Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

“Wash Post exposes real agenda of Wall Street Democrats”

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 04:08 PM
Original message
“Wash Post exposes real agenda of Wall Street Democrats”
This article by Sirota may explain why we have been so puzzled by the behavior of the beltway dems. Fascinating read and theory.

“Wash Post exposes real agenda of Wall Street Democrats”

Last night, I wrote optimistically about the possibility of Democratic Party elites finally realizing the error of their ways in ramming corporate-written trade policies down the throat of average Americans. Though I noted that most of the key players are still comfortable in the minority, and still awash in Washington's pay-to-play culture, I cited some recent moves as evidence that they may at the very least realize that they no longer live in the go-go Clinton Era where rhetoric about the "booming economy" could paper over the very serious economic challenges faced by regular working folks. Apparently, I was wrong.

A stunning piece by Washington Post business reporter Steve Pearlstein today shows that the real agenda of these Big Money insiders is to pretend to care about stagnating wages, slashed pensions, and job outsourcing - but not actually be willing to attack the "free" trade policies that are causing those hardships. Pearlstein notes the nefariousness of it all, after attending a conference by the so-called "Hamilton Project" - the group of Wall-Street-backed Washington, D.C. Democratic insiders working to crush unions, limit citizens legal rights and, of course, perpetuate our corporate-written trade policy:

"The problem is that, when you scratch the surface, the free-trade members of the Democratic establishment turn out to be more committed to Part A of the formula, more globalization, than they are to Part B, making sure the benefits from globalization are widely shared. For them, it's really not a package deal. And if push comes to shove, which it always does in trade politics, they'd welcome more globalization even without the compensatory social policies. How do I know this? Because they said so. At the conference's closing session, I asked former Treasury secretaries Robert Rubin and Larry Summers and former deputy Treasury secretary Roger Altman if any of them would be willing to support the idea of a "time out" on new free-trade initiatives until there was some tangible progress toward greater economic security for U.S. workers. To a man, they recoiled at the idea."

Pearlstein describes the powerful moment America finds itself in - we have enough economic power to actually create a race to the top, instead of fueling a race to the bottom. But only if our government actually starts representing ordinary citizens, rather than Big Money:” cont…

http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=B0EF65BA-E0C3-F084-DCF7DAE16ED0ECC4

*shadow government*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. I never pass up a Sirota piece.
Edited on Thu Jul-27-06 04:45 PM by chill_wind
We so badly need scores more like him.

From the WAPO piece he cites:

"The idea here isn't to kill free trade. It's to take it hostage. Right now, the defection of formerly free-trade Democrats has made it impossible to get any trade treaty or trade-negotiating authority through Congress. That's a big problem for the business community, particularly big corporations such as Lucent, AIG and General Electric. Democrats now have a perfect opportunity to deliver what the business community wants -- and to demand in exchange programs designed to provide workers more economic security. But such negotiations will never succeed if influential Democrats give away the store in advance by signaling they support all trade liberalization, unconditionally.

No guarantees of health care, pensions, expanded unemployment insurance -- no more trade deals. It's a simple message even chief executives can understand. Voters, too."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I Could Never Get Past
Why the dems have passed up so many golden opps to stand up what we believe they stand for. It would certainly explain a Joe Lieberman. I'm also glad he pointed out the positive side of the equation for there are dems who are trying and there are plenty who want to get in. And I think that as this view becomes more commonly known it's really going to minimize the chances of DLC dems. Now I know why Clinton went to Conn.

*shadow government*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. there are Wall Street Dems???
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reckon Donating Member (729 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. The truth is we no longer have a left wing / labor party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Voltaire99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-28-06 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. True. As Gore Vidal likes to say...
...there's only one party in Washington, and it has two right wings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drduffy Donating Member (739 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-27-06 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. are there any non-wall street dems????
Other than Conyers and a couple of others?

What the hell are we fooling ourselves for on this web site?

I'm about done with identifying with what my voter reg card says....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-28-06 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yes, probably well over 2/3s of the Dems in congress are main-street Dems.
Edited on Fri Jul-28-06 12:02 AM by w4rma
Unfortunately that other 1/3 is loud and has the "in" with big media. And also 1/3 is enough to help Republicans filibuster anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-28-06 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
7. Interesting article.
Thanks for posting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-28-06 05:35 AM
Response to Original message
8. (oops!
Edited on Fri Jul-28-06 05:35 AM by H2O Man
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC