aura that clings to the former First Lady and Secretary of State and re-purpose her as a candidate willing to get into the mix with voters and listen to their concerns.

“Wow, that’s great,” she offered with uncertain enthusiasm as the first of a handpicked group of students shared her plans to graduate and find work.

And her plan for improving the condition of the masses? Here it is, in all its glorious detail:

Looking alternately at her hosts and the cameras, Ms Clinton reiterated the theme of the video released on Sunday declaring her candidacy – that she means to be the “champion” of the American people, some of whom have yet to see the benefits of the economic recovery. “I want to be that champion,” she said, “I want to stand up for people so they are not just getting by but so they can get ahead and stay ahead.”

So contrast that to how she behaves when an issue is truly close to her heart:

ONE ICY MORNING in February 2012, Hillary Clinton's plane touched down in the Bulgarian capital, Sofia, which was just digging out from a fierce blizzard. Wrapped in a thick coat, the secretary of state descended the stairs to the snow-covered tarmac, where she and her aides piled into a motorcade bound for the presidential palace. That afternoon, they huddled with Bulgarian leaders, including Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, discussing everything from Syria's bloody civil war to their joint search for loose nukes. But the focus of the talks was fracking. The previous year, Bulgaria had signed a five-year, $68 million deal, granting US oil giant Chevron millions of acres in shale gas concessions. Bulgarians were outraged. Shortly before Clinton arrived, tens of thousands of protesters poured into the streets carrying placards that read "Stop fracking with our water" and "Chevron go home." Bulgaria's parliament responded by voting overwhelmingly for a fracking moratorium.


Advertise on MotherJones.com

Clinton urged Bulgarian officials to give fracking another chance. According to Borissov, she agreed to help fly in the "best specialists on these new technologies to present the benefits to the Bulgarian people."

But resistance only grew. The following month in neighboring Romania, thousands of people gathered to protest another Chevron fracking project, and Romania's parliament began weighing its own shale gas moratorium. Again Clinton intervened, dispatching her special envoy for energy in Eurasia, Richard Morningstar, to push back against the fracking bans.

The State Depart­ment's lobbying effort culminated in late May 2012, when Morningstar held a series of meetings on fracking with top Bulgarian and Romanian officials. He also touted the technology in an interview on Bulgarian national radio, saying it could lead to a fivefold drop in the price of natural gas. A few weeks later, Romania's parliament voted down its proposed fracking ban and Bulgaria's eased its moratorium.

[KoKo]

51. Secret Specifics ....but...

"Bags'O'Money" in the Pocketbook, Bank Account, Foundation Vaults.

It all works out in the end. After all there was much suffering to get there. And, the "Entitlement is Earned for the Hard Work...Putting UP with "STUFF."

[AgingAmerican]

29. Her timidity is a direct result

Of Bernie's declared candidacy, IMHO.

[Autumn]

35. I don't think so. I have followed Hillary for a long time. I supported her in 2007

I think in this case she knows that this is the last chance she has to be elected president. This is the last chance for her to be the first woman elected to the office, the last chance for her and Bill to be the first wife and husband ever elected to the Presidency. That would be one hell of a historical legacy. But her time has come and gone.
I'm not willing to support her in that endeavor. We can not afford more giveaways to the corporation, the wealthy and the banks at the expense of the poor and the elderly and the working class. We can not afford more wars, more erosion of our privacy and rights. If she wins the primary that's just what we will get. That's my 2 cents

[A Simple Game]

42. She's not stupid, she remembers what happened last time when she felt safe talking and

answering questions because her only real competition was a little known Senator.

[Autumn]

43. Yeah that little known Senator ate her lunch

[A Simple Game]

45. He did help her pad her resume though. n/t

[TheNutcracker]

32. She last said she is "unsure" and wants to see the rest of it. I call BS what it is!

[billhicks76]

55. Hillary

Warren said yesterday she's not supporting Hillary yet as nominee. Finally someone with some integrity and grit.

[el_bryanto]

5. I don't know how we do this

But it feels like we need to trace back and figure out why so many Democrats and liberals are fine with this bill. Are they simply bought off? Or do they genuinely believe it to be good for America?

If it's a simple matter of corruption, than it's pretty straightforward - we need to get the money out of politics. But if they genuinely believe that that the TPP and the secretive nature of it's development is good for America than we need to take them apart on this issue. We need to get to the root of why they believe the clear potential abuses of this bill won't occur.

Bryant

[cali]

6. Honestly B, I think it's largely loyalty to the President

And the vast majority of elected dems in Congress are firmly against it. They don't even have enough dem votes yet to pass it. The last figure I saw, was that only 20 dems in the House have come out in support of it- and last year 151 out of the 188 dems in the House, wrote a letter to the President expressing their opposition.

[lark]

21. Ding, Ding, we have a winner!

"The president is for it, I trust the president, so TPP JUST HAS TO BE GOOD"! So say the Obamabots. There was a whole thread devoted to that exact same topic just yesterday and quite a few people were piling on to say the same thing. Cult of personality isn't just about GW. Progressives (OK, self styled progressives) are all over this board ignoring reality and "hoping" Obama isn't selling them down the river. Unfortunately, that's exactly what's happening.

[Divernan]

57. True believers can't live w/out blind faith/trust in authority.

The realities of modern life are so cripplingly terrifying to them, they absolutely HAVE to believe, without question, that some higher figure, whether religious, political or both will protect them in areas in which they are vulnerable. Do they ever notice that those religious and/or political figures are constantly asking them for money, votes or both?

Of course anyone who points out their idol has feet of clay will be viciously attacked because critics throw them into blind panics.

[Sobax]

26. +1

[TheNutcracker]

31. +2

[Dragonfli]

47. Many think it is simply due to loyalty towards a personality, but you raise a good question.

If there are true believers, why are they true believers? We need to know the answer to this question if we are ever to answer with facts that may cause them to question such belief.

It is a neo-liberal trade policy, there are true believers in neo-liberal trade policies, we need to know why people actually have faith in neo-liberalism, which is a belief system that crosses borders and oceans.

Your thoughts have more than a little merit, your point is well raised.

[L0oniX]

48. It stinks of investor class.

[JEB]

7. Tpp is a great way

for Democrats to shoot themselves in the foot.

[raouldukelives]

8. Sounds like the backbone of a sound retirement portfolio. nt

[Omar4Dems]

12. Which should make all hourly wage earners dance in the streets

[phantom power]

9. If they thought people would like it, they'd be spamming the news outlets with it every day.

[Segami]

10. House for Sale...

state-of-the-art-building-design-inside.........but, but, but....you can't view the inside of the house......JUST GIVE US YOUR OFFER!

"...Good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance..."

- Daniel Davies

".....President Obama and the Republican Senators know what they are doing. They are handing gifts to the business lobbies out of sight of the American people, and attacking the opponents of fast track as anti-trade or ignorant, when in fact the opponents are merely pro-public interest. If the President and the Republicans believe these draft agreements are so good, and therefore merit fast track, let them make the agreements public, so that the public could say a resounding NO to ISDS and other threats to the common interest hidden within the draft agreements....."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/why-fast-track-is-a-dange_b_7312034.html

[SoapBox]

13. ^ This ^

[bigwillq]

14. K and R (nt)

[Spitfire of ATJ]

17. From what I've seen the main boosters of the TPP are Republicans....

The Dems supporting it vote like Republicans.

The rank and file republicans and democrats don't want it.

Then there are the people who actually claim this is a loyalty test for Obama.

Those are the ones that make me laugh.

[Jackpine Radical]

36. Alluva sudden 2/3 of the Democrats just went nuts

and started bucking Obama. That's tough for anybody to handle. Fortunately, he was able to find a new bunch of more reasonable friends. The Orange Man and the Turtle are far more congenial than that nasty Liz Whatsername or that impudent guy with the wild hair.

[L0oniX]

49. +1

[Segami]

59. +1000

[pampango]

63. "The rank and file republicans and democrats don't want it." First part true. Second part not.

The polls certainly show that rank and file republicans don't want it. I have not seen a poll that shows that rank and file Democrats don't want it.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

64. The unions are dead set against it and so is the blogosphere.

[pampango]

67. Those two groups do not constitute the entire "rank and file" of the Democratic party.

Polls indicate that a majority of Democrats support it. There are certainly many Democrats who are against it as well.

