Showing posts with label Sherrod Brown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sherrod Brown. Show all posts

Thursday, May 21, 2020

Savaging The Right's "We're Tougher Than You Pansies!" Meme On Reopening - And The REAL Risk Of a Second Wave



"The whiteness of the protests alongside the stark racial disparities in COVID-19 mortality underscores that the desire to reopen businesses is rooted in white supremacy. " - Sonali Kolhatkar, smirkinghcimp.com blog

"The coronavirus has exposed this delusion of individualism for what it is. For one thing, the virus doesn't care if you pop on a tricorner hat and declare yourself a rugged individual. It'll infect you just as easily as it infects a person who stays home, wears a mask and pays their taxes without complaint. Individualism can't stop the virus — only collective action can.

But on a deeper level, the virus has exposed the incoherence of the individualist ideology. Right now, the same people who fueled the Tea Party protests, including Trump himself, are out there insisting that the lockdowns end - Amanda Marcotte, 'Right Wing Individualism Is Just Selfish Garbage' 


"It's obvious there's a huge disconnect between those willing to follow our state's guidelines and those who feel their rights are being violated...I suggest those in the latter group - who refuse to wear masks or obey social distancing, offer to volunteer at one of our hospitals.  Maybe if they spent time with the health care workers risking their lives every day they might understand why the people working to save us are pleading for us to stay home." - Rebecca Cook, letter to Sunday Denver Post, p. 3E.

"In some places you see reopenings that respect Mother Nature’s power, are coordinated and grounded in science, and in other places you see crowded restaurants or a gym owner defying his governor’s guidelines as cheering demonstrators waive signs that read “My freedom doesn’t end where your fear begins.  The people making those signs, and the morons on Fox cheering them on, don’t get it. We’re not up against each other. We’re all up against Mother Nature".- Thomas Friedman, NY Times

"The whole point of the shutdown was to buy ourselves time so we could do it right the second time after we muffed the first response. It's not only important to avoid opening up too aggressively but  if you don't have a good amount of testing, tracing and isolation, you won't be able to keep infected people away from susceptible people. The basic biology then is the infection is just going to take off again-  Dr. Ashish Jha,  Professor of Global Health, Harvard University, on 'All In' , April 27th


As all fifty states have reopened in some form, and we learned yesterday that 3 million more Americans have joined the unemployed, the Right's propaganda mills and talking heads (as well as scribes) are working overtime. They want to paint reality to conform to their myth that it is the "tough Americans and freedom lovers" - also most "real workers" who need $$$- who demand states reopen now.  That as opposed to the "elite, blue state pansies" who prefer security to being warriors for the economy ....oh yeah, and "personal liberty".

One headline in the NY Times 2 days ago blared:

Mnuchin Warns of ‘Permanent Damage’ to Economy if Lockdowns Persist


Suggesting that it's got to be workers' lives instead of dollars to be sacrificed. Or as Sen. Sherrod Brown asked: 'How Many Workers Should Give Their Lives To Increase The GDP By One Half A Percent?

In a forgettable column titled “Scenes From the Class Struggle in Lockdown,” The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan wrote: “Here’s a generalization based on a lifetime of experience and observation. The working-class people who are pushing back have had harder lives than those now determining their fate.”  Incredibly, Noonan then added a bone to the "he-men" of the Right with this balderdash:

"Since the pandemic began the Overclass has been in charge - scientists, doctors, consultants - calling the shots for the average people. But personally they have no skin in the game."

And this piffle at the end:

"This is no time to make our divisions worse. The pandemic is not only about our health but our humanity".

As if the two can be conveniently separated, so Noonan feels obligated to create another false choice.  The fact is there need not be such a false choice if we'd had our heads on straight from the get go. But as Rachel Maddow so often puts it, we've been saddled with the worst, god-awful government at the worst moment in our recent history - when extraordinary leadership skills were needed.  

Don't believe it?     The fact is that 99 percent of the chaos, ineptitude and division falls on Trump himself. He repeatedly undermined the guidance and credibility of his own health officials including by initially dismissing the pandemic as  a "hoax".  Then fomenting anti-quarantine protests - even as he incited his latter day Tea Baggers to flout the reopening guidelines his own administration released.   Then to top it off, this criminal loser buried a detailed CDC document showing states how to reopen by minimizing risk.  Oh, and he's now hawking an unproven malarial drug that he claims he's taking for prophylactic reasons.

The mistake of Noonan and others mocking the lockdowns as the product of effete snobs is that they forget or discount certain pertinent facts.  That is, that more blunt options were needed to prevent the spread of the virus-   and the collapse of our health system - once the Trumpies fucked it all up. Meanwhile, in South Korea massive testing and contact tracing kept deaths to a minimum in relative terms - and far less per capita than the U.S. Further, only recently when a new outbreak threatened S. Korean officials using GPS directed contract tracing were able to immediately track the new emergence to one source: a 29 -year old male  with the virus who'd visited a series of Seoul nightclubs.  The process uncovered 102 infected individuals and a total of 5,500 who'd been in contact with the infected subset -initially infected by the 29 year old.  The new cluster was a setback but also marked a success story in that officials were able to rapidly contain the virus.  THIS is what the U.S. under Trump has been unable to do, and why the reopening in too many red states is premature. 

 It's not because blue state "commies"  and "pansies"  are trying to control the red staters and gut their freedoms, but because the critical jobs of testing and contact tracing still lag behind those states' capabilities. (So much so that Georgia, for example, has stooped to publishing spurious graphs to try to show it's flattened the infection curve). In other words, by recklessly reopening before those processes are in place we risk a second wave wiping out all the progress made thus far- and even worse economic fallout.  And mammoth consequences especially when idiots in crowds disregard masks and social distancing.  

As reported today (WSJ. p. A1) "a study published last week by the National Academy of Sciences found that one minute of loud speech was enough to produce thousands of virus droplets that remain in the air for about 12 minutes, potentially able to infect anyone in the area."

The phenomenon also most likely to give rise to high viral loads and "superspreaders" -with the capacity to infect hundreds. Hence  blue state governors and citizens are not against opening up but against opening up stupidly - with no adequate testing plan - and no means to contact trace any outbreaks.  The smart reopening also includes social distancing  and mask wearing, As former CDC Director Tom Friedan explained yesterday morning on CBS:

"It's not open versus closed. It's not health versus economy. It's  gradual, stepwise, data driven, science driven reopening that takes account of both health and the economic impacts of the virus and our response to it. This is doing three things: we empower people to protect themselves, we hold governments accountable for getting data and sharing it openly and we accelerate toward a new normal"

So it is NOT a case of the "elites" lording it over the "salt of the earth" types to keep them locked down and unable to earn a living and feed their families - or just get outside.   Rather, the issue is  opening recklessly devoid of any sound plans to track or detect the virus.   A goal already hobbled by a dysfunctional administration which has operated below even minimal competence  levels needed to ferret out the virus., turning the whole national response into a side show. At least on the Right.  Given the above, we can say a recent comment by  W. Bradford Wilcox, a sociologist at the University of Virginia, (published in NY Times yesterday) is total hogwash.  That comment is::
Progressives have grown more likely to embrace a culture of “safetyism” in recent years. This safetyism seeks to protect them and those who are deemed the most vulnerable members of our society from threats to their emotional and physical well-being.
But it isn't a case of "safetyism" at all, but science-driven SANITY, as former CDC Director Tom Friedan already noted.  NY Times columnist Michelle Goldberg aptly spelled it out 3 days ago:

"The assumptions underlying this generalization, however, are not based on even a cursory look at actual data. In a recent Washington Post/Ipsos survey, 74 percent of respondents agreed that the “U.S. should keep trying to slow the spread of the coronavirus, even if that means keeping many businesses closed.” Agreement was slightly higher — 79 percent — among respondents who’d been laid off or furloughed.

Researchers at the University of Chicago have been tracking the impact of coronavirus on a representative sample of American households. They’ve found that when it comes to judging policies on the coronavirus, “politics is the overwhelming force dividing Americans,” and that “how households have been economically impacted by the Covid crisis so far” plays only a minimal role.

Donald Trump and his allies have polarized the response to the coronavirus, turning defiance of public health directives into a mark of right-wing identity. Because a significant chunk of Trump’s base is made up of whites without a college degree, there are naturally many such people among the lockdown protesters."

Basically, she nailed it, unlike a Texan turkey by the name of  Dan Crenshaw -  who belched out the following op-ed  codswallop ('Why Does Reopening Polarize Us?, WSJ, May 19, p.A17)

"It isn't obvious that such a debate should be partisan yet it is. Why? One popular explanation is that all roads lead to Trump. Whatever he says, the left will say the opposite."

