The Ed Show Just Handed Obamas A$$ back to him on TPP

[rsmith6621]

Ed says the TPP is NAFTA on steroids. Will hurt labor and this POTUS is not backing down on fast tracking the TPP.

Obama will betray the very group, LABOR, that elected him twice to the POTUS if Obama keeps pushing this.

Obama will not talk to the America Public, what is he afraid of.

BTW, Hilary is also for the TPP and anything else that benefits the 1% and corporate America.

[djean111]

1. Hillary helped write the TPP. She cannot back away from it.

I feel that Obama wants to get it done before Hillary starts campaigning.

[blkmusclmachine]

2. What does this Party STAND FOR, anymore??? Seems all our "leadership" are 1980's Republicans.

[fredamae]

4. I stand with Democrats not the

"democrats" we have in leadership.

[Jack Rabbit]

22. Did you get your capitalization crossed?

I wish we had more democrats (common noun) in the leadership of the Democratic (proper adjective) Party, like Senator Warren or Senator Sanders.

[appalachiablue]

7. I also wonder that, what is the Dem. Plan? and Vision? Seems we're clearly not involved or as I saw

Chris Hedges say; the govt. is corp. owned and we are irrelevant (Video interview from Nov. 22). How these leaders can consider this massive TPP Asia-Pacific Trade Deal secretly negotiated since 2005, with this country and jobs so very weak. Blows the mind. We are truly in the age of global capital and not labor.

[hifiguy]

12. As the late, great George Carlin said.

It's a big club and we ain't in it and never will be.

[appalachiablue]

19. Carlin got it for real. Thanks.

[C Moon]

24. +1000

[BrotherIvan]

35. Sums it up

And strangely relevant to every question.

[Thespian2]

53. Thanks

Remember this segment well. George speaks the truth. North America is totally Frigged.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

76. I support Obama but not on this and George was right, dammit

[pangaia]

30. "These leaders" do not care about you and me.

That is the whole point.
Obama included. He should be ashamed of himself.
I honestly do not think the man has the cojones to stand up to the PTB.

[truedelphi]

58. Stand up to the PTB? His job is to be their spokesperson.

And he does it very well.

He can even give two speeches on the exact same issue six months apart, and in the first speech he says "We will go for A, for the good of theAmerican people" and in the second speech he says "We will not go for A" and not a single facial expression indicates he has any comprehension of what he said earlier.

He will be compensated very well for his 8 year performance, just as Bill Clinton was.

[sendero]

91. Exactly..

.... he is working for his post-term wealth, which is the system we have set up and everyone in the presidency plays it well.

[CrispyQ]

71. Global capital, a succinct phrase. -nt

[hifiguy]

9. At the top, they stand for enriching themselves

and advancing the interests of the corporatists who own them lock, stock and barrel. And for nothing else, when it comes to economic policy.

[LeftOfWest]

62. Not seems. Is. n/t.

[cui bono]

80. In this day of politics as a team sport (PATS-I'm going to start using that) they don't need

to stand for anything.

People just pick a team and defend it no matter what. It happens right here on DU. You won't see anyone actually defending the TPP directly perhaps, but they will defend Obama pursuing it.

Blind loyalty and apologists are ruining our country.

[fredamae]

3. I'm calling

Senators/congresscritters...

And Damn--Ed Show is laying "it" all bare today as were the pols ...They Sounded like Democrats, in fact.

[jwirr]

18. After watching Ed in Wisconsin supporting the teachers I have always understood that if I needed

someone to at my back it would be him.

[appalachiablue]

5. I just saw this TPP piece by Ed Schultz with VT Peter Defazio, Mark Pochan, Leo Gerard Steelworkers.

Huge win for Big Pharma, transnationals, we'd compete with Vietnam's prison and child labor, 28 cents an hour, Brunai's Sharia Law. What damage to US labor and jobs. The Dems. involved at the top?!

[kentuck]

6. There are some Democrats that believe trade is good for the American workers...

We can compete with any country in the world, even those that pay $3 dollars a day.

They also believe that these companies that move jobs overseas are deserving of huge tax breaks.

They are mostly out of touch with average Democrats.

[lark]

10. They may call themselves Democrats, but they are only Democrats on social issues

On the economy, labor and often the environment, they stand foursquare with the largest of corporations and the 1%. They have no care for the American worker, no understanding that when our workers do bad, the economy also does bad. They only know that the richest of the rich get more wealth by paying less to foreign workers, and think that's a good thing.

[hifiguy]

14. I wish I could kick your post 1000 times.

For this is the TRUTH and nothing BUT THE TRUTH.

[ReRe]

15. They may say they are for social issues...

... but if they are Corporatists, they AREN"T Democrats. Which cancels out the "social" thing. They can't have it both ways.

[obxhead]

25. They could give a shit about social issues as well.

As long as a dem wins its all good. I honestly believe a democrat could run on a platform that says drowning puppies for entertainment is righteous and they would cheer and stomp they're feet in support of that platform.

[lark]

79. Sadly, both parties are like that.

[Populist_Prole]

37. BING-GO!!

I'm sick of it.

Great post though.

[AlbertCat]

54. worker do badLY

Badly.... the adverb not the adjective.

Jesus, there are a lot of elementary grammar mistakes in this thread!



And yes it does make a difference if you're trying to make a point. Or don't you like to make fun of Teabagger signs?



BTW.... my grammar is far from perfect, and thank the fathers for spellcheck! So correct away if I'm wrong. It doesn't upset me and I will probably get it right from then on... or at least try to.

[lark]

78. You say there are a lot of mistakes, but only mention one.

Oh great guru of political board English, what were the other legion of mistakes? At my age, I'm lucky I can still see well enough to even use the Internet.

[AlbertCat]

88. Yours was a minor common mistake....I make all the time too

Speaking mostly.

But I did mention others in other posts.


I really don't know why I'm the grammar nazi this week....

(I'm tired from sewing up shirts for Xmas gifts and I can't breathe thru my nose...sniff sniff! Maybe that's it. Grammar nazi fatigue syndrome)

[Enthusiast]

67. +1 an entire shit load.

[cui bono]

81. Exactly. And that's why the apologists listing PBO's social progress are missing the big picture.

Those are just the bones they throw us to keep us quiet and pacified. The 1% doesn't give a crap if there is same sex marriage or not. It doesn't affect their lives one iota. So they give the people that so that they remain content enough to ignore that they are still getting royally screwed as to the quality of life they can lead. And people fall for it. It's right here on DU, just look at the BOG.

[hifiguy]

87. Blammo.

Anyone who thinks the Masters of the Universe give a shit about legal weed or gay marriage is nuts. They don't. They care about two things - money and power. They want all of both. All is what they perceive and believe to be their fair share. Every bit of it.b They will take the money and establish a New Feudalism with a mass,impoverished peasantry and a rich-beyond-measure aristocracy. There will also be a courtier class to provide the aristocrats with the goods and services they desire or need. Everybody else will be free to have that second helping of dog food before curling up in their box.

To keep the peasantry in place there are already completely militarized police forces over the weapons of which the Gestapo would drool, and the rest of the Total Surveillance Security State. Add 24/7 propaganda pushing the views of the overlords and you have the fully realized power structure of a shlny, sleek and New Fascist state to enforce the feudal economic structure.

Wht is new about all of this is that fascists past realized that their base was a contented, propagandized and authoritarian-leaning middle class. The New Feudal Fascists are indeed something new under the sun. They intend to perform a complete cashectomy on the entire society and hoard it all themselves.

[pampango]

29. FDR must have been one of them. He and Truman were the ones that designed the post-war trading

system with its low tariffs and multilateral organizations to govern it.

Of course, he also believe in safety nets, strong unions and effective regulation.

[JDPriestly]

46. FDR favored multinaitonal trade agreements provided they would not lower the standard of

living for ordinary Americans.

He criticized tariffs on the ground that they impose taxes on the poor not on the rich, but he cautioned:

Peasants who live at lower levels than our farmers, workers who are sweated to reduce costs, ought not to determine the price of American goods. There are standards which we desire to set for ourselves. Tariffs should be large enough to maintain living standards which we set for ourselves.


pages 145-146, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Looking Forward, first published in 1933

The TPP will not allow us to set living standards for ourselves. The result will be the further enrichment of the 1% and the increased impoverishment of the rest of us, the 99%.

No to the TPP.

Tariffs can be reduced provided the agreements that reduce them protect the jobs and economic opportunities of ordinary Americans.

I have a hunch that the TPP is primarily intended to protect the intellectual property rights, that is patents and copyrights of the world's corporations. The extended term of the enforceability of patents and copyrights will discourage the production of affordable generic drugs, the publication and dissemination of literature and information and just generally discourage new technologies, creativity and sharing.

The TPP is a horror. No wonder those who wrote and pushed it are too ashamed to make its text public.

No to TPP. Just another dirty trick of the 1%. No to TPP.

[pampango]

47. Your quote is from FDR in 1933. His commitment to multilateral trade agreements evolved later.

And he cared about promoting peace and prosperity all over the world not just maintaining our living standards.

... both FDR and Hull saw the opening up of the world's economy as a positive measure that would help alleviate global poverty, improve the lives of workers, reduce tensions among nations, and help usher in a new age of peace and prosperity.

BTW, I've said many times that the TPP is only good if it has strong labor and environmental standards in it. We've seen no proof of their inclusion. And even if they are in there, without 'fast track' which Obama will never get from a republican congress, republicans will just strip out them out and pass their own version. So I agree with you with respect to the TPP unless it meets a much higher standard than I suspect it will.

But I do not agree with your opposition to the multilaterally governed trading system initiated by FDR and Truman.

[pangaia]

31. They are out of touch with humanity.

[appalachiablue]

60. We've already entered the post-human era I think. A dilemma as I'm big on humans.

Surplus labor big time. More prisons for that or just abandonment. Existential nightmare.
Oh here's the Pres. on Colbert now-

[1StrongBlackMan]

73. Question ...

What if the trade agreement came with wage protective measures, e.g., a floor for wages ... say ... $6-8/hr., and workplace safety/working condition protective measures, e.g., elimination of sweat shops, child labor, etc., and environmental protections.

Would you still oppose the TPP?

[cui bono]

82. And what if the sky was made of blueberry pudding and whipped cream?

Show that that is included in the TPP and then you can speculate that it will be good for us. Come on, you aren't naive. That would be akin to supporting unions and Obama isn't even doing that, let alone the majority Congress.

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. Well, that IS the U.S. Government's negotiation position ...

that the agreement include such "blueberry pudding and whipped cream" items as Wage protections, working condition protections and environmental protections.

http://www.ustr.gov/tpp/Summary-of-US-objectives

[cui bono]

84. Well isn't that nice. We were also told we were going to get a public option before the actual

bill was passed.

But seriously, you really believe this current US Govt wants things that are going to be decent for people? And besides, what good is $6-8/hr? We're fighting for a $15 minimum wage here in the US, why is below poverty level wages something that sounds good? And if that becomes some international standard via the TPP what of the countries who actually do look out for their workers where they get paid over $20/hr as a minimum? Are they going to be dragged down?

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. Yes, that is "nice" ...

but more, it's the U.S. Government's negotiating position.

But seriously, you really believe this current US Govt wants things that are going to be decent for people?

Yes.

And besides, what good is $6-8/hr? We're fighting for a $15 minimum wage here in the US, why is below poverty level wages something that sounds good?

Because a wage floor of $6-8/hr., would make it less profitable to (and arguably, would eliminate the competitive advantage of) shift(ing) manufacturing work overseas.

And if that becomes some international standard via the TPP what of the countries who actually do look out for their workers where they get paid over $20/hr as a minimum? Are they going to be dragged down?

If $.50/hr. hasn't affected those countries, then $6-8/hr. won't, either.

[liberal_at_heart]

8. Obama has never fought for labor, neither has Hillary. And it has been decades since

any of the Democratic Party has. The AFL-CIO needs to cut ties with the Democratic Party.

[lark]

11. Hillary and Obama are close to being 2 sides of the same coin

when it comes to economics and labor.

[hifiguy]

13. Don't forget Bill

He is now a made man for his services to the corporate overlords.

[Fred Sanders]

16. "NAFTA on steroids"? How can you argue with that level of analysis? Good going, TV host Ed!

Bring the conversation up to the level of a desperate weightlifter.

[pampango]

33. Even TPP's critics know that it has little to do with reducing tariffs like NAFTA did.

I have to admit that "NAFTA on steroids" has a nice ring to it.

[ReRe]

17. Does anyone know...

... how the poll came out? I called in, but I always miss the results. I wish they would send the results to the number one calls in on.

[PatrynXX]

20. No surprise on Hillary

Obama.. he's dealing with a crazy right wing flank. both Nafta and TPP are Conservative ideas. Nafta was supposed to be signed by Bush Sr.. why Obama is pushing this I don't know... this is part of the reason Hillary won't win in 2016. So if Obama wants to go right wing. he can do that alone. I'll cost more jobs than the XL pipeline oh wait nevermind XL Pipeline actually will cost more jobs but nevermind that

[TBF]

21. The XL pipeline is 35 permanent jobs.

Just so we're clear.

[INdemo]

44. Yes but the AFL-CIO

is for the pipeline...That is the leaders of the AFL-CIO are for it and they have tried to convince their members it will add Thousand of jobs.The Ironworkers and Pipefitters think they will have jobs but hey..The Koch Bros are involved and they hate unions so they will use non-union help as much as they can.
Anyway the TPP issue will defeat Hillary and its time for all real Democrats to make a serious effort to draft Elizabeth Warren.
She said she is not running but after this jobs killing "NAFTA II" she might reconsider

[TBF]

45. And the AFL-CIO is making a mistake

with this. I am with you. Both TPP and the pipeline are bad ideas. Pipeline is not worth the environmental risk for the low number of permanent jobs it would create, and TPP will put even more of our people out of work.

[Enthusiast]

68. We know the AFL-CIO is not always right.

I am pro-labor all the way but this time they are wrong.

[bread_and_roses]

23. Where are all the blue links to tell us how great TPP is?

Always follow the money. Always. The money, not the mouth.

[Jack Rabbit]

26. Good. Obama needs a good talking to about the TPP.

I doubt he'll listen.

Meanwhile, try this on local governments:

Please click here (PDF).

[Initech]

27. TPP will allow corporations to become self aware. And that's not good for anybody.

[99Forever]

32. Understand this:

The Washington DC Democrats DO NOT care even one little bit what We the People want or need. They care about one thing and one thing only, taking VERY good care of THEMSELVES.

So shut up and take it, our opinion doesn't matter, neither does the quality of our lives.

[pampango]

36. Are "Washington DC Democrats" those ""rich out-of-touch east coast open-borders globalist liberals"

that the right loves to talk about?

[99Forever]

38. Bait somebody else...

... I'm not bitin'.

[WillyT]

34. K & R !!!

[RiverLover]

39. Progressives stand up for People! Thank you Ed, & our OP!!

This thing cannot be allowed to go through. Corporate rule of nations, a part of the new world order, it is wrong and we must protest in HUGE numbers. Especially small business owners. Small farmers. Entrepreneurs. Labor unions. Hell, it will affect most of us.

They've protested in Asia against the TPP, we should too!!

