Wrong Place, Wrong Time: Some Very Bad Politics From The White House

[n2doc]

BY CHARLES P. PIERCE

We've all enjoyed Obama Unleashed since he appeared in the wake of the 2014 midterms. But his performance on the Trans-Pacific Partnership has not been his finest work in that genre. And now he's decided to tell the most obvious of political optics to go fk itself.

But Obama made his case for free trade at a company that many liberals — notably Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a presidential candidate — see as a symbol of failed trade policies. Nike, the world's largest athletic shoe manufacturer, imports shoes from contract factories in places like Vietnam, where the minimum wage is 56 cents an hour. Obama said Vietnam, where 330,000 workers make Nike shoes, would have to increase the minimum wage, improve working conditions and even establish the right of workers to join a union. "It doesn't mean that suddenly working conditions in Vietnam will be like they are here at Nike, or here in Portland right away, but it moves us in the right direction," he said. "If you're a country that wants into this agreement, you have to meet higher standards. If you don't you're out."

Pitching this job-wrecking runaway train at Nike World HQ is demonstration enough that some of what the president's opponents say about his arrogance is not misplaced. Of course, we have to trust that it will be different this time around because it is This President and This Deal.

At first, Nike seemed like an unlikely venue for a speech touting the virtues of free trade. But hours before the speech, Nike announced it would hire 10,000 workers in the United States over the next decade if a Pacific trade agreement passes Congress. Introducing Obama, Nike President Mark Parker said Nike's fast-growth success story "was made possible because of the power of trade." "We are also proof that trade works, and we believe that companies should see that kind of success — all companies," Parker said.

First of all, I wouldn't trust Nike to produce those 10,000 jobs any more than I would trust the company meekly to allow its Vietnamese workforce to join the fking Teamsters. That's just insulting, and the president should be ashamed to lend his name to it. And, no, the Affordable Care Act and the minimum wage and Lilly Ledbetter doesn't buy you enough credulity from the American public to pretend that Nike will now turn into Ben and Jerry's just because you tell the company to do so. Not in this country. Not any more.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a34895/the-president-should-start-giving-some-fcks-again/

[Scootaloo]

1. Wait, he went to Nike and really said that?

It doesn't mean that suddenly working conditions in Vietnam will be like they are here at Nike"

Can... can he really just be unaware of Nike's role in Vietnamese working conditions? Philippine working conditions? Really?

[daredtowork]

56. On NPR this morning they said he "blasted liberals for being wrong on TPP". nt

[winter is coming]

57. There are supposedly clauses in the treaty that would require more progressive working

conditions. 'Cause that sort of thing has been so effective in the past.

[Exilednight]

73. That's because the majority of Americans don't

Understand how these companies do business. Nike doesn't own the companies, they hire a company to assemble the shoes, and they sign the contract stating that THEY won't violate the agreement, but that company typically outsources the majority of that contract out to multiple third parties, and since the third parties did not sign the contract with Nike, they typically ignore it.

[tecelote]

81. How changing a couple items..

Obama said Vietnam, where 330,000 workers make Nike shoes, would have to increase the minimum wage, improve working conditions and even establish the right of workers to join a union.

---

Obama said America, where 330,000 workers make hamburgers, would have to increase the minimum wage, improve working conditions and even establish the right of workers to join a union.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Great article, and I agree completely with what's said here.

I believe he has sold us out, or is at least trying to.......but why? It makes no sense.

And it really pisses me off.

How can you do this, Mr. President?

And Madame Secretary wants to follow in his footsteps, which bodes very ill for us.

[malthaussen]

4. Madame secretary helped write the TPP, fer chrissakes.

Now she wants us to believe she has reservations? To the George Cinq, maybe.

-- Mal

[CaliforniaPeggy]

7. You are spot on, my dear malthaussen! Thank you.

[erronis]

17. Love that reference to Hotel George V - I doubt you'll find Bernie there.

I expect he'd actually rather stay in a place where he can meet some real people - sorta like live in his state.

[malthaussen]

19. Well, he could hobnob with the bellhops and the concierge...

... which is kind of like where many rich people get their knowledge of real people.

-- Mal

[lark]

33. Do you know this for an absolute fact?

I hadn't seen anywhere that HRC had actually written any of the TPP, or that she had any involvement, even on a consultation level.
Are you telling us the 100% truth, or is this just more Clinton bile?

[malthaussen]

36. There have been many posts in DU about it.

As for other evidence, take for example this quote: "As secretary of State, she was a chief advocate as talks commenced surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), one of the largest worldwide deals in recent history."

Link to article: http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Free_Trade.htm

Examples could easily be multiplied. Google is your friend.

-- Mal

[lark]

37. A one liner with no followup or explanation isn't credible proof

Notice that the article is blatantly pro TPP too? I'll wait and see what Hillary has to say about TPP herself and form my opinion based on that. If she's for it, that's very very disappointing.

[Scuba]

46. The fact that she isn't loudly and adamantly against it is very disappointing.

[lark]

134. I totally agree

She needs to come out big against the TPP, but will she?

[rhett o rick]

122. Your logic works both ways of course. We have seen zero, nil, nada, that she doesn't favor it.

And I assume her supporters here have been looking like crazy for it. However, we have seen some evidence that she supports the TPP and her silence should tell you all you need to know.
And why would someone even be surprised that she supports the TPP? Economically her record is clear that she supports corporations. IMO she is a trickle-downer.

[MaggieD]

54. "as Secretary of State"

No, she did not write it, ffs. She represented OUR interests.

[Exilednight]

75. Who is "our"? Yours? Mine? Nike? How much do you want to bet

That the TPP benefits the 1% more than it does the 99%? I'll bet everything I have.

[eridani]

80. Whatchu mean "our" interests, Kemosabe?

The purpose of "free" "trade" agreements is to fuck over the 99% to enhance corporate profits.

[MaggieD]

84. Oh my bad

Of course you're right. We should close our eyes and pretend we don't live in a global economy. Letting China write the rules would be so much better. And naturally she should have resigned in protest rather than sully her hands by doing the normal job of the SoS.

I don't know why I didn't think of that sooner.

[green917]

110. Bs.. Anyone who tells you trade is free is selling something!

We are the only developed nation that doesn't insist on trade tariffs of any kind (most, today, calculate a value added tax or tax calculating the value of somethings components), including China. Trade deals, like the tpp don't enhance our standing in the global economy, they weaken it significantly and exacerbate other issues (low and stagnant wages, high unemployment, loss of manufacturing base, etc). If this deal is so fucking great for the American economy and people, then why aren't we allowed to see what is in it? What little we have seen of it (thank god for wiki leaks) is pretty abhorrent because very little of it actually has anything to do with trade and a lot to do with selling our sovereignty to the highest bidder. You brought up China and asked if it would be better if they wrote the rules... Well, I assure you, to a great extent they did. Rumor has it that there is nothing in the tpp to prevent currency manipulation, something the Chinese have done to great effect when dealing with our market place for years on top of the fact that it allows a corporation to sue (not in a court of law mind you but in a corporate friendly tribunal) our nation because our environmental or labor laws may cause them to lose profits. Just because this deal is supported by politicians with Ds next to their names does not make it beneficial for the American people! Hero worship ("it's okay because it's my guy screwing me this time) is going to be the death of our democracy!

[eridani]

133. It doesn't matter fuckall what China does, as it will not be a signatory

As if China has ever, ever done anything but what it damned well pleases about trade rules.

[MaggieD]

53. She didn't

But that won't stop people from saying she did. They are fact free zones.

[OKNancy]

85. plus it was a draft... and it was five years ago

I bet she hasn't even seen what is in it now

[MaggieD]

51. What did she write in it?

Can you be specific?

[jeff47]

22. My guess is the labor and environmental regulations in the TPP.

My guess is the labor and environmental regulations in the TPP are large improvements over the status quo in several countries in the treaty.

So making life a lot better for some sweatshop workers.

[Scuba]

47. Well, the leaked drafts contradict your guess.

[jeff47]

49. The leaked drafts aren't complete, and do not include the chapters I was talking about. (nt)

[delrem]

72. So your speculation is based on your "feelings" alone,

totally unsubstantiated by any known fact.

On the other hand, you dismiss commentary that points out the plain truth that your speculation is contradicted by the actual chapters that've been leaked, which show that the TPP is oriented toward empowering investment capitalists and hasn't even the most remote intention of empowering the environmental and labor concerns that you claim it does.

There's a word for your kind of speculative argument.

eta: my guess is that if the TPP indeed did have chapters empowering the environmental and labor fronts, they would have at least be leaked, if not put out officially as rebuttals to the objections of the despised "professional left".

[jeff47]

106. There's no facts to base it on.

Since the TPP is secret. There's some leaks. They're bad. But there's plenty that hasn't leaked.

The guy is willing to "sell out" the people, but only when he feels like he's getting something for the people. For example, chained CPI was on the table only if the Republicans gave up on some of their priorities.

It would fit his pattern to think he's getting something for the downtrodden out of the deal. The fact that it has never quite worked out to the benefit of the downtrodden before doesn't mean he can't believe "This time it will work!".

eta: my guess is that if the TPP indeed did have chapters empowering the environmental and labor fronts, they would have at least be leaked, if not put out officially as rebuttals to the objections of the despised "professional left".

It would have been smart politics, but it looks like Obama really hates leaks - his White House is more tight-lipped than previous ones, and he's prosecuted more than previous ones.

Again, it's a guess. Without the full text, guesses are all we have.

[rhett o rick]

123. I think there is a logic problem presented here. Some will argue that if you can't provide 100%

proof, then it must not be true. The fact that they can't provide any evidence to prove their stand seems to be missed by them.

It's like the person that shuts their eyes and claims something isn't happening because they cant see it.

[jeff47]

127. You seem to have mistaken me with someone who likes the TPP.

The TPP is garbage. It should be incinerated, the ashes buried, and the earth salted so nothing ever grows there again.

He hasn't just sold everyone down the river so far, despite all the pressure to do so. (ex. Chained CPI without that extra spending). And that radical of a change in personality is very unlikely.

If Obama thinks he's engineering a "compromise" like chained CPI in return for more safety net spending, he's shown he'll go for it.

If he mistakenly thinks the TPP is such a "compromise", that would explain the effort he is putting into it. It's still an awful treaty.

[rhett o rick]

128. I must have misunderstood your post #22. Was it sarcasm? nm

[jeff47]

129. Nope, just a guess based on armchair psychology.

Since the TPP is secret, guesses are all we have.

All #22 says is "I think Obama believes he's getting something positive for liberals in return for what he's giving away with the TPP."

That belief doesn't have to be accurate. Bill Clinton thought NAFTA would be good. And there was language in NAFTA he could hang his hat on as "good" for workers. It turned out to not work the way he thought it would - giant holes left that language useless.

Same with Obama. I'm confident there's something written to sound positive in the TPP. I'm also confident that the TPP has giant holes that will allow that language to be useless in the real world.

[rhett o rick]

130. I think I hear you saying is that Pres Clinton meant well but made a mistake in signing NAFTA.

And Obama means well but it wouldn't surprise you if it fails but not the fault of Obama.

I think Obama knows exactly what he is doing and there is nothing there for the workers of the world. I have heard a lot of speculation on how exactly the TPP can hurt workers, but I have not heard anyone explain how it possibly can help workers. You guess there are words included that will help workers. But no one has been able to explain what possible words those can be. It doesn't compute.

If foreign workers make wage gains, who will pay? Where will that money come from? Certainly not from profits.

[jeff47]

131. Which workers is key.

I think it has language to help sweatshop workers in other countries. Our workers? Yeah, not so helpful.

If foreign workers make wage gains, who will pay? Where will that money come from? Certainly not from profits.

Dammit, stop talking about reality. This is "compromise" time, where "liberals" get good-sounding things that don't pan out while conservatives get everything they want.

[rhett o rick]

132. Some "liberals" may think that the rest of the world's workers should be

leveled out with our workers. Sounds wonderful, but the capitalists that run our country will level things out alright, but all at slave wages. It's probably too late to change things to help the 99% without major violence. Those of us that support Sen Sanders are hoping that maybe there's a chance, but it will take some drastic measures. Those that support HRC seem to me to be hoping they can just hold on to whatever they have for just a little longer and to hell with those already ruined by the system.

[cali]

82. sorry, there is NO evidence to support that guess. In fact, late round drafts

of the environmental and investment chapters as well as the list of corporate advisers to the USTR, sharply contradict that guess.

And in fta after fta, much vaunted for their increased regulatory protections, workers have suffered mightily- including being murdered with collusion from government. See Colombia. (and that was a recent fta, praised for both labor and environmental protections)

[jeff47]

105. That's why it's a "guess".

"Obama's just selling everyone out" is too out of character, IMO. Yes, he'll sell everyone out, but he'll have to feel like he's getting something for everyone in return - Chained CPI was on the table, but only when the Republicans would give up something.

But Obama thinking he is making life better for third-world sweatshop workers fits very well. History demonstrates it doesn't work in the real world, but it's the kind of thing he could get behind.

"I just want cash when I'm out of office" would have resulted in a lot of other ways he could have screwed everyone over. He seems to need the patina of something positive out of the "compromise". Whether or not that positive will actually appear.

[Marr]

117. "Guess" again. /nt

[rhett o rick]

124. That guess doen't make the slightest sense. If labor and environmental conditions improve

in Vietnam, for example, who will pay or it? If you think Nike will give up their profits to voluntarily help out, you are dreaming. It's illegal for a corporations not to make as much profit for their stockholders as they can. Besides, labor had nothing to do with writing this piece of crap. Corporations aided in the creation.

Previous so-called Free Trade Agreements have not made life better for workers anywhere.

[jeff47]

126. Theoretically, being part of such a trade agreement gives them reasons to stay.

Moving on to this decade's cheapest country would move them out from the treaty's agreements. Theoretically, that's a disincentive to moving.

Also, labor and environmental conditions aren't an enormous cost driver in the US - it's the relatively high minimum income we need to barely survive.

But again, I'm taking a guess about something secret via armchair psychology. It's not exactly a rock-solid prediction.

Besides, labor had nothing to do with writing this piece of crap.

Not saying they did. I'm saying my guess is Obama likes the TPP because it gets something for "liberals" (better labor and environmental conditions in sweatshops) that conservatives hate. At the same time, it gets something for conservatives (all the other crap in the treaty) that liberals hate.

It's a nice, beltway-style "compromise" that has appealed to Obama in the past.

And yes, history shows this kind of plan has never worked. Doesn't mean he can't comfort himself with the promise that this time it will work.

[n2doc]

27. My feeling is that he has been in the bubble for too long

He spends all of his time with 0.00001%'ers and washington types who live rich, full lives. None of them have anything to lose from more bogus trade agreements and plenty to gain from the non-trade aspects. They have convinced him that this is the way to go, and I think once Obama decides on a course of action, he goes all in on it. I don't think he is evil, but I do think he has been misled/tricked. And I don't think he has the ability to say "I was wrong" at this point in his Presidency.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

28. I suspect you're right. He really believes this BS. n/t

[lark]

34. No f*ing way

Obama is too smart for that. He's seen the effects of NAFTA. He knows that he picked top corporate lobbyists as our representation in these talks and didn't allow environmentalist or labor leaders any access at all. He knows exactly what he's doing, he's going for the big payoff, IMO.

[840high]

62. Of course he knows. He's not stupid.

[delrem]

74. Yup. Not even Sarah Palin is so ignorant as to not know who her politics benefits.

This idea that Third Way type Dem politicians are ignorant dupes that get "fooled" by Bush and the extreme right in every sphere of influence, is absurd and disrespectful.

[F4lconF16]

86. Bingo.

Obama is a corporatist Democrat through and through. The vast majority of his policies have not been in working-class interests.

But meh. What can you expect from our system? It's utterly corrupt. I'd say broken, but it can't be fixed. It's designed to screw labor in the interests of the owners of capital, and man, does it ever do a good job of it. Obama is just another in a long line of very intelligent elites who control the wealth and power in the world. He hasn't done much that should surprise us, really.

[malthaussen]

42. Possibly, but support for the TPP is in line with his self-admitted Republicanism.

I'll play Shadow for a moment and discuss what true evil I think lies in his heart. One thing about successful people, they believe that if they could do it, anyone can. I am pretty comfortable with the idea that Mr Obama really believes the American Dream noise he has been making since, well, forever. And I think he is foolish enough to believe Trickle-Down ideology to some extent, especially since it is the gospel of the financiers and industrialists whom he favors. Such being the case, he could sincerely believe that Free Trade (tm) is Good For the Country. But it is also certainly a matter of perspective, and what is good for the people he admires most is not necessarily good for the rest of us, and IMO verges on necessarily bad for us. What I really don't quite understand is why he takes this particular issue so much to heart. Maybe he is thinking about his future opportunities, although as the First Black President (tm) he has an assured lecture income for the rest of his life. Or maybe he is so naive as to think that the big rich boys will accept him into the club if he just plays nice. I'd hate to think he was so innocent, but sometimes his actions make me wonder.

-- Mal

[carolinayellowdog]

61. World leader vs. national leader; conflicting feelings

On ONE HAND-- Dubya was such a provincial idiot, so destructive of our international reputation, that it was a huge relief to see Obama succeed him and repair the damage. And all the Kenyan Muslim birther BS was such obvious racist crap that it created huge sympathy for him from most of us.

On THE OTHER HAND-- the Hawaiian grandson of a bank vice-president, raised partly abroad and only fully part of the mainland US scene in college and thereafter, might be missing something important in terms of real empathy with the real struggles of poor people in this country. And the clueless tone-deafness of late makes me more worried about the Hawaiian-Indonesian bank VP grandson worldview than about the Kenyan Muslim stuff which is just BULLSHIT. Still-- is he one of us, does he really care about us, or does he want to sacrifice our well-being for some global vision of international capitalism? Just thinking/feeling out loud here but there is defininitely a trust issue the TPP brings into focus.

Bill Clinton is very solidly established in the echelons of world leaders, and Obama is headed there. It is hard to see Hillary as able to care about the "little people"-- and this latest news from the UK about Messina helping the Austerity gang further crush the workers only adds to that.

Bernie Sanders seems SO much more credible as a leader who cares about the real struggles of ordinary Americans-- but what about his ability to be "leader of the free world" whatever the hell THAT means anymore?

[LuvNewcastle]

64. I agree.

I think he and many others in power believe that they can't raise the standard of living in other countries without bringing our standard down, as if there's only a finite amount of cash out that the wealthy will allow us to share amongst everybody in the world. He's ruining whatever legacy he's been building by trying to ram this shit through.

[n2doc]

121. World Leader, but where is he leading us?

Frankly I have not been too impressed with Bill Clinton's "leadership". He seems to like being up there making speeches, but unlike Carter, where are the results? Haiti is still a disaster, Bosnia/Serbia is still simmering, Africa is getting worse by the day.

[Marr]

118. He never would've been invited into the bubble if he wasn't already amenable to this sort of thing.

This isn't some kind of spontaneous character shift, or an aberrant decision made while in office. He had massive corporate support in his original campaign because he was already their guy. This deal has been long in the making, and I suspect the Obama Administration made it a second term political goal for a reason; they knew the general population would oppose it.

[Enthusiast]

79. Now we know for sure.

I have long suspected it.

[Hotler]

96. Why has he sold us out or trying to????

For a high paying prestigious job working for or as a consultant to the corporations and the 1% that this is going to benefit.

[malthaussen]

3. I wonder how much champagne was snorted through noses after that.

I'm with Scootaloo, I want to believe this is a misrepresentation of what Mr Obama said. Surely he doesn't believe that shit?

-- Mal

[grasswire]

35. it's not

...and he said that critics of the agreement in the Democratic Party are just "making things up" to be critical of.

It was sickening. Barack Slick Obama. He has outdone Bill Clinton in slick.

[Elwood P Dowd]

5. K&R. Excellent article. (nm)

[cali]

6. Fantastic vintage Charlie.

The only thing he got wrong is that Nike did NOT say they'd create 10,000 jobs- Nike said UP TO 10,000 over a 10 year period.

The President is completely contemptuous of those who disagree with him on the tpp. He is anything but truthful about them. It's disgraceful.

[1939]

26. Retail jobs

Part time retail jobs in Nike Factory Stores in all of the discount/outlet malls across the US.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

67. Exactly. At $8.50/hr with no benefits. Like Macy's.

They really do think we're idiots.

[delrem]

76. Yah, well those workers will be replaced by machines in no time.

[Enthusiast]

8. I don't trust the President.

And I certainly don't trust the TPP.

[truedelphi]

10. And I doubt that the man, and those who are behind him,

trust either of us!!

Those who see the Emperor wears no clothes are simply not to be trusted.

[Thespian2]

21. Had to vote for him twice

but I agree with your sentiments...TTIP and TPP will be the death of America...Obama must be looking forward to collecting loads of cash from corporate GREEDY BASTARDS once his ass is out of the White House...

[F4lconF16]

88. You didn't, though.

As millions of millenials have figured out, you don't have to vote for anyone. The lesser of two evils argument has been used to great effect by the Democratic Party to resist any serious change to what is (clearly, to anyone not willfully ignorant) an undeniably cruel and oppressive system. The only way to win this game is not to play--if you're going to vote, only vote for your own interests. Otherwise you're guaranteeing you will get screwed. The rightward shift in the Democratic Party over the last 70 years has not been a coincidence.

[Thespian2]

111. I know.

I will put that advise to good use in 2016.

[F4lconF16]

115. I think many of us will.

Apologies if that came off harshly, by the way. It was not intended to be so.

[Thespian2]

116. No

I took as you intended, as good advice...Thank you!

[wolfie001]

9. In retail, this is what's known as.........

......a bait and switch. Nike, in all probability, would have countless opportunities to explain why they couldn't produce one decent US job but it will create as many 56 cent/per hour jobs as it needs in any of many third world countries. 10,000 jobs?

[truedelphi]

13. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ n/t

[whereisjustice]

29. They'll blame it on lack of education... like our inability to learn how to work for $2/day or less.

[GoneFishin]

43. TPP contains implicit job retraining mechanisms, to help workers without that job skill to

learn it fast.

It could be called the "learn how to work for $2/day or less, or starve trying" retraining program.

[brewens]

11. I saw the micro version of what's been going on years ago at the Budweiser distributor I worked for.

When I started, we sold almost exclusively premium brands except for Lucky Lager and this generic beer made by General Brewin that had bought out Lucky Lager. We had Lucky because tha was what the distributor had been in the 50's and 60's. Budweiser expanded in to the west and those guys got the right to distribute that and then Miller. In the mean time, Lucky was bought out and run down. It had at one time arguably been the best of the western beers. But we still had it and sold a lot of it. Brand loyalty can be pretty funny. Old timer Lucky drinkers would rather drink pisswater than admit their beer had been trashed.

So when I started there, we sold 90%, Bud, Michelob and Miller High life and their light versions. Along with our main competition, the Coors distributor, we sold the good stuff and there were like three other distributors hanging on selling the cheap beers. We wanted no part of that action. We made more profit per case than they did and doing a good job pushing it, we made more money for our accounts too.

Then the downhill slide started. That was partly fueled by the looting at the top that was screwing working people. People couldn't afford to pound down the good beer as much anymore and demand for cheaper beers grew. Before you knew it, Anheuser Busch was producing Busch Beer out here and Miller had it's Milwaukees Best. It wasn't bad for cheap beer really but we hated it. It takes more work to sell more of that stuff to make up for the difference in price. But you really can't make up for it all. And the tougher DUI laws were hurting us too along with more taxes on beer. The next thing you know, you can't get a raise anymore and the bosses are demanding more work for the same salary.

I see the beer guys all the time and just talked to one yesterday. What used to be kind of a fun job if you were tough enough to handle the physical labor now sucks. They treat those guys like shit and beat them up all the time for not hitting their numbers. I quit there long ago and out of 13 of us, one guy still works for them. In the time I was there, we had no turnover to speak of for the good jobs. We had one guy die of cancer, one guy fired and all the rest of the openings were because of retirement.

I know some retired people that have no clue. So many of what used to be pretty good jobs really suck now. They didn't have to put up with the shit that's going on now.

