Is It Wrong For Me To Believe That Obama Is Playing 3D Chess With This TPP?.....

[global1]

I keep hoping that there is something in this trade agreement that Obama knows about that will make the Repugs regret that they joined forces with him to pass it.

Even to the point that Pelosi may have staged that rebellion a week or so ago - is she in on it? Was that a ploy on Obama and Pelosi's part to further lure the Repugs in voting for this agreement?

I still have to believe that Obama is sincere when he says why would he do something counter to what he's been doing for all his years in office. That he wouldn't support anything that would hurt the economy he worked so hard to bring back from the brink. That he wouldn't do anything to cause more unemployment - because he worked so hard to get the employment numbers where they are today.

Something is just not adding up to me. It seems an uncharacteristically 180 degree turn for Obama - and I just don't think he has it in him to be doing this just a a legacy thing.

Come on - his legacy will be he was the first black President of the U.S. That seems pretty good to me for a legacy given the odds that were against him. And all through his administration he's done more good for this country than not. Why would he want to hurt his image. For some reason I don't see him as a money grubbing ex-pol that will be out to just make a speech and collect a fee when he leaves office. Seems to me that the more he gets the people of this country to like him - the more successful he will be as he retires from his Presidency and begins to do good for the world - which I feel he will do.

Does Obama have an ace up his sleeve on this or is it just wishful thinking on my part?

[onecaliberal]

1. He's not playing chess.

[Maedhros]

2. Obama doesn't work for us.

He's doing what he's told.

[Elwood P Dowd]

6. You left out "what he's told by Wall Street".

His crowd is infested with those types. The USTR has Robert Rubin trained execs writing the TPP.

[think]

3. Bill Clinton & NAFTA. Same scenario..../nt

[truedelphi]

59. Without the titialiting diversions with the intern, of course.

Otherwise this Presidency is just Clinton Administration 3.0

[haikugal]

61. You said it for me! n/t

[truedelphi]

69. Although if you had typed it, maybe you'd have

Spelled "Titillating" properly! (Still not sure if it is spelled right.)

[haikugal]

70. It's right....LOL

tit·il·lat·ing
ˈtidlˌādiNG/
adjective
arousing mild sexual excitement or interest; salacious.
"she let slip titillating details about her clients"

The second time.....

Hey, shit happens....lol

[immoderate]

4. He could be securing his retirement.

--imm

[SammyWinstonJack]

71. Oh, no doubt.

[cherokeeprogressive]

91. Be interesting to see how much the Obama's are worth in ten years. n/t

[guillaumeb]

5. I vote for "wishful thinking" as the answer.

The President started his presidency taking off the table any discussion of the Iraq war, the lies and manipulation used by the GOP to start it, and stated that he would not support any investigation of the Bush cabal.

He followed that up with the statement that he would not investigate the role of the bankers in nearly ruining the US economy.

He told us that we should look forward rather than to the past.

We then got a gigantic subsidy to the insurance companies disguised as the ACA.

We have also had unprecedented levels of attacks against whistleblowers, assaults on journalistic freedom, and NSA spying on everyone.

Now we have another corporate-written, lobbyist influenced, totally secret, (at least as far as the American people go), trade deal that the President assures us will be better than NAFTA.

Please.

[global1]

9. Putting It That Way - I Want My Campaign Contribution Money Back From Him......nt

[guillaumeb]

12. I did put it that way.

But if you had a choice of Scalia and Roberts or, Kagan and Sotomayor, which pair would you pick?

Obama was clearly the better choice, but when money rules, as it does in the US, money generally talks louder than average citizens.

[salib]

85. Yep, once he had the nomination, remember the other choice was Hillary

I worked as hard as I could for the Democrat to win. Yes, he was the Dem.

I would do it again in a second. No problem.

I expect nearly everyone here would do the same.

That said, let's make sure we can vote for, work for, support with all our hearts someone we really believe in, trust and will do us proud. Let's do him proud.

[ladyVet]

72. Thank you. And I'm supposed to be happy with HRC, who will do much the same. nt

[guillaumeb]

111. I would not say that one is supposed to be happy with HRC,

but would ANY of the GOP nominees represent a better choice? Clearly not. I much prefer President Obama's choices for SCOTUS, Kagan and Sotomayor, over Roberts and Scalia and Alito. Unfortunate that many progressive Democrats can only vote for a "somewhat better alternative" rather than a candidate who truly represents change.

And given that every low turnout election leads to GOP wins, I do not feel that not-voting really represents a good idea.

[leftstreet]

7. LOL

[SaranchaIsWaiting]

8. I don't know about the chess game thing.

But I feel much the same way you do. It would be so out of character for him to suddenly turn repug evil. You are right, just doesn't add up. Maybe this deal is an exception to the ones previous and really is the better thing to do.

I don't know but I am certainly not going after him with my claws out because I don't know.

[cilla4progress]

15. I'm with you -

giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Here's what I think it is (and he's said it): if we DON"T pass TPP and participate in these trade negotiations and helping to draft the documents, we leave it wide open for China.

So, yes, I think chess. Unfortunately I think China is winning! Got us boxed in!

[Marr]

10. At this point, that 'three dimensional chess' line is outright delusional.

It's Obama's second term and he's put his cards on the table. Everyone who argued that he was just cleverly acting like a corporate Dem to achieve something else has been proven thoroughly, undeniably, unredeemably wrong. He is exactly what he appeared to be when he filled his cabinet with Third Wayers and Wall Street CEO's back in 2008.

[Andy823]

11. I wonder the same thing

The problem is you can't talk about it on DU because some here have convinced a large number here that the president is evil, that he is doing it all for "money", that he is a republican, and all kinds of other insane things. Some republicans are not happy about this passing either. I keep saying that we all need to wait to judge this deal until all the facts come out, and when the do come out I sure hope that he pulled one over on the republicans. I trust him more than the hair on fire group here on DU that keep making claims that never come true, yet never seem to apologize for their mistakes. If am wrong, I will admit it, but not till all the facts come out. I think that's only fair.

[Kelvin Mace]

19. I don't think he is evil

he has just been suborned by the system, and he betrays us with a delusional justification that he is "helping us". When he leaves office he will never want for anything financially and will not have to suffer consequences of his actions like the rest of us will.

[Andy823]

35. Sorry I don't buy that. nt

[GoneFishin]

130. ".. he will never want for anything financially and will not have to suffer consequences .."

Let that sink in, and remember that in the end he is just a guy who is doing what he thinks is the best for himself and his family.

He would not be the first guy to betray voters using the rational that his family comes first, or that he knows what is "best" for us.

[Control-Z]

21. Yes, I feel the exact same. n/t

[Kelvin Mace]

14. Sorry, but you are wrong

There is no 3 or 11 dimensional chess going on. It is simply a man betraying the rest of us for money. HRC will do the same thing.

[cilla4progress]

16. I disagree.

He has stated he believes if we walk away we leave a huge vacuum for China to fill.

[Art_from_Ark]

116. And what vacuum would be filled by China?

What huge vacuum in Japan, or Australia, or Canada, or Mexico, or New Zealand, or Peru, or Singapore is going to suddenly open up to China if TPP is defeated?

[cilla4progress]

119. My understanding is

we are vying with them for top dog position in setting trade policy.

[Art_from_Ark]

122. And yet, Obama has said that China is being considered for TPP membership

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/barack-obama-china-join-trade-deal-tpp-118598.html

[djean111]

128. China is just this week's boogeyman. This sets privileges for corporations, the countries

involved are not important. And people in Europe are just as angry about the TTIP - not just us and the Pacific Rim being reamed.

[Art_from_Ark]

135. Reaming is right

Here's but one example of potential reaming here in Japan-- at will firing of employees, which right now is virtually unheard of.

The boss (at the desk) is saying "Starting next month, your salary is cut in half. If you don't like it, you will be terminated with 3 months severance pay."

Note the Pandora's box marked "TPP" on the right.

[djean111]

136. Funny, I don't see China in there. Maybe the Chinese were going to swoop in and fire everyone,

and the TPP will ensure that Japan can do that first? What a joke this all is. A destructive joke. I am offended at the "But China! But the poor Vietnamese farmers!" bullshit.

[Art_from_Ark]

137. Here's another potential "benefit" of TPP in Japan

The graphic says, "There are major concerns about decreasing quality of medical care, and higher patient costs. Increasing costs of "free" diagnoses. Shrinking scope of health insurance coverage. And unprofitable medical facilities withdrawing from smaller communities."

[djean111]

138. Yep. Those poor Vietnamese farmers are gonna see health care costs go up, too.

If they get any health care, that is.

[lame54]

17. there only thing i can think of...

that he is being blackmailed by the supreme court who holds the future of the affordable care act (which will be his legacy) in their hands

I know that is far-fetched but it's all i've got - otherwise i don't get him at all when it comes to this deal

[Kelvin Mace]

23. It is very simple

and doesn't require a blackmailing SCOTUS.

When he leaves office he can either be modestly wealthy or obscenely rich. Support for TPP will mean dozens of six-figure seats on corporate boards, hundreds of speeches at six figures a pop, 8 figure book deals, seven figure "consulting jobs", and more vacations and more rides on luxury jets than you or I can imagine up to the day he draws his last breath.

Compare Bill Clinton's net worth when he left office and signed the Glass-Stegall repeal into law with his net worth today.

Follow the money.

[lame54]

25. not buying that...

I'm no Obama sycophant but he has shown no sign of pure greed

there something else motivating him

[SaranchaIsWaiting]

29. Same, no sale. Obama is not like a Clinton when it comes to greed and money.

absolutely for sure.

[Marr]

31. Yes-- he believes things like NAFTA and the TPP are great.

It really isn't very complex. He was groomed and screened before he ever entered the primaries. His position on things like international trade were key reasons he got so much support from big business.

It doesn't mean he's evil, it just means he isn't on your side.

[lame54]

33. if this is purely for his own financial gain - then yes...

it means he is completely evil

I don't think he is

[Marr]

36. That's my point. I don't think he's doing it for his personal financial gain.

I think he's doing it because he believes in trickle down economics; that what's good for big business is good for the country. Now, believing those things is also incredibly lucrative for a politician, and most people have an uncanny tendency to earnestly believe things that benefit them-- but I don't for one second believe he's consciously pushing things like this for a pay check.

[dreamnightwind]

40. Exactly

Amazing how so many look so hard to find some other theory when the truth is right in front of them. Obama believes in this kind of thing, he has surrounded himself with other people who also believe in it, and actively excluded those who don't. It couldn't be more obvious.

[Marr]

43. Yep.

Have you ever seen those old models of the solar system that were built in the 1400's or so? Big mechanical contraptions that were amazingly complex, with the sun and all the other planets orbiting the earth. They were totally wrong, of course, but they could, with a lot of painstaking balancing, explain the movement of heavenly bodies.

That's what this kind of talk always reminds me of. It's exactly what it looks like, and it's very, very simple. But if you don't want to see it, you just build a big machine that sort of... kind of... explains it all and let's you keep on believing the sun is orbiting the earth. lol.

[dreamnightwind]

50. I'm not generally an Occam's Razor type

I believe we live in a highly complex and difficult to understand world where things are often not what they seem. In this case, though, every step of the way Obama has shown us who he is, that is after his campaign rhetoric about renegotiating NAFTA was no longer needed.

People don't want to believe he's evil, but as you said, that is not necessary, or even how I see the truth. Obama sees multinational corporatism as a force for the greater good, and he is willing to make American workers take a hit if that's what it takes to (in his mind) align us in the global trade alliances.

I completely disagree with Obama, but it's about buying into a different world view, so-called New Democrats are working for a multinational corporatist agenda, they admit as much, and only pretend otherwise during campaign season or when they think they need to low-key their agenda, such as how Hillary is sitting in the corner hoping noone notices her re the TPP.

[Kelvin Mace]

94. If a person shoots you in the head

do you care that he may not be evil, but is simply killing you to make the world a better place, and coincidentally, make himself fabulously rich at the same time?

Seems to me a distinction without a difference.

I don't care what world view he is "buying into", what matters is he is selling us into penury to pay for it.

[dreamnightwind]

100. Sure, but my comments were in the context of...

posters who were buying into and even inventing all sorts of 11 dimensional chess rationale, because they couldn't buy into "Obama is evil".

I was pointing out that you don't have to believe he's evil to believe he is actually in favor of the TPP, so their whole 11 dimensional chess thing was not neccessary (or at all appropriate) to explain his advocacy of the issue.

And I am in no way excusing him pushing this issue down our throats, it totally sucks.

[Kelvin Mace]

108. My apologies

for Being clumsy in amplifying your point. We are pretty much in agreement.

[dreamnightwind]

109. No problem, my apologies if I took you wrong, and yes we do agree - n/t

[Locrian]

106. that's really it in a nutshell

He's not evil - just not a very creative thinker. He's set himself up with the "best and brightest" (puke) and sincerely believes he's doing the "right" - even "difficult" thing.

The bubble is a very real system - and it's captured him in it completely. In the end he respects power, and success - like most of the people who have it - so he follows whatever that system tells him is the correct path. A reinforcing feedback loop of same old same old.

[Kelvin Mace]

93. So, that would make him an absolute fool

whose policies are replays of thoroughly discredited policies which just so happens will make him a very rich man.

[Kelvin Mace]

92. He started betraying us almost as soon as he hit Washington

He appointed thugs like Rham Emanuel, refused to prosecute torture and other war crimes, refused to prosecute Wall Street, reneged on closing Guantanamo, dropped the public option for health care reform and let the insurance industry write the law, etc, etc.

He played the Left who had bought into the whole "hope and chnage" lie, then sold us out to the rich and powerful.

[dreamnightwind]

107. I certainly agree with that

His cabinet appointments, and choosing Rick Warren to do his inaugural prayer, those said a lot.

For me the absolute crystalizing moment was a fairly early (in his presidency) interview he did on Rachel Maddow's MS-NBC show. He just had a certain attitude, he clearly enjoyed punching the left in the nuts. It was understated but seemed frighteningly real to me. I remember at that moment looking at my then-wife and saying "he's not one of us". Sadly he's never given me much reason to reconsider that remark.

[magical thyme]

97. the carrot is usually backed up with a stick

back when I worked in a multinational corporate headquarters, we saw how the "wheels" did business when our CEO sold us out.

He likely was given a choice -- do as you're told and we'll make you obscenely wealthy or don't do our bidding and be lucky to get a job flipping burgers.

[bowens43]

18. He plays 3D chess all time, problem is he's a shitty chess player.

[SamKnause]

20. No, it is not wrong for you to believe that.

I don't agree with you, but who am I to tell you what to believe ?

I don't think history or evidence supports your belief.

These so called Free Trade Deals are destroying this country.

They harm the workers in the countries we trade with.

They are not meant to or set up to protect workers.

They are meant to enrich global corporations.

[HappyMe]

27. Those are exactly my concerns with this deal.

I really, really want to believe that this won't make things worse. I have to admit I'm having a hard time with it.

[Avalux]

22. I really really want to believe it too.

I have always supported Obama and think he tries to do the right thing, but this is a WHAMMY.

The only redeemable argument in his favor, is that if we didn't pass TPP, it will give China the upper hand in the global economy. At least we will be an equal player now. (This is what I've heard, since none of us really know what it says).

It makes me sad though, to think that this piece of legislation may very well be the nail in the coffin of the people of this country, and Obama did it.

[Bradical79]

24. It's mostly in line with the initial profile I had heard about him

In that he was a pragmatic moderate, which I tend to understand as corporate bought politician, but not irrational far right nutter like the vast majority of today's Republicans. It's not his willingness to push the TPP that I find surprising, but how hard he's fought the majority of the Democratic party on it.

[Agnosticsherbet]

26. I think Obama is doing what he thinks is right,

Which should not be confused with what is right. We will not know until it is too late how it turns out.

I do not believe he is owned by Wall Street, though many do.

[truebrit71]

28. Well we know who the pawns are....

...

[truebluegreen]

30. "Yes." It is wishful thinking.

Obama is a very nice man, a very moral man, a very smart man...who has spent his presidency listening to the wrong people. "Experts". The "smartest guys in the room," no doubt. I am sure that he thinks this is the best thing for the country. Unfortunately, he is far from his community organizer roots and now seems to believe that if something is good for the business class it is good for America. It is top down, not bottom up. Maybe his "community organizing" was formative in the opposite way that many of us assumed. "Cause I don't see him as in it for the money, personally. He just isn't a progressive, or even a liberal (certainly there is nothing liberal about his signature accomplishment the ACA). More's the pity.

He has been better than the alternative, certainly...and not what we needed.

[Maedhros]

52. How moral are signature strikes, or double taps? [n/t]

[truebluegreen]

82. Fine. He's not moral.

You convinced me.

[Maedhros]

86. We shouldn't be minimizing the misery we heap on third world citizens.[n/t]

[truebluegreen]

90. You are absolutely correct.

I was attempting to deflect the "you're just a hater" responses.

[aikoaiko]

32. I think the correct metaphor is "11th dimensional chess"

[Hoyt]

34. I think he knows we are in trouble long-term if we do nothing.

[arcane1]

37. "I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer."

Sounds familiar. Someone once lied by saying we must do something that sucks, because doing nothing would be worse.


http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/bush.speech.txt/

[Hoyt]

38. So, we shouldn't do anything about climate change, etc., because george

war bush and Cheney lied to us about Iraq. Brilliant.

[arcane1]

42. Not even a nice try. Climate change is a real, actual threat.

The "Yellow Peril" from China is not.

[Hoyt]

44. Trying to maintain an economy here that keeps people from complaining is real.

We aren't gonna do that trading among ourselves, unless people lower their expectations. I think your being a bit short-sighted on the TPP.

[arcane1]

47. Strawman. We are already trading with Asian countries, without the TPP.

So the claim that we would be "trading among ourselves" without the TPP is both false and dishonest.

If honest arguments aren't available, then perhaps you're being too loyal to the TPP and its beneficiaries.

[Hoyt]

51. Perhaps you are believing the junk about how bad TPP and TTIP are

I guess all those country's governments -- including Scandinavian countries - just aren't as smart as you.

[djean111]

129. People in Europe are angry about the TTIP. The governments could care less. This is not about

trade between countries; we already do that. This is about corporate rule.

[appalachiablue]

131. +1

[Hoyt]

139. Yes, some protesters in Europe are against it. Their governments aren't --

including Bernie Sander's Scandinavian countries --

because they realize it's important for their future in providing healthcare, welfare, education, JOBS, etc., to the people who will riot in the future if that is impacted from lack of growth and progress.

[jeff47]

63. We already have free trade agreements with 80% of the GDP covered by the TPP.

That's hardly "trading among ourselves". 12% of the remaining GDP is Japan. Where the average tariff paid is a whopping 1.2%. Currency fluctuation between the Yen and the Dollar utterly dwarf that 1.2%.

In the remaining 8%, there are zero countries with massive, 1920s-level tariffs.

So no, the TPP isn't about free trade. We already have free trade or de-facto free trade.

[Jim Lane]

112. So will Obama sign the bill that PROHIBITS trade negotiators from addressing climate change?

That's the actual bill that just passed. That's the actual bill that Obama apologists are hailing as a great victory.

[Hoyt]

113. Do you have a specific citation. Besides, it is a trade agreement, not an environmental agreement

and there are environmental protection standards in the expected TPP.

Sounds like something one might read on the fearmonger websites.

[Jim Lane]

114. Thanks for providing me with today’s laugh.

As often as you’ve posted about TPP and related legislation, it’s more than a little amusing that you reveal such abysmal ignorance about the subject.

I often include citations for my assertions. In this instance, I didn’t, because, frankly, I thought it had been so widely reported that anyone who got this far down in a trade thread would know about it.

Even without a citation, though, a moment with your favorite search engine would have verified the accuracy of my statement. For example, from this piece by CNN, which most of us don’t consider a fearmonger website, you could learn of two provisions inserted into the bill: “one stating the President cannot make any changes to immigration policies as part of trade negotiations, and another barring the administration from including any climate change provisions as part of the final TPP deal.”

For a more detailed analysis, there’s a good Huffington Post article: “Anti-Climate Provision Gives Democrats Fresh Reason To Oppose Obama On Trade”. An excerpt:

The House is poised to vote on a package of trade bills, including fast-track authority for Obama, as early as Friday. Three additional trade bills will be considered, including a customs enforcement bill. Within the customs bill is the anti-climate language added by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who has acted as the administration's go-to person in the House on trade. Unless that language is first changed by the Rules Committee, it will stay in the bill.

. . . .

Ryan offered the climate amendment to appeal to Republican concerns that Obama might use his trade powers to act on climate change. The measure would "ensure that trade agreements do not require changes to U.S. law or obligate the United States with respect to global warming or climate change." (emphasis added)

As for your bland assertion that it won’t be a problem because this is merely a trade agreement, note from the HuffPo article that environmentalists disagree with you. Quoted are spokespersons for 350.org and Friends of the Earth. I'm sure that some Republicans consider those organizations to be fearmongers on climate change. For my part, however, I credit their assessments of the environmental impact, especially as compared with the blandishments of a pseudonymous Obama loyalist who wasn’t even aware of this provision.

[Hoyt]

115. You better check your sources, looks like climate change prohibition may not have been part of

deal that passed Wednesday. You were quoting stuff from a week ago in the House. It went back to the Senate.


http://www.bleedingheartland.com/diary/7604/fasttrack-trade-promotion-authority-heads-to-obamas-desk-how-the-iowans-voted

"According to David Dayen, the riders limiting the president's authority to negotiate on climate change were added to the customs bill to get votes from King and other "far-right" House Republicans, but there is "no guarantee they [will] stay in the customs bill," which will be finalized in a conference committee. Dayen added, "I don't see how this conference will come up with anything satisfactory that can get the votes in the House & Senate, in fact." If the customs bill never passes Congress, King and his allies will have been snowed."

Besides, that wouldn't prohibit environmental standards in TPP.

Immigration reform is internal to the USA, so wouldn't apply to international trade anyway.

[Marr]

39. And isn't it funny how those encroaching perils always

seem to mesh so perfectly with things the person wanted to do already?

[arcane1]

46. There comes a point when the fearmongering no longer works.

Hopefully, this is it.

[pampango]

101. The GOP fervently hope that we have not reached the "point when the fearmongering no longer works".

That's all they've got to run their campaigns on. If appealing to fear and emotion (with a dose of American exceptionalism) don't work they are in deep doo-doo.

[joshcryer]

103. TPP solves zero long term issues.

Zero. TPP is kicking down the road the real issues that we face. China is our biggest product creator. The idea is to grab non-China countries so that instead of "Made in China" on your products you start seeing "Made in Vietnam." Or "Made in Peru." Or "Made in Malaysia."

Long term automation is going to destroy labor regardless of the product being created or the service. That is not solved by trade agreements, it can only be solved by a basic income. No Presidential candidate is broaching this issue. That includes the candidate I support Bernie Sanders. No one is going there.

[Hoyt]

104. I agree completely with the automation issue, and need to address.

[tridim]

41. If anyone thinks he isn't, you haven't been paying attention for the last seven years.

He plays the same way every time, different moves same strategy.

And he always wins because he is orders of magnitude smarter than everyone else in D.C.

[Marr]

45. Are you suggesting Obama doesn't actually want to pass the TPP? /nt

[Frustratedlady]

133. I agree. I'm hoping a lot of Democrats will be eating crow when this is over.

Obama wouldn't be so convinced that this was a great deal for the U.S. if it wasn't. He wouldn't be stuffing his pockets for retirement. He can knock out a few books if he needs money or give speeches, which he loves to do and is good at. He hasn't come this far with his successes to screw the whole picture up for his legacy.

It always amazes me how people can come up with all these scenarios when they haven't even read the agreement. Do they have ESP? Psychics? Fortune Tellers? Spies?

Keep the faith. Obama isn't going to put himself in a precarious position at this point in his presidency. He isn't an evil man. Remember, he enjoys sitting back and seeing everyone wriggle thru the sludge of embarrassment when they find out this president was only watching out for our own good. Don't give his hand away. Back off and let him do his job.

[ananda]

48. I guess it's called Career Advancement Chess.

Obama and the pro-TPP Dems could obviously care less
about their constituents and the well-being of Americans.

Their future careers and financial well-being are secure, though.

[tavernier]

49. Of course it is wrong for you to believe that

here on DU. Haven't you been paying attention? This guy is a born scheister, a dirty dog, double crossing, dastardly, low down horse rustler. He would sooner kick your mother than help her across the street. And you would know it if you looked into those steely soulless eyes... Nuthin there but his insatiable lust for money. Your money.

Pay attention. It's all right here in DU.



Not much different these days from freeperville.

[Maedhros]

53. Well, some of us care about the poor and working classes

and don't like to see nasty trade agreements further undercut their ability to earn a living.

You obviously care more about propping up your hero.

[tavernier]

60. Hey, don't shoot the messenger!

I'm just answering the OP's question based on all I've read here lately. I thought I was actually being quite kind compared with some of the rotten tomatoes he's taken.

As for my personal opinion, I believe I don't yet have enough information, so I haven't stated one. But once I do, I will welcome your input.

[Solomon]

64. Hey, don't forget "piece of shit used car salesman"!

What? "Still don't think he's a used car salesman?"

[Dream Girl]

54. I have to agree that there is more to this than meets the eye (nt)

[a kennedy]

55. Naive of me......when will we find out that this deal really stinks....how long before we can

say that this deal was a horribly one?

[sendero]

56. I've heard this for seven years..

... yet he's never won a game of this so-called 3D chess.

No, it is a simple as it looks. It's a corporate bill that virtually every Republican supported and Obama did also because he's owned by the rich like 99% of the politicians in Washington.

[frylock]

57. Yes.

[Recursion]

58. He's been pretty straightforward: he thinks this will be good for the economy

I don't think you need to read anything in to that.

It is actually possible to sincerely hold opinions different from the DU orthodoxy.

[winter is coming]

62. There's a school of thought that when the economy does well, people will do well.

Actually, it's the other way around, but that's not what corporate lobbyists want to believe/hear.