[WillyT]

18. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[green917]

20. It's a free trade agreement

The simple fact that it's a free trade agreement is enough for me to know that it will be bad for the American working class! There has never been a free trade agreement that didn't completely decimate our economy and this one is exponentially bigger than all the others! The TPP would be a disaster for this economy!

[valerief]

22. People who support the TPP won't lose shit.

They live in that Other World where they get everything they could ever want.

[Populist_Prole]

23. Major Bingo

Was the same for all the other FTAs that have hollowed out the working class.

[BrotherIvan]

24. You mean a picture of Obama with his shirt off?

[cui bono]

39. lmao!!!

Hahahahaha... That was hilarious!!!

[jeff47]

25. Good policy does not need to be protected by a phalanx of lies. (nt)

[TheNutcracker]

28. But Hillary just said she wants to see the rest of it. Still unsure.

Surprised?

[cali]

37. She's,er, fibbing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026695846

[MrMickeysMom]

34. Those who have read the entire thing cannot speak to us!

How fucked up is that, Mr. and Mrs. America?

Creepy, Multi-dimensional chess, paternalistic, corporatist, know-it-all governance is here, so the next step would be to have us bend over and grab our ankles.

I.DO.NOT.THINK.SO

[Doctor_J]

38. Many care far more about the president than they do about the country or the majority of citizens

Their only view of anything that happens is how it reflects on Obama. They simply can't get past their devotion to him to view any set of facts objectively.

[cui bono]

40. Yup. I responded to one who pretty much stated that outright somewhere today.

And then went on to chastise those of us who dare say the TPP will be Obama's legacy and it will be bad telling us we are BAD DEMOCRATS and something else in all caps. No, that poster demands that the legacy will be ONLY the ACA and they will support that and simply ignore the TPP.

[A Simple Game]

44. Like no one thinks of President Clinton when NAFTA is mentioned?

NAFTA is Clinton's legacy and very little else is remembered.

[L0oniX]

50. The American Idol effect for the simple minded and gullible.

[bigwillq]

52. Yup.

[MisterP]

54. they literally say they'll support anything as long as X does

IOW, there's nothing behind the eyes

[pampango]

62. "They" were not Democrats before 2008 and won't be after 2016. "They" care little for the country or

the people who live in it.

"Their only view of anything that happens is how it reflects on Obama. They simply can't get past their devotion to him to view any set of facts objectively." Someone should alert right-wing talk radio of these facts right away. These revelations would be dynamite on their shows.

[Exilednight]

41. This one is really hard to square.

Higher drug prices and fewer generic options due to extended patents from the sleazy practice of "evergreening"? Hey, that's the price of doing business and accessing big new markets.

Drug companies are, supposedly, given extended patents to offset the price of drug development, hence to recoup the cost of R&D.

BUT

With access to larger markets they can offset that price in a fraction of the time.

[Enthusiast]

53. Kicked

and recommended a whole bunch!

[colsohlibgal]

58. Why Do Some So Called Democrats Defend This?

The pro TPP crowd is basically Obama, most republicans, and a scattering of DINOS. This trade bill is toxic in so many ways and yet they defend the President.

Is it this?: if he's for it then it can't be really bad? Maybe. So much of this seems to match what that great intellectual Britney Spears said when she said we ought to just trust the president and do what they ask, whatever that is.

Then there is the defense of Hillary staying mum on the issue. Se needs to weigh in soon, she wants to be president and this is an enormous issue.

[ucrdem]

65. Here's why:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026700031

[Hotler]

60. The politicians and the CEO's that support TTP....

will not be affected by the outcome. It's that old saying with the rich and most repugs that I know "I have mine. Fuck the rest of you."
Why we are not in the streets by the tens, hundreds of thousands I do not know. Sure we are going to get screwed over, but at least we could put up a fight. Geeez!

[Divernan]

66. Or the really stupid, i.e., - "I don't have mine yet, but I will!"

Because if I just believe long enough and hard enough and completely enough, in the face of all logical realities, I know there's a pony just for me somewhere in this mountain of TPP shit.

[QC]

69. Love can make people do some crazy things. n/t