[arikara]

30. I think that is a real snapshot of what is happening everywhere

The bosses all expect more and more work out of everyone. One person is good for what used to be 3 people's job as far as they're concerned, not only that but they want to get rid of benefits. Sick time, pensions; plus keep raises to 1% if any. If wages are too high what they do now is fire all the old workers and hire more at a cheaper wage and no bennies.
In many fields its reached a breaking point. Example, nurses around here are quitting left and right because they can't tolerate the stress of the job anymore. They don't have time to actually look after a patient, just pill them and chart.

[Nay]

100. Thank you for that capsule of history -- I recently retired and saw, over a period of

15 years, a similar destruction of a workplace that had been renowned for its happy employees.

Positions at the middle and top started to be filled by outsiders poached from other corporations when previously you could work your way up. The new hires, rather than being expected to absorb the existing culture, were encouraged to change the culture. A couple of vice presidents later, we had the same rapacious corporate culture that all the other workplaces were suffering under. What a life.

[Maedhros]

12. But if Vietnam raises the minimum wage for its workers,

the TPP contains a provision that will allow Nike to sue, not in a court but in a tribunal of corporate arbitrators, for any lost profits resulting from the increased wages.

I call bullshit.

[okaawhatever]

15. No, that's B.S. I'd spend some time explaining it to you, but I don't think it would make a

difference.

[sulphurdunn]

52. Do it anyway.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

70. Take a stab at it.

Please.

[okaawhatever]

120. Better yet, let's get Maedhros to prove their claim. They can't & that way I won't have to waste

my time.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

125. But if you support Obama and the TPP...

why not take the opportunity to prove the anti-TPPer wrong? If the anti-TPPer is indeed wrong, that is.

I'm finding these Obama/TPP/Warren/Sanders threads quite educational and am thankful to those who have the time/inclination to keep up with it all!

[Marr]

119. Explain it. /nt

[Recursion]

77. No, that's backwards. AFL-CIO can sue if they lower it again (nt).

[hifiguy]

14. When it comes to the TPP, the truth is that

the president is a serial liar. Every word he has said about it is complete



Charlie Pierce rocks the house.

[rufus dog]

16. I heard the beggining of the speech on the radio

And it wasn't good, promoting it as a boon to "small" business which make up 3/4 of the exporters.

I immediately thought of Mitt Romney!

[WillyT]

18. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[raindaddy]

20. The CEO of Nike makes 15 million plus

including stocks and bonuses and his company is paying slave wages to the people who manufacture his product. How is that not indicative of how corrupt and simply immoral this system has become?

Disappointed Barack Omaba is another Democratic President willing to become a cheerleader for a system that has been completely corrupted.

[F4lconF16]

89. Funny thing, that. It's not becoming corrupt, it always has been.

Our system was designed to be corrupt and immoral, from the very beginning. It has its roots stretching back to the early 1500s and the emergence of capitalism and an extremely weathy elite. Our constitution was explicitly designed to protect property rights and the owners of wealth and physical capital. It was in no way shape or form made for the working class. Every one of the founding fathers was a 1%er, and most of them were obscenely rich. Many profited off the enslavement of an entire people. Our whole economic and political system is designed to reinforce the power of the capital owners at the expense of labor.

It's kinda insane when you realize just how much BS we're spoonfed all through our life, from our overtly nationalistic and corporate education system to the constant propaganda we're subjected to in our daily lives. It's nuts.

As for Obama, meh. The Democratic Party has been against change since its beginnings. Particularly in the last century, though. It's become more and more explicitly for system stability at the cost of the working class. Even FDR, a liberal hero, really wasn't that great. He revived a
failed system. Despite the elite of the time resisting him, he was their salvation.

[raindaddy]

98. Really Good Points!

At least the Democratic party especially following WW2 has been enough of a firewall to carve out a healthy middle class. As Bernie points out that firewall has been toppled.

[F4lconF16]

102. True enough.

But it's important to remember that the middle class we knew here also only applied if you were a straight white male living in the US. Otherwise, things weren't (and aren't, really) so good. I'd argue the middle class itself was a firewall--after all, despite not owning it, it's labor that controls the means of production. The middle class is a defense mechanism of capitalism against the inevitable revolution of the oppressed labor class. Historically, it has been middle class support for the Democratic Party that has prevented a total uprising. I'm somewhat reminded of a quote from MLK in his letter from Birmingham Jail:

"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."

Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Replace "moderate" with middle class, and Negro with labor class, and it's surprisingly relevant to our economic situation (with a couple of other changes, of course). The white middle class has continued to support this corrupt system again and again. Sometimes it's in self-interest, sometimes it's in confusion, sometimes it's in some twisted sadism (ex: the tea party), etc. There are many reasons, but the net result is the same. Not to mention the original quote itself is excellent.

This is why I hate the lesser of two evils argument with a passion. It is the embodiment of support for a system that does everything it can to essentially enslave people (using various forms of oppression now, it used to be literally enslaving people) and harness them to a machine that strips them of their humanity in order to generate a profit for the machine owners. It's against everything I stand for. As I have said before (and I echo many an old civil rights crusader in doing so), I will not wait for reforms to a broken system to demand my rights and my humanity.