?itok=aJkqU6Y8

Published on
Tuesday, April 22, 2014

'Corporate Colonialism': Protesters Slam TPP, US Military 'One-Two Punch'

Ahead of Obama visit, Asia-Pacific voices demand 'U.S. out'
by
Sarah Lazare, staff writer

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/04/22/corporate-colonialism-protesters-slam-tpp-us-military-one-two-punch

[bbgrunt]

40. k and r. I love me some ass kickin ED. I wonder how

much longer MSNBC will love him.

[INdemo]

55. Remember the Majory Sockholder of NBC is

Comcast. That could mean too many loud "barks" and Ed is out the door.

[helpmetohelpyou]

41. He will become more wealthy

than he or Michelle ever imagined once he pushes this through.
Yes they are wealthy now but they will surpass the Clintons .

Within 5 years out of the Whitehouse their net worth will be in the 100's of millions

They are going to owe him big time.

[JDPriestly]

42. Ed should invite Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren as regular guests at least on his radio show

even if MSNBC objects to his inviting them to his show on MSNBC.

Thatnks, Ed Schultz.

[DemandsRedPill]

43. let's harness the rage

My god if I could muster even one tenth the dissatisfaction and at times rage I see voiced here when I attend the local " kumbaya" singalongs (Democratic party functions locally) the party apparatchiks would think the revolution had started.

I sing very much off key for most of them (I actually put forth Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren type ideas) and therefore I'm seen as the local 'radical'.

I usually have no one covering my back.

Stay home and ignore what goes on in selecting loser's like Obama and Hillary? Shut up about what you end up with then.

You are getting the government you seem to demand so far as the so called leaders would know

Ever think that maybe a few of them get lonely

Let them know what you really think once in a while

[madfloridian]

48. Recommended.

[INdemo]

49. The Ed Show Video

http://www.msnbc.com/ed-show/watch/why-the-tpp-poses-danger-to-us-jobs-368870979944

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

50. We'll just lose more jobs and gain more trade debt

It's guaranteed that in Vietnam, for example, wages will be much lower, less benefits (if any), and more manufacturing will be outsourced there.

[AlbertCat]

51. Obama's

Apostrophe "s" is left over from Old English, which was a reflexive language meaning suffixes told you what part of speech the word was. In this instance the genitive case (a noun modifying another noun...usually possessive) added "es" ( I think Scandinavian languages still do this) but the "e" was eventually dropped, shown by the apostrophe.

The Normans tried to get rid of it and replace it with a prepositional phrase (the a$$ of Obama) like in French, but that didn't stick.

Here you have used the plural form of Obama.

We don't need any more than one. Even if they are in the form of a white woman with a familiar name.

He sure is much MUCH better than any of the alternatives offered in the last election, but....well he admires Reagan

Education is the key to reversing this! (That's why I went on an obnoxious, but I think interesting, exposition of apostrophe "s" y'know. I'm sure it was just a typo )

[CK_John]

52. Ed has no idea what he is talking about, TPP is not Nafta.

[JDPriestly]

63. Please explain why you think that the TPP is not NAFTA.

What are the diffferences?

[pampango]

65. Krugman thinks the TPP is "no big deal". I doubt that you or many others think the same of NAFTA.

No Big Deal

And you know what? That’s O.K. It’s far from clear that the T.P.P. is a good idea. It’s even less clear that it’s something on which President Obama should be spending political capital. I am in general a free trader, but I’ll be undismayed and even a bit relieved if the T.P.P. just fades away.

There’s a lot of hype about T.P.P., from both supporters and opponents. Supporters like to talk about the fact that the countries at the negotiating table comprise around 40 percent of the world economy, which they imply means that the agreement would be hugely significant. But trade among these players is already fairly free, so the T.P.P. wouldn’t make that much difference.

Meanwhile, opponents portray the T.P.P. as a huge plot, suggesting that it would destroy national sovereignty and transfer all the power to corporations. This, too, is hugely overblown. Corporate interests would get somewhat more ability to seek legal recourse against government actions, but, no, the Obama administration isn’t secretly bargaining away democracy.

So don’t cry for T.P.P. If the big trade deal comes to nothing, as seems likely, it will be, well, no big deal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/opinion/krugman-no-big-deal.html?_r=0

[Enthusiast]

69. You are really really going to a lot of effort to defend the TPP.

[pampango]

72. If "no big deal" is a defense, so be it. And it is really not that much effort.

I suppose it's the best I can do for an agreement that I would only support under specific circumstances that you and I agree are unlikely to happen. If holding out the slightest hope that an international agreement could be good makes me a 'defender', I can live with that.

[bvar22]

86. Krugman was also a big supporter of NAFTA.

He has since changed his position on NAFTA (somewhat), but never apologized for selling out America's Working Class.


When it comes to International Trade, I don't value Krugman's advice.

[CK_John]

74. About 5 1/2 billion buyers.

[wzw90334]

56. This is a reflection of a bad

This is a reflection of a bad

[George II]

57. Don't forget, Ed raged about why the Keystone Pipeline was IMPORTANT to America....

....for months and months, then suddenly changed his tune when it suited him.

I've lost a lot of respect for him with his ranting and raving without really getting into the substance of his rants or raves.

[Enthusiast]

70. He didn't change his tune when it suited him. He changed his tune when he was clued in on truth.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

59. Go, Big ED!

[Samantha]

61. Of course Hillary helped write it

She takes a very active part in the Clinton Global Initiative. And yes, I do believe that President Obama thinks he owes more to the Clintons than he does Labor.

I also believe President Obama has as a personal goal following the trail of former President Bill Clinton into playing a larger role on the world stage (after he leaves office). Standing by Labor at the expense of Bill and Hillary Clinton gets him exactly nowhere in the aftermath of his two terms.

Don't misconstrue these words as meaning I hold the President in disfavor. I voted for him twice, I believe he has done a remarkable job on handling the economic recovery in the Bush* aftermath, and he has done some very positive things such as ACA. However, he did say in his campaign days, he didn't want to be President of the blue states or the red states, he wanted to be President of the United States. In my opinion, that is exactly what he has done -- lived up to what he said he wanted to do. One cannot say he was not honest about his intentions.

I believe he will be regarded as one of the greatest Presidents we have had sit in the Oval Office.

Sam

[hopemountain]

64. the video of the president's "statements" seemed forced

he is a great speaker but not on this video. i got the feeling he does not believe a word he is saying in support of the tpp - especially when he spoke about jobs & about the environment. completely different from his statements in australia when is speech is strong regarding what will be acceptable and not acceptable with international trade agreements partners. but in the video ed showed, the president's statements are choppy and not believable .... makes me wonder if he is feining support - and why he is doing so? why would he support something created in secret when transparancy is something he tries to bring to the forefront?

[Enthusiast]

66. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch!

Way to go, Ed!

[Phlem]

75. There are some on this site that have been saying this

Last edited Tue Dec 9, 2014, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)

very thing for a long time. We usually get slimed by third way supporters. I'm glad this is finally seeing some light. This is what we get when we elect Republican lite. Also why I get so frustrated by the blind support for Hillary.

We need to turn left as we've been marching rightward since Clinton. We need to be the Liberal party again. No holds barred. Fucking embrace it and wear like a badge of honor.

I will repeat this until we as a party become unified as a Liberal party and reject anything that remotely smells of third way.

[raouldukelives]

77. Every investor in Wall St is demanding it happens.

And it will happen because of them. Every dollar invested a vote of confidence for more of the same. Every dollar invested in hopes that the corporations will figure out a way to make it really work for them and aren't they pleased when they finally do.
Sure, it sucks for those that love America and honor the sacrifices of those who came before them. And yeah, it is really horrible for people who love nature and wildlife or those who think saving a little for the next generation isn't a bad idea. But they just don't understand how cool money is and how it eases the pain that occasionally may pinch the very slimmest examples of liberal mentalities.

[woo me with science]

89. kick

[woo me with science]

90. kick