MaggieD
MaggieD's JournalIs that what you call these links?
Because here is what you got:
1. HRC's role in the TPP was the same as every SoS in a potential U.S. trade pact. No more, no less. It's an international negotiation.
2. It's not ""Hillary's" TPP, and a post by someone else who claims that doesn't make that so.
3. Yeah, that's what she has said is wrong with it - it will hurt US workers. I think that is exactly the same reason she voted against CAFTA in 2005.
To me they are those that....
.... that believe their PERFECT political candidate exists, and that every other candidate is awful and corrupt. (and they insult and disdain anyone who doesn't share their reverence for their chosen one).
Then they project that image of perfection on to the chosen demigod they have created in their head. Naturally, in time, they realize their demigod is not really a demigod after all. Reality eventually sets in. Their perfect candidate (who never actually existed) becomes the awful corrupt one, and a new demigod is anointed.
For a recent example see Obama 2007 and Obama 2015.
I don't have a side
As I have repeated about 100 times now, I welcome ALL Democrats in the race. I don't believe in bashing any Democrat. I know you do, but I do not share your view.
I will donate to every Dem in the primary (with the exception of Chafee if he runs). I believe in a robust primary process. The nomination is decided by the time my state holds one. I wil vote for the Democratic nominee in the general.
And now I will journal this so I can cut and paste it when "you folks" snarl at me because I won't pledge my fealty to your preferred candidate.
The NY Post is a right wing rag
And, please show me where she supports the TPP. Here is a verifiable list of her populist positions based on actions and statements from many years past, including in the senate:
Pushed for SCHIP
- Early childhood education
- Expansion of the earned income credit
- Expansion of CPSF
- Spoken out about outrageous CEO compensation
- Wants decrease in corporate welfare
- Against corps using bankruptcy to do away with pension responsibilities
- Support for universal healthcare
- Wants repeal of corporate subsidies for companies moving US jobs offshore
- Criticized "corporate elite" for treating workers as "invisible"
- Against school vouchers
- Voted against CAFTA / opposed NAFTA even though she wasn't a senator yet (gets a 17% rating by right wing group CATO on free trade)
- Supports constitutional amendment against Citizen's United
- Supports same day voter registration
- Supports increase in the minimum wage - has repeatedly stated the working poor deserve a living wage
- Supports unions
- No SS privatization - rejects COLA adjustments that screw seniors
- Pushed for unemployment insurance extensions
- Voted no on raising estate tax exemption from $1 mil to $5 mil
- Rated 80% by CTJ in supporting progressive taxation
Perhaps you didn't fully read the article
She pressed for Asian countries to open their doors to US based companies. That creates jobs here (and is a populist thing to do). She has made numerous comments on currency manipulation in the Asian markets, even when she was in the Senate. That seems to be her main interest in the TPP. Further opening markets to US businesses is one of the State departments prime responsibilities.
Now I will say I am against the TPP, BUT the idea is that it would create more enforceable rules around currency manipulation that is currently occurring in Asian markets. Currency manipulation distorts trade flows by artificially lowering the cost of U.S. imports and raising the cost of U.S. exports, and that causes trade deficits and lost jobs in the country or countries that do not manipulate the currency.
If I thought they would actually enforce sections of any trade agreement that would stop this currency manipulation, I might be more inclined to be supportive as a voter. But as for HRC, she has been very consistent on the issue of currency manipulation and how it hurts American workers. The TPP is going to sail without or without US involvement. If the US can genuinely impact it to decrease the trade deficit that would be a good thing. But reasonable people can disagree on whether there is more good than bad to be had with US participation.
I think if you understood the issue better you would not be accusing HRC of being an oligarch. There is just nothing in her history that supports that kind of derision.
I'll play devil's advocate
Now I will say I am against the TPP, BUT the idea is that it would create more enforceable rules around currency manipulation that is currently occurring in Asian markets. Currency manipulation distorts trade flows by artificially lowering the cost of U.S. imports and raising the cost of U.S. exports, and that causes trade deficits and lost jobs in the country or countries that do not manipulate the currency.
If I thought they would actually enforce sections of any trade agreement that would stop this currency manipulation, I might be more inclined to be supportive as a voter. But I THINK that is one of the places Obama is coming from on the issue.
I really wish we could jettison the "it's secret" bullshit and actually have a public debate about this by our politicians. Enough is known to have that debate.
Profile Information
Member since: 2001Number of posts: 7,393