[sadoldgirl]

23. The worst lie he is spreading is

that those who disagree with the TPP are "making stuff
up". Calling good people in his own party liars is really
beyond the pale.

A lot of them have read the drafts, and know the facts.
Most of them know about the union problems as well.

What beats me is the WHY. Why does he insist on this
treaty? And why the fast track? What is he going to
gain by this? It would make his legacy a very lousy
one, imo.

[jakeXT]

41. Geopolitics

http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/global/11114.pdf

[appalachiablue]

69. Typical calm and some mild scolding recently. So far the released info. and concerns by

TPP opposing Dems. and others seem valid. The money $$$ in this deal is staggering and amounts to capturing the neoliberal economic global Jewel in the Crown. The TPP and the EU part, T-TIP, have been worked on by 600 corporate trade reps. secretly since c. 2005 during Bush, behind closed doors.

Today's token scrap from Nike is sad, almost offensive. Maybe some believe it. There's concern about anti-TPP Dems. which is resulting in more lobbying, pressure on them and an increase in news pieces. It's very serious business.

On the same topic I just posted a CNN Update article from today, in this link,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251407024

[sendero]

99. The only legacy he cares...

.. about is the $250K speaking fees, the foundation donations and the lucrative consulting appointments.

[moondust]

109. The Bill Clinton Platinum Retirement Plan.

Call now!

[bvar22]

24. Even IF he is correct that...

Vietnam, where 330,000 workers make Nike shoes, would have to increase the minimum wage, improve working conditions and even establish the right of workers to join a union.

After 25 years of "Free Trade", it is safe to predict that
Nike would simply move to another low wage country to make their shoes.

Capital will ALWAYS be able to outrun Human Rights, LABOR Rights, and Environmental regulation.

It takes YEARS/Decades for advocacy groups to petition their governments to impose standards on a Corporation. It takes one board meeting to pack up and move to another desperate country with a less concerned dictator, or co-conspirator.
This IS the main reason why Corporations must remain submissive to government,
and NOT the other way around (like we are now).

The American Worker has been "gamed" by promises of "Free Trade" and "more jobs" since 1993.
Why should we believe them NOW?

[raindaddy]

25. Great points bvar 22

And we shouldn't belive them!

[ibegurpard]

87. And tariffs and "protectionism"

are one of the only weapons we have to prevent that. Instead of using them judiciously we are being force-fed the same tired pro-corporate BS.

[F4lconF16]

90. Yes, yes, yes. Excellent post.

It takes YEARS/Decades for advocacy groups to petition their governments to impose standards on a Corporation. It takes one board meeting to pack up and move to another desperate country with a less concerned dictator, or co-conspirator.
This IS the main reason why Corporations must remain submissive to government,
and NOT the other way around (like we are now).

And I'd argue the root cause of this is a capitalist economic system. These are unavoidable problems at the heart of our economic system.

Edit to add that your post makes an excellent case for why we need to take to the streets. Radical movements have historically been the only way to affect real change, for precisely the reasons you stated. Direct action and resistance to the capital owners is how we scare the living daylights out of our elite. It's how we get what we need (you know, basic human rights and the like). The working class needs to fight this with everything we have. Hopefully it isn't too late--with climate change fast approaching in it's full fury (we've barely started feeling the effects) we may have already missed our chance.

[AzDar]

31. K & R

[Jack Rabbit]

32. K/R

I really feel bad for Obama looking at him play this charade.

[SamKnause]

39. I don't.

No one is forcing him to push the TPP.

If someone or some entity were, and he didn't stand

up to them knowing it will destroy this country, would

you respect or admire him ???

I don't respect or admire anyone who intentionally lies.

I think he is lying.

We have already lost 75,000 jobs to South Korea since the

Free Trade Deal he signed with them in 2011.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

I am so sick of the LIES !!!!!!

[Jack Rabbit]

40. But I still hate to see a grown man make such a fool of himself

. . . while he falls from the lofty place he made for himself six and a half years ago.

But you're right in that he did that by breaking his promise to lead a transparent administration.

[F4lconF16]

95. So don't take it anymore!

Get to the streets and let your voice be heard. Do as the Black Lives Matter movement has, and call the elite on their bullshit!

Enough with this crap, it's time for some cold, hard facts around here. And the facts are that we are getting screwed, and it's time to end this.

No more lies.

No more pretending that Obamacare is anywhere near what we need. No more screwing over PoC because drugs are scary and black people are scarier. No more war for oil and imperialism. No more oppression of women and LGBT because of gender and family norms designed for production of labor and profit. No more rabid destruction of the environment without repercussion.

No. More. Fucking. Lies.

