Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 03:52 PM Apr 2015

Obama Fires Back At Warren, Liberals Over 'Dishonest' Attacks On Trade Deal

Source: TPM

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama made a surprise appearance in a media conference call with Labor Secretary Tom Perez on Friday to push back on what he called "dishonest" criticism from progressives — apparently including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) — that the Trans-Pacific Partnership was a "secret" deal.

"What I am averse to is a bunch of ad hominem attacks and misinformation that stirs up the base but ultimately doesn't serve them well. And I'm going to be pushing back very hard if I keep hearing that stuff," Obama told a small group of reporters on the call.

Of all the criticisms, "The one that gets on my nerves the most is the notion that this is a secret deal," he said. "Every single one of the critics saying this is a secret deal, or send out e-mails to their fundraising base that they're working to stop a secret deal, could walk over and see the text of the agreement."

-snip-

Obama didn't mention Warren by name, but he didn't have to. Two days ago Warren sent her supporters a fundraising email to whip up opposition to fast-tracking a trade deal. "The government doesn't want you to read this massive new trade agreement," Warren wrote. "It’s top secret." The president noted that the text of the TPP has been available "for weeks." He said some components are still being negotiated and that Congress will have months to review it and decide whether or not to approve the deal.

-snip-

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/obama-progressives-trade-tpp

68 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Obama Fires Back At Warren, Liberals Over 'Dishonest' Attacks On Trade Deal (Original Post) DonViejo Apr 2015 OP
Is he being deliberately dishonest? The deal is a secret from US! That's the point. arcane1 Apr 2015 #1
.... DonViejo Apr 2015 #4
You'd think republicans would be 100% against "the most progressive trade agreement in our history" arcane1 Apr 2015 #6
Denial tends to get one nowhere CountAllVotes Apr 2015 #7
Obama is lying Thespian2 Apr 2015 #9
Why don't you check how many have won? ZERO. nt okaawhatever Apr 2015 #28
Here's how it works... Thespian2 Apr 2015 #59
None of these free trade agreements are worth a damn. Big_Mike Apr 2015 #55
No, President Obama isn't lying. Elizabeth Warren is lying. Cha Apr 2015 #63
He is the who is being absolutely disingenuous. olegramps Apr 2015 #37
Elizabeth Warren said congress can't TALK ABOUT what they saw in the TPP whathehell Apr 2015 #39
Fine Pres Obama can give the text of the deal in progress to the press, stop the naysayers BUT peacebird Apr 2015 #2
Agreed. Note to PBO "Publish it now." Vincardog Apr 2015 #8
Before the final negotiations take place? He should publish something that, when changed, will be okaawhatever Apr 2015 #11
How about marking it DRAFT? Just the investor dispute resolution part. Vincardog Apr 2015 #13
How about waiting until we know what it actually says and deal with FACTS. The only people who okaawhatever Apr 2015 #14
You want us to wait for 5 years after it becomes law to read it? That is when the dispute "Court" Vincardog Apr 2015 #19
That is absolut.b.s.. I don't know where you're getting your info. The bill has 90 days okaawhatever Apr 2015 #20
Fast track = no debate no amendment. Your path is capitulation. Vincardog Apr 2015 #23
.... DonViejo Apr 2015 #25
Words are CHEAP. Vincardog Apr 2015 #29
So is rhetoric... DonViejo Apr 2015 #33
By then it will be too late. Vincardog Apr 2015 #36
Sorry, I disagree... DonViejo Apr 2015 #38
You're wrong. The text won't be released until after fast track is passed. No changes will GoneFishin Apr 2015 #58
They get their soundbytes from the ignorant shite that's being thrown about and spread it like Cha Apr 2015 #65
Fast track does not mean no debate. They will have plenty of time to debate. What they can't do is okaawhatever Apr 2015 #26
It's amazing that we ever pass any treaty at all. IF this POS can't withstand the light of day Vincardog Apr 2015 #31
Oh please. Let's deal with the truth here. The truth is this bill will see the light of day. Why are okaawhatever Apr 2015 #40
I find your argument to be disingenuous Vincardog Apr 2015 #41
You are not properly informed. olegramps Apr 2015 #42
Ah horseshit. JoeyT Apr 2015 #60
Transparency Plucketeer Apr 2015 #3
Paul Ryan is in agreement with the Prez re TPP asiliveandbreathe Apr 2015 #5
II'll bet he is! CountAllVotes Apr 2015 #10
Oh, he is soooo clever salib Apr 2015 #12
I couldn't disagree more. Obama never tried to mislead on single payer. He has said since 2004 okaawhatever Apr 2015 #17
Why shouldn't the public get to read and comment on the drafts of the agreement? candelista Apr 2015 #21
Because any agreement between 12 countries with 28 working groups will never be agreeable okaawhatever Apr 2015 #24
Your answer makes no sense. Beauregard Apr 2015 #44
No, our democratic process involves elected representation. You comment however you'd like. For okaawhatever Apr 2015 #46
That's a bullshit manipulation tactic. If it was a good deal there would be no need to hide it until GoneFishin Apr 2015 #56
Keep parsing and parsing salib Apr 2015 #35
+1. Definitely sounds desperate. GoneFishin Apr 2015 #57
Sorry, but you are totally misinformed. olegramps Apr 2015 #43
Oh, THAT's informative! :) Beauregard Apr 2015 #45
This message was self-deleted by its author olegramps Apr 2015 #49
I was not responding to you but to the post at #20 olegramps Apr 2015 #50
Well, I was responding to you. Beauregard Apr 2015 #53
actually he was informing the poster that his info was inadequate! n/t wildbilln864 Apr 2015 #61
I am sorry that your comprehension is seemingly unable to grasp the clear statements. olegramps Apr 2015 #67
You are soooo wrong. I guess the cheap ignorant pot shots aren't having an impact. Cha Apr 2015 #64
Hmmm... First Senator Warren was wrong and now she is dishonest... Wasn't Shakespear that said diabeticman Apr 2015 #15
http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7xgd2l0up1qbfpl4o1_500.jpg blkmusclmachine Apr 2015 #16
Yes and Elizabeth Warren should stop telling them. nt okaawhatever Apr 2015 #27
He really hates liberals. too bad. They were ready to walk through fire for him in Jan 2009 Doctor_J Apr 2015 #18
Obama hates me? Nah, he doesnt. He is a center left American politician. NoJusticeNoPeace Apr 2015 #30
"Dishonest"? That's an unfortunate choice of words. candelista Apr 2015 #22
Like I said the other day-- Jackpine Radical Apr 2015 #51
Interesting post. candelista Apr 2015 #66
Joint media conference: Obama and Warren. No time limits. mahannah Apr 2015 #32
No gloves davidpdx Apr 2015 #54
He's fighting harder against Democrats on this than he ever did against Republican on the ACA. EEO Apr 2015 #34
He needs Rahm back to tell us how retarded we are. PassingFair Apr 2015 #47
Why can't I pull this up on line? sulphurdunn Apr 2015 #48
" walk over and see the text of the agreement." Optical.Catalyst Apr 2015 #52
there is an easy and obvious solution to this issue.... mike_c Apr 2015 #62
He's losing me on this. romanic Apr 2015 #68

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
4. ....
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:02 PM
Apr 2015

"If and when TPA (Trade Promotion Authority) passes, I still have to present the final detailed text of TPP to Congress, and a minimum of three months will be provided to Congress for them to scrutinize every comma and period and number in the text," he said. "So there's nothing secret about it, and when I just keep on hearing people repeating this notion that it's secret, I gotta say, it's dishonest. And it's a little concerning when I see friends of mine resorting to those tactics."

Apart from Warren, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and a variety of progressive activist groups have been mobilizing their base against a trade deal. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said "hell no" to letting Obama fast-track a trade agreement. Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton is noncommittal. Republican leaders, meanwhile, are broadly on board and moving the fast-track authority, as are numerous Democrats like Sen. Ron Wyden (OR), the ranking member of the Finance Committee.

Obama also dismissed as "bunk" and "not true" separate claims that investor-state dispute settlement (or ISDS) procedures could end up weakening domestic financial regulations or consumer protections or food safety laws. "They have no ability to undo U.S. laws," he said.

He urged critics to understand that the deal would be far more progressive than NAFTA because it includes enforceable labor, environmental and human rights protections. He promised that it would be "the most progressive trade agreement in our history" and a big improvement on the status quo.

The battle appears to be the most contentious that Obama has had with his base, and it has clearly irked him. On Thursday he compared some of the left's attacks on trade to the "death panels" smear during the Obamacare debate while speaking to supporters in Washington, D.C., according to a White House transcript of the appearance.

"I'm pretty fired up about this," he told reporters on the Friday call.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
6. You'd think republicans would be 100% against "the most progressive trade agreement in our history"
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:07 PM
Apr 2015

CountAllVotes

(20,854 posts)
7. Denial tends to get one nowhere
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:09 PM
Apr 2015

>>He promised that it would be "the most progressive trade agreement in our history" and a big improvement on the status quo.

AND ...

>>
"I'm pretty fired up about this," he told reporters on the Friday call.

****

I'll bet -- Fired Up and Ready to Go!!!


Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
9. Obama is lying
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:16 PM
Apr 2015

when he says the ISDS will not weaken the economy. Check on how many lawsuits have been brought or are pending because of the same shit in NAFTA.

Thespian2

(2,741 posts)
59. Here's how it works...
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:49 PM
Apr 2015

"The potential for lawsuits under this process is far-reaching since it could be used by more than 350 million individuals and corporations throughout the NAFTA countries."
Appleton & Associates (attorneys
for Ethyl), October 1996

OUTCOME
In July 1998, the government of Canada settled with Ethyl. Canada reversed its ban on MMT, paid $13 million in legal fees and damages, and issued a statement that it lacked evidence of MMT’s toxicity (for Ethyl’s use in advertising).

CORPORATION
Ethyl – the corporation that put the lead in leaded gasoline – is a Virginia-based chemical company. It produces a toxic gasoline additive called methylcyclopentadienyl man-
ganese tricarbonyl (MMT) in Virginia, then ships the substance to Canada, where it is mixed in a plant in Ontario and sold to Canadian gasoline refiners. To complete the circle of poison, each year Ethyl ships 4 million kgs of toxic waste back into the US, burying it in Ohio, making the company the largest cross-border pollution trader in North America.

PUBLIC INTEREST
In 1997 Canada imposed a ban on the import and inter-provincial transport of
MMT. The ban was intended to protect public health, as MMT contains manganese — a known human neurotoxin. MMT is banned by the State of California and EPA has banned its use
in reformulated gasoline.

LEGAL ATTACK
While the ban was being debated in the Canadian Parliament, Ethyl filed a notice
that it would sue Canada for cash damages under NAFTA if restrictions were placed
on MMT. The Parliament withstood these threats and passed the ban. Five days later,
Ethyl filed a claim for $250 million before a NAFTA tribunal. Ethyl argued that the law
was an expropriation of its assets; that it was unfairly treated because it was a foreign company (there are no Canadian manufacturers of MMT); and that the ban
was an illegal “performance requirement” because it would force the company to
build a factory in every Canadian Province

Pay the polluter: Ethyl’s claim that restrictions on MMT “expropriated” the company’s
property is a dangerous expansion of rules on regulatory takings.
When a government regulates a dangerous chemical, it shouldn’t have to pay the corporation that manufactures the toxic substance.

Intimidation: By threatening to sue before the law was passed, Ethyl hung the threat
of monetary damages over the heads of lawmakers. While the Canadian parliament did not
give in to the pressure, this tactic could have a “chilling effect” in the future.

Successful Suit!
Ethyl’s NAFTA lawsuit succeeded in reversing the controls on MMT. This success will no
doubt encourage other corporations to use NAFTA’s investment rules to challenge
government policies.

Big_Mike

(509 posts)
55. None of these free trade agreements are worth a damn.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:28 PM
Apr 2015

I might have laughed at that Jughead clone H. Ross Perot back in '92, but her sure got one part right: Ya hear that sound? That's the sound of jobs, going to Mexico!

Break down barriers to trade, my ass! Look at the trucks coming up from Mexico and note how many fail inspections as well as how few drivers actually meet the training requirements set out in the agreements.

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
37. He is the who is being absolutely disingenuous.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:21 PM
Apr 2015

Yes, the representatives can go in and see the bill, but the can't take any notes or have any aides with them. The most important restriction is that it has been classified as SECRET. Therefore, even if they can see it they can not reveal anything that is in it under the threat of being arrested.

Fast Tracts is total bullshit, because the congress can not make any amendments to the bill and after we have all read how damn rotten it is they will have to vote to either pass it or kill it. Guess who controls congress: Republicans and they along with some right-wing asshole Democrats will pass it and it will be law. This is their game plan, slam dunk and go screw yourself and bend over because your are going to get the shaft. When Obama saw that Democrats had lost the Senate and the House it was his grand opportunity to ram this through congress as he heads out the door to dozen multi-million dollar do nothing board memberships.

I can't believe that I changed my party status from Independent to Democratic in order to vote for Obama in the primary. Although I agree that he has brought about some progressive legislation I am very disappointed and I am going to re-register as an Independent. He just hasn't been forceful enough on a number of issues and too damn wishy-washy in dealing with the Republicans. He is attacking the progressive wing of his party that put him in office far most stringently than he has ever dared to treat the Republicans. He let those damn killers, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfield go scot free. He could have at least pushed for an congressional investigation into how they were able to take up to war on lies. Then he sits back and doesn't say crap when the Republicans gained control of the House and the launch one phoney investigation after another. Why hasn't he gone to the American people and condemned them as FDR or Harry Truman never hesitated to do.

I will vote for a Democrat, who will most probably be Clinton. But I will be very hesitant to contribute anything for her campaign until I she comes out attacking this bogus trade agreement, pledges to back the unions and really work for fair trade agreements including the either major changes to existing trade agreements or their cancellation.

whathehell

(28,968 posts)
39. Elizabeth Warren said congress can't TALK ABOUT what they saw in the TPP
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:27 PM
Apr 2015

in her interview with Rachel Maddow the other night -- I'd call that secretive as hell.

peacebird

(14,195 posts)
2. Fine Pres Obama can give the text of the deal in progress to the press, stop the naysayers BUT
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 03:56 PM
Apr 2015

You notice that he DOESN'T!?? Publish it. Let us decide. Because the leaked bits I have read are pretty damning. Corps rights trump countries laws.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
11. Before the final negotiations take place? He should publish something that, when changed, will be
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:28 PM
Apr 2015

viewed as misleading. No thanks, when the final bill is agreed upon, I want to see it and read it. Until then, I don't want to read what MIGHT happen or what the law MIGHT contain. That is dishonest and could be used in a very negative way against the American people.

It isn't secret when the legislators can walk over and read it. If Warren is lying about that, she has lost a lot of credibility. She is supposed to be the truth-teller.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
14. How about waiting until we know what it actually says and deal with FACTS. The only people who
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:37 PM
Apr 2015

want it published before it is finalized are special interest groups who have no more interest in the American taxpayer than Wall Street.

I'll wait until I can learn the TRUTH. I'm not listening to the dog whistle being put out by special interest groups.

Vincardog

(20,234 posts)
19. You want us to wait for 5 years after it becomes law to read it? That is when the dispute "Court"
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:52 PM
Apr 2015

part is allowed to be published.

But you keep on refusing to do anything until five years after it is too late.
I am going to fight it NOW.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
20. That is absolut.b.s.. I don't know where you're getting your info. The bill has 90 days
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:56 PM
Apr 2015

from release to vote. Whether it is released now or later doesn't matter. The clock starts when it is released. By delaying it until it is finalized, it gives the voters and congresspeople the most time to debate the FACTS and ACUTAL BILL

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
25. ....
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:05 PM
Apr 2015

From the article:

"If and when TPA (Trade Promotion Authority) passes, I still have to present the final detailed text of TPP to Congress, and a minimum of three months will be provided to Congress for them to scrutinize every comma and period and number in the text," he said. "So there's nothing secret about it, and when I just keep on hearing people repeating this notion that it's secret, I gotta say, it's dishonest. And it's a little concerning when I see friends of mine resorting to those tactics."

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
33. So is rhetoric...
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:15 PM
Apr 2015

You may be correct, I don't know, but, we'll all know when the final negotiated documented is made public. Won't we?

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
38. Sorry, I disagree...
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:24 PM
Apr 2015

I've been involved with State government on both sides of an issue that was presented to the public with a 90 day timeline for approval. I've seen policies overturned completely in those 90 days, I've seen them amended and I've seen them sail into law with public approval. Time will tell on this one.

GoneFishin

(5,217 posts)
58. You're wrong. The text won't be released until after fast track is passed. No changes will
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:36 PM
Apr 2015

be possible. Yes we will know we are screwed at that point, but nothing can be done about it, which is precisely why they are insisting on this order of events.

Cha

(295,899 posts)
65. They get their soundbytes from the ignorant shite that's being thrown about and spread it like
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 11:54 PM
Apr 2015

it means something.

Mahalo Don

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
26. Fast track does not mean no debate. They will have plenty of time to debate. What they can't do is
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:06 PM
Apr 2015

amend it, but that is to be expected. There will never be a global trade bill if every country wants to amend it. So the US amends it, and then we wait for the other 12 countries to respond, possibly with amendments, then we re-review and debate the bill, and possibly add more amendments, then we send it to the other 12 countries who amend it.....ad infinitum.



Vincardog

(20,234 posts)
31. It's amazing that we ever pass any treaty at all. IF this POS can't withstand the light of day
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:12 PM
Apr 2015

It does not deserve to become law.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
40. Oh please. Let's deal with the truth here. The truth is this bill will see the light of day. Why are
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:31 PM
Apr 2015

you being so dishonest about that? You advocate releasing a bill that isn't finalized? What is your opposition to releasing the bill once it is finalized? I find your dishonesty very telling.


olegramps

(8,200 posts)
42. You are not properly informed.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:49 PM
Apr 2015

The trade agreement cannot be modified and the congress can only vote it up or down. Guess who controls congress? Guess who support it? When they ship the last good paying manufacturing job out to Vietnam where their minimum wage is something like .50 cent an hour get back to us.

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
60. Ah horseshit.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 10:03 PM
Apr 2015

I love all the "I wait for facts!" comments on stuff like the TPP that are *never* turned against the people that blindly support it. I wonder why that is.

asiliveandbreathe

(8,203 posts)
5. Paul Ryan is in agreement with the Prez re TPP
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:04 PM
Apr 2015

Ryan said "I feel like I am having an out of body experience" -

Ryan also used a procedural maneuver to stop Levin from making a change in committee...

salib

(2,116 posts)
12. Oh, he is soooo clever
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:29 PM
Apr 2015

He never really said anything about a public option or single payer. Not really.

Now, he tells us that "Every single one of the critics saying this is a secret deal, or send out e-mails to their fundraising base that they're working to stop a secret deal, could walk over and see the text of the agreement." It isn't secret. Honest.

And those that have taken a look cannot take notes, cannot tell us specifically what it says, cannot let their staff see it by themselves. And with those restrictions still say "if you only knew what was in it you would be shocked" or something to that effect.

This is VERY disingenuous by our President.

I guess we are having an impact and he (or his handlers) are worried.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
17. I couldn't disagree more. Obama never tried to mislead on single payer. He has said since 2004
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:42 PM
Apr 2015

that he supports the idea of single payer but it won't work with the system we have. It was the right that pushed the single payer meme. They continually reported that ACA would lead to single payer. BTW, the ACA has provisions that allow each state to become single payer. Guess what? The one state that tried to make that happen couldn't based on cost. So if you don't have single payer, don't blame Obama. If anything, blame your state reps.

The idea that the TPP should be released for public consumption before even being finalized is ridiculous. Obama just handed Warren her lying ass on this and it will be a while before she lives it down. I realize it was a fund raising letter, but she has lost all credibility as the truth-teller in the Senate. That is what is really sad.

 

candelista

(1,986 posts)
21. Why shouldn't the public get to read and comment on the drafts of the agreement?
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:57 PM
Apr 2015

That would be more democratic.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
24. Because any agreement between 12 countries with 28 working groups will never be agreeable
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:03 PM
Apr 2015

to everyone. It won't be the most democratic process. it has taken 8 years to get this far. The public comment period will come in the 90 day interval between release and vote. Then the voters will be able to tell their congresspeople to vote yes or no. That is democracy.

90 days is 90 days. If they release the bill tomorrow there will be a 90 day commentary period. If they release it in a month, there will still be a 90 day commentary period. The only reason for waiting is accuracy. That is democracy in my book.

 

Beauregard

(376 posts)
44. Your answer makes no sense.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 06:13 PM
Apr 2015

This bill is being fast-tracked, so the Congress will only be able to vote up or down on it. Whatever criticisms the public might have will have no chance to be incorporated in the bill. That's undemocratic.

okaawhatever

(9,453 posts)
46. No, our democratic process involves elected representation. You comment however you'd like. For
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 06:18 PM
Apr 2015

or against and you communicate that with your elected representative, then your representative will vote accordingly.

The idea of proposing legislation and voting up or down on it is democracy at it's finest. I would argue that the process of amending legislation (which frequently has nothing to do with the bill) and holding legislation hostage to get an unfavorable amendment passed is highly undemocratic.

GoneFishin

(5,217 posts)
56. That's a bullshit manipulation tactic. If it was a good deal there would be no need to hide it until
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:31 PM
Apr 2015

after fast track is approved.

Let them release the full text for 90 days, then have a vote on fast track. They won't do it for the same reason they were in a rush to pass the Patriot Act before most people could study it carefully and understand the ramifications.

They have had many years to carefully weave weasel language into the document which may not be unwoven forensically until it becomes the focus of an ISDS challenge. Every trade representative weasel has had numerous years to carefully craft their language, in advance of any challenge, to support the future arguments which they plan on making when they extract penalties from the pockets of the U.S. taxpayers.

That is every unethical dirtbag lawyer's wet dream. To have years to write a contract, with ample time to study all of the angles, but which the other party has only a brief time to read hurriedly before they sign it.

These are sleazebag con man tactics at their finest.

Response to Beauregard (Reply #45)

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
67. I am sorry that your comprehension is seemingly unable to grasp the clear statements.
Sat Apr 25, 2015, 03:56 PM
Apr 2015

I can only suppose from the tone of your response that perhaps that you are just being argumentative. Have a nine day. I will endeavor not to read any of your posts.

diabeticman

(3,121 posts)
15. Hmmm... First Senator Warren was wrong and now she is dishonest... Wasn't Shakespear that said
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:38 PM
Apr 2015

Me thinks thou does protest too much? Please Mr. President if we are wrong we (as my wife said) will gladly eat our words "on a nice pizza" but prove to us we are wrong by releasing the deal.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
18. He really hates liberals. too bad. They were ready to walk through fire for him in Jan 2009
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:50 PM
Apr 2015

Instead he sided with the people who despise him (if they really do - it might just be theater).

NoJusticeNoPeace

(5,018 posts)
30. Obama hates me? Nah, he doesnt. He is a center left American politician.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:10 PM
Apr 2015

He should hate me, I am white and if I was him I would.


But that is a different matter, isnt it.

 

candelista

(1,986 posts)
22. "Dishonest"? That's an unfortunate choice of words.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 04:59 PM
Apr 2015

It attacks the moral character of Warren and the other critics. It's not like President Obama to say something like this. He's usually very polite. He must really be pissed off this time.

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
51. Like I said the other day--
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 07:10 PM
Apr 2015

In a thread by WillyT

The tenor of this comment amazes me more than the substantive points.

The points are dead-on, but we've known for a bit where she stands.

But she goes on to rail about Obama deliberately concealing things from the public purely because he knows they would not like them if they found out.

Before that moment, it was just a little spat on policy between them. But Liz just put ten bucks in the nickel-dime poker pot when she called Obama out & used that "deliberate" word where, when and as she did.

Shush a bit, everyone.

There will momentarily be the sound of another shoe dropping.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6551698

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
54. No gloves
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 09:08 PM
Apr 2015

Let them spare with each other (metaphorically speaking). That would be interesting.

If Warren really thinks Obama is wrong, then she should challenge him to a sit down debate on the issue.

Honestly I'm not happy about what is being said by either of them (and I say this because I support both of them). Who should I believe?

EEO

(1,620 posts)
34. He's fighting harder against Democrats on this than he ever did against Republican on the ACA.
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 05:18 PM
Apr 2015

Such bullshit.

 

sulphurdunn

(6,891 posts)
48. Why can't I pull this up on line?
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 06:42 PM
Apr 2015

Is it some kind of national security secret or just a goddamn trade deal?

Optical.Catalyst

(1,355 posts)
52. " walk over and see the text of the agreement."
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 07:44 PM
Apr 2015

Mr. President, I would love to walk over and see the text of the agreement. Where do I go to see it?

Better yet, just post a copy on the White House website so everybody can " See the text of the agreement."

mike_c

(36,213 posts)
62. there is an easy and obvious solution to this issue....
Fri Apr 24, 2015, 11:19 PM
Apr 2015

Stop the secrecy, show us the working version, and let's have a public debate. If Obama is correct, and the TPP is good for U.S. workers, then he should be much more easily able to make that case through transparency, rather than secrecy.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Obama Fires Back At Warre...