There is no secret plan to help ordinary people. We're no longer part of the equation.

[glinda]

65. yes

[Hekate]

66. Not wrong. He has stated his reasons more than once. He has not betrayed us. There will be....

....congressional and public review as part of the usual process for trade agreements, and all on the usual time line.

I look forward to discussion outside the fact-free zone.

[questionseverything]

83. up or down vote with a r senate and r house

i do not trust the repubs like you seem to

[Hekate]

84. And whose fault is it that he has to work with a Repub majority? Voters who stayed home...

...either sulking that life's not perfect or too disinterested in the outcome to bother.

[Marr]

98. It's amazing how far you'll stretch to blame the public, and to excuse Obama. /nt

[Hekate]

99. Democratic voters stayed home in the midterms. That's the truth, not a stretch. nt

[MFrohike]

117. What?

He's relying on Republican votes because the overwhelming majority of Democrats won't support it. You can push that lie about people staying home all you want, but the actual vote totals in the United States Congress tell the real story. His party doesn't back him because they think it sucks and they've seen it. It might be a rational move to side with the majority of the Democratic party in this instance. Just a thought.

[CANDO]

67. And mark my words....

From this time forward, in conversations with conservatives... all you'll hear is how Democratic POTUS' gave us these destructive trade deals. I guarantee it.

[lamp_shade]

68. I believe firmly that he has an ace up his sleeve. I trust the man. n/t

[Baitball Blogger]

73. I think we need to find a new leader of the Democratic party in the interim.

With racial issues heating up, it would be a good idea to find someone we can all rely on without having to worry about developing a schizophrenic relationship with the party. Because this is really too much emotional back and forth.

[PowerToThePeople]

74. Yes, it is wrong. n/t

[haele]

75. He's a communitarian, not a populist.

The President has made that clear by starting out all the actual policies requiring an act of Congress that he has pushed from a position of negotiation rather than from the opening position statement that was made to the public.
Communitarians will justify all actions that are seen to be for "the greater good for the continuance of the operation". They practice rule by committee; let's get together, hammer out our differences, and sing kumbaya at the end with the most people with the loudest voices making the most promises leaving the happiest. Whether it's actually the best position for the community at large in the long run can be debatable, but at least everyone at the committee table had a say.
That doesn't mean the person is a bad person or has bad ideals. It just mean that that person has a greater interest in making sure that everything runs smoothly than going through the pain that might actually get an issue fixed.

So, no, sadly. I don't think he has an ace up his sleeve. I don't think he's an actual corporate stooge, but I think that because of what he had to do and who he had to associate with as a community organizer, and to get elected, that "best thing for the community at large" mentality overshadows most of any native populist opinions he might have.

Haele

[Cleita]

76. It's not wrong and it's not wrong for you to believe in unicorns, but neither is reality based. eom

[Renew Deal]

77. Obama's legacy is his trail of success. He's a winner.

[EV_Ares]

78. Nope, I think you are absolutely correct global1.

[99Forever]

79. Yes, you are wrong.

This shitty corporate giveaway of our sovereignty, workers rights, decent jobs, environmental protections IS THE REAL BARACK OBAMA. A calculating neoliberal that has sold out the people of this nation to please the corporations, Wall Street, and the Republicans.

[Rex]

80. Hmmm...looking at the replies in this thread, I think you might be on to something.

[Number23]

81. In all honesty, I can't make heads or tails out of the TPP issue. It is massively complex

and I can't figure out what's what.

There are only two things I know about this whole issue. One, majorities of Americans support free trade and even support TPP but with some caveats and nuances. "The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted May 12-18 among 2,002 adults, finds that 58% say free trade agreements with other countries have been a good thing for the U.S., while 33% say they have been a bad thing." "About six-in-ten independents (62%) and Democrats (58%) say free trade agreements have been good for the U.S., as do 53% of Republicans. Nearly half of independents (47%), 42% of Democrats and 39% of Republicans say their family’s finances have been helped by free trade agreements.http://www.people-press.org/2015/05/27/free-trade-agreements-seen-as-good-for-u-s-but-concerns-persist/

Two, the president's detractors, particularly on this board, have declared him and his intentions evil, corrupt and against the will of the people more times than I can count and they have been proven in the vast majority of those instances to be flat out, 100%, no bones about it, WRONG.

So I am waiting and seeing.

[djean111]

132. It is just that only 5 or 6 chapters have anything to do with trade. The rest sets up global

corporate authority. The "trade" thing is a distraction, IMO.

[Ruby the Liberal]

87. McConnell and Boehner are fighting for this tooth and nail

POTUS Obama will have ~1 year to do anything with this bill.

What we give POTUS in this manner goes to the next POTUS. Big Dog didn't have to atone for NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, but they made him popular in (R) circles. We paid the price during the * Administration when the fruits ripened on those POS legislative efforts.

If nothing else concerns you about this bill, think of those two things (i) POTUS Obama will be out of office when the effects are felt and (ii) are you comfortable supporting something the (R) congressional majority is fighting tooth and nail to pass in hopes of a 2016 sweep?

[wilsonbooks]

88. A few thoughts

1) Occam's razor

Definition of OCCAM'S RAZOR. : a scientific and philosophic rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities

2) what happens when poor but bright boys go to Harvard and Yale?

They learn how to be members of the ruling class.


3) There is a club and you ain't in it. Anytime you think you might be too cynical. Watch this.

[HFRN]

89. no more wrong than my believing Spock has beamed himself

into the oval office to help coach Obama on this 3d chess

so no, i don't think you're wrong

But I do think you'd be wrong if you thought captain Kirk would join him, if kirk came back to earth, he'd visit his home in Iowa - and then maybe do a priceline commercial

[GeorgeGist]

95. I think Hope and Change ...

was Bait and Switch.

[lostnfound]

96. I hope you are right and at the very least...

He might believe that a deal is inevitable and that he can shape a better deal than his likely successor.
Or it was part of the price of office.
We will never know.
I don't believe it tells us anything one way or another about his character, because we won't know the full story. I think he has accomplished quite a lot of good with the ACA, even though I was disappointed that there was no single-payer option. So I reserve judgment on just how bad this will turn out to be.

[joshcryer]

102. With Pelosi signing on, yes.

She could've got a lot more than she did, so it seems that it was all theater.

[Vinca]

105. I'm afraid this issue has made me very cynical about the POTUS.

Do you suppose he's got seven figure speaking engagements floating around his head? I can't see how this does anything but hurt the people he claimed he was working for.

[djean111]

110. I think he is playing 3D chess with US. We are willing pawns. Or some of us are.

[Betty Karlson]

118. I think you are indeed wrong.

If Obama is playing 3D-chess, he's trying for to check-mate everyone left of the political centre (The "F***ing Retards, as per Chicago's favorite mayor). Just like he did with the public option (cue the cheering senator Lincoln). Just like he did when he would not prosecute Wall Street fraud. Just like when he refused to go after known war criminals ('We tortured some folks&quot .

Obama has a callous streak in him. You are hoping for a miracle so you won't have to stop believing in the myth called Obama. I have given up hoping for a miracle. Obama is just a man. Plenty of other and better men I can trust. He's not one of them, and it's all right to vehemently disagree with his political choices. It's a right (and a moral duty) to work to undo what works of Obama I disagree with. That's how democracy works.

[Autumn]

120. Oh he's playing alright

[Gloria]

121. There is some aspect to this with regards to getting SOME

formal way to counter China as it stomps all over the place economically....

It's tricky, very tricky, though.

But overall, I'm not convinced about this...

In general, I hate the whole TPP...

[Art_from_Ark]

126. The "counter China" argument is bogus

especially when you consider this:

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/president-obama-talks-trade/china-may-join-tppbut-itll-take-while

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/barack-obama-china-join-trade-deal-tpp-118598.html

[gollygee]

123. I think there are two possibilities

1. He honestly thinks free trade is good for America. (I disagree based on my town's experience with NAFTA.)

2. He thinks free trade is inevitable and he'd rather set up the least bad agreement he can than leave it to someone else.

I do think he feels he's doing what's best for the country. I can't imagine him trying to screw the people over for corporations - I just don't buy that. I can disagree with him without assuming bad intentions.

[DFW]

124. I think you're right with #2

He is averse to the "leave it to someone else" way of going about things because he has been burned too often doing just that.

[DiverDave]

125. Yes

Nafta killed so many good middle class jobs.
Ask me how I know.

[orpupilofnature57]

127. I've been waiting for that card to appear for 7 yrs, the same people WE bailed out, now dictate our

Democracy, I don't blame him and for the same reasons I can't trust him, if we never left Checks & Balances not trusting him wouldn't seem like an insult .

[BlindTiresias]

134. lol

11 dimensional chess? Anyone who believed that to begin with was delusional, and those who still believe it are just outright stupid.