Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Populist Reform of the Democratic Party
In reply to the discussion: So, acc to this, Mr O'Malley is just putting on a show for us Liberals~ [View all]djean111
(14,255 posts)54. Thanks for that article. I stand corrected. Anyone who can read that article and still pimp for
the TPP (and TTIP) is either a corporate tool or hopelessly delusional about what constitutes being a corporate tool.
What are the larger concerns about the TPP?
There are two major concerns about agreements like this. One is that these agreements continue a transition from a democratic system toward one in which the rights of foreign corporations can trump laws passed by legislative bodies. As Lee put it, Every time you have a new trade agreement you expand the number of companies who can challenge American laws.
The second concern is far more frightening. Americas dependence on China was not an issue in 1992, when NAFTA was signed. Today, it is. Lee noted, Weve put ourselves in a very vulnerable position because of the concentrated source of supply on critical resources, whether its China or elsewhere. I dont agree that the TPP is the answer to this. In my view TPP, if anything, will exacerbate this. In TPP whats being discussed are fairly weak rules of country of origin. Some of these countries may get substantial inputs from China. The TPP could become a conduit for the U.S. to become more dependent on China. Barry Lynn spelled this out in a hypothetical disaster scenario, in which American tensions with China cause genuine friction. This isnt far-fetched, as America is positioning military assets in the region.
Officials [in China] do not even need to impose some sort of across-the-board trade embargo to achieve their ends. Far more effective would be to put the squeeze on one industrial system or other, or one company or other, day after day, in a systematic fashion, until Washington cried uncle. The Pentagon has sketched out complex plans for how to respond to any use of force by China. Far more useful would be to know how the United States as a nation would respond when, suddenly, grandma cant get her medicine. Or when, suddenly, the store shelves empty of batteries and lightbulbs. What does the president do when he has General Electric and Wal-Mart both on the phone, demanding the restoration of normal trade? Or when Apples stock plummets because the company cant move any of its iPhones through Chinese ports?
That BUT CHINA!!! boogeyman is ridiculous. The whole thing reeks, and it is disheartening, no, disgusting, to see people pimp for it because of whose name is currently on it, or because of who helped write it. This is how Democracy is killed.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

So, acc to this, Mr O'Malley is just putting on a show for us Liberals~ [View all]
RiverLover
Apr 2015
OP
I think he is meant to be VP. I think any and all "populism" from HRC and O'Malley is just
djean111
Apr 2015
#1
Don't listen to what they say, look at their records, how they vote, WHO IS FUNDING THEM
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#64
I think we should listen to what he says, and understand what his policies are to determine if he is
still_one
Apr 2015
#2
A recent OP at DU about him and "law and order" quoted him making an odd comment about "teh left."
merrily
Apr 2015
#48
Maryland under O'Malley=#1 in foreclosures plus mass exodus of middle class taxpayers
leftofcool
Apr 2015
#17
I would be interested where they got their facts, but welcome O'Malley to run.
Thinkingabout
Apr 2015
#22
So do you think that HRC and Sen Warren should be "rated together"? Or do you agree
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#72
O'Malley is classified as a moderate liberal, and EW and HRC are classified as hard core liberals.
Thinkingabout
Apr 2015
#31
Since you posted it w/o comment, I assume you agree that HRC is a hard line liberal. Is that
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#70
PLEASE show where HRC is classified as a hard core liberal. Maybe Fox'ed Up News. nm
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#66
See my post #41 she is going by the pop meaningless graphic used by "ontheissues"
Dragonfli
Apr 2015
#69
I am suspicious of any and all potential candidates including Martin O’Malley.
Enthusiast
Apr 2015
#38
Not climbing on any O'Malley bandwagon, but as far as the TPP is concerned, two years ago we did not
djean111
Apr 2015
#50
Not exactly right. 2012: "Trans-Pacific Partnership: The biggest trade deal you’ve never heard of"
RiverLover
Apr 2015
#52
Thanks for that article. I stand corrected. Anyone who can read that article and still pimp for
djean111
Apr 2015
#54
HA Goodman is a HUGE Elizabeth Warren fan, and he likes O'Malley for President...
RiverLover
Apr 2015
#56
A (personal, I suspect) problem I have now is that I no longer care who is supporting this or
djean111
Apr 2015
#59
No, you're right. The PTB & our Third Way Dems are trying to make sure this will be a very
RiverLover
Apr 2015
#62
I would say that the Powers That Be that have their hands deep into the Democratic Party
rhett o rick
Apr 2015
#68
My gut has said stalking horse the whole way. I have little hope for the Castro brothers either now
TheKentuckian
Apr 2015
#73