[yallerdawg]

38. On the other hand...

Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) have proved to be one of the best ways to open up foreign markets to U.S. exporters. Trade Agreements reduce barriers to U.S. exports, and protect U.S. interests and enhance the rule of law in the FTA partner country. The reduction of trade barriers and the creation of a more stable and transparent trading and investment environment make it easier and cheaper for U.S. companies to export their products and services to trading partner markets. In 2014, 47 percent of U.S. goods exports went to FTA partner countries. U.S. merchandise exports to the 20 FTA partners with agreements in force totaled $765 billion, up 4 percent from 2013. The United States also enjoyed a trade surplus in manufactured goods with our FTA partners totaling $55 billion in 2014.

Much more at: http://trade.gov/fta/

[cali]

45. so that's why are trade deficits with ftas partners

rise?

[YoungDemCA]

44. Globalization has been a reality for decades, like it or not

The real question is what can realistically be done to mitigate its negative effects and increase its positive ones.

[whereisjustice]

48. It isn't "reality" any more than debtor prison and NSA surveillence is a "reality". You confuse

reality with a mechanism for the destructive transfer of wealth forced on us by the ruling class against our will.

Gutting the middle class isn't some inevitable physical law imposed by nature like entropy.

It isn't the intention of our Democracy or a necessary side-effect. It is exactly the opposite of that.

Little by little civil rights and constitutional protections have been whittled away to prevent citizen participation in the legislative process.

And yes, it has happened over a mere two decades. As soon as the rich realized they could literally buy candidates for themselves.

Obama has a choice, either fuck us over or not. He's chosen to follow the money and fuck us over.

[ctsnowman]

91. Exactly!

[ibegurpard]

93. globalization is a political construct

It is not inevitable.

[F4lconF16]

97. I disagree with one part of this.

It's been a lot longer than two decades. The entire political and economic structure of this country was designed to be a stable system for capital owners. It has it's roots back hundreds of years before that. See my post upthread, #89, I think. I can go into more in depth if you'd like.

I'd concede that we have seen a rapid acceleration in the pace of oppression recently, though I'd put the beginnings around the deradicalization of the social movements in the late 70s and the following emergence of the modern conservative.

[whereisjustice]

107. You are right, I tend to think of the hockey stick like trajectory of corporate influence

in trickle-down 1980s/1990s as the epoch but the seeds were planted in 1970s, then heavily fertilized with Reagan and Bush and even Clinton.

[F4lconF16]

108. "Hockey-stick like trajectory". I like that. nt

[whatchamacallit]

103. Exactly

You see this acquiescence to "reality" all the time on DU. Usually, as ass covering for a favored politician. It seems the minute a bad policy is enacted it is henceforth an irrevocable political reality.

[Doctor_J]

50. his bad politics started the day after his first inauguration

He hasn't accomplished a single thing except what the corporations told him was OK

[PassingFair]

55. He lost me at "Rahm" nt

[FlatBaroque]

92. Yup

That was the day I looked in the mirror and said "you are a fucking sap". ( I had worked for his campaign).

[PassingFair]

104. Don't beat yourself up. We didn't really have a choice.

This time around, we're not even gonna get a SEMBLANCE of a choice.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

58. But,....but,....but,...Phil says Americans don't WANT to make shoes!

See?

[JayNev]

59. Reality Check

I wonder how many of all those now defending Obama saying that they believe he knows best and will do what is good for American workers actually are even remotely aware of the following statistic from opensecrets.org

Donations to Presidential candidates in 2008 by Goldman Sachs:

Obama ~ $800,000

McCain ~200,000

How much did you donate? Who do you think Obama cares more for, you or the one who donated $800,000?

[JayNev]

60. I should add...

Goldman Sachs didn't get rich by investing money where there would not be a return.

[840high]

63. Yep -

[iamthebandfanman]

65. Why would he lie ?

I mean, he said he'd renegotiate NAFTA too and he's been on that since day one....

oh wait.

[Jakes Progress]

66. Is this just a matter of the president not being too perceptive?

He seems to listen to, and trust, the worst people. He unfailingly went with the advice of Wall Street insiders after the crash. He seems enthralled by rich people, seems to buy into the idea that they are smart because they are rich.

And he continues to allow arne duncan free rein to destroy public education for the benefit of corporate interests. This will be the enduing legacy of this administration - the death of free education in America.

He keeps listening to people that perceptive minds would know are charlatans and crooks. He lacks judgement. Bill did this too. Could it be their near poverty backgrounds that make them so taken with the words of the rich?

[SMC22307]

71. Taken with words of the rich AND father issues.

Both of them.

[blackspade]

68. K&R

[pbmus]

78. Not in this country. Not any more.

[myrna minx]

83. K&R nt

[99Forever]

94. HUGE K&R Never forget that NEOLIBERALS are pushing this crap on American workers scam.

[CharlotteVale]

101. K&R

[cantbeserious]

112. What Happened To This Obama - Promoted The Modification (Scrapping) Of NAFTA - So Confused

[PatrickforO]

113. I've got to agree with Charles Pierce on this one.

There's absolutely no way we should trust companies like Nike to create thousands of jobs here. That just ain't happenin'.

[Marr]

114. He's just campaigning for a different job now-- regular corporate speaker.

We are no longer the audience.