This cornpone knucklehead, so far up Trump's ass he can't see the Sun,  doesn't seem to know it wasn't the "left" that screwed the response up to a far- thee-well.  It was his lord and master Dotard - ignoring warnings, babbling that the virus "will just go sway like magic".  Oh, and then dismissing it as a hoax, before then forgetting Harry Truman's maxim that  "the buck stops here". Essentially frittering away weeks we had to get our act together - thanks to the Chinese lockdown of their own nation- as well as isolating the infected from their families also to contain spread. All immensely effective despite Holman Jenkins Jr. further yammering (WSJ, p. A15 yesterday) the Chinese failed and oh, by the way, "the U.S. and China are in a contest now to see which world power can emerge from this chaos with the most realistic policy toward the virus".

Obviously scribbled while popping his usual opioids, speed and MJ candies. Because the efficacy of the Chinese response was exactly what gave us time to get our own act together instead of fucking it up.  As proof, a new Columbia University study released yesterday showed that up to 54,000 lives might have been saved had restrictions - including lockdowns - started two weeks earlier.  So, the total deaths now might have been 40,000 as opposed to 94,000.   But this is what the white boy conservative death mongers like Jenkins Jr. chide liberal state governments about, and ceaselessly.

 Potentially 54,000 fewer deaths but the dyspeptic Trump was unable to summon one ounce of  minimal leadership and consistent national planning or leadership. Instead babbling back in January that the U.S. "has it totally under control"  and in February blabbed that  "within a couple of days the cases will be down to zero."  And a week later,  "One day it's gonna disappear ...like a miracle."   As Chris Hayes put it on 'ALL IN'  last night:

"Well there have been no miracles, just mass unemployment and mass death"

Facts the Reepo Trump asslickers and opinion propaganidists just can't face, so they have to deflect.  Which explains why  this Texas yokel Crenshaw feels compelled to write this twaddle:

"The far left is treating the lockdown and the consequent economic devastation as an opportunity to restructure America into a socialist utopia."

Uh no, asshole. We just want to ensure the 39 million people who've now lost their jobs - thanks to Trump's tomfoolery and haphazard response-  get the money they need to buy groceries, pay utility bills and keep a roof over their heads. Get it?  Again, Michelle Goldberg does - parsing both Noonan's canards and Crenshaw's as she observes:

"But it’s a mistake to treat the growing ideological divide over when and how to reopen the country as a matter of class rather than partisanship"

 Apart from that this yahoo doesn't get the connection between controlling the virus and successfully opening the economy. As the Times Paul Krugman notes:

"One thing I keep hearing, however, is that we must reopen for the sake of workers, who need to start earning wages again to put food on their families’ tables. So it’s important to realize that this is a really bad argument.  For America is fully capable of shielding workers idled by the lockdown from severe economic hardship. As Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, said in a TV interview aired Sunday, we can and should pursue policies that “keep workers in their homes, keep them paying their bills. Keep families solvent.”

A salient point I made in another post not long ago, i.e.


Noting:

"So whisking millions back to work prematurely serves two main purposes for the WSJ's hacks: 1) Disabling any need for the govt' to step in again to send relief checks or expand food stamps etc., and 2) To provide more billions for the rich, the one percent, hedge fund owners, Repuke donors and the like.. "

Also quoting Nobel winning economist Paul Romer who posited over 300 million tests were needed nationwide before we could even think of returning to business as usual. We haven't even met one hundredth that standard, so we are asking for it. This is given the virus is ready to roar back at the slightest hint of relaxing our efforts, and slacking off means letting millions resume work without proper safeguards.

But, incredibly, one must evidently - and in addition to the usual political polarization- factor in a "white male"  tribal factor as well. (According to a Times article 'When The Mask You're Wearing Tastes Like Socialism')  This is derived from a contingent of knuckle dragging, conservative white males who see those advocating for mitigation and safeguards as embracing a "feminine"  stance.  Much like these mutts (brainwashed for years by Limbaugh etc.) who believe any gov't help amounts to a 'nanny state" interfering.  Peter Ditto, a psychologist at the University of California-Irvine, posits that:

"While liberals adopt their nurturant role, bemoaning the climbing infection and death rates and are willing to accept economic carnage in favor of minimizing the loss of human life, conservatives are more likely to, in effect, tell the American people to “walk it off,” increasingly staking out the position that some loss of life must be endured for the greater economic good."

  Which is preposterous, and why I believe it more important than ever these "macho" white boy conservos be dragged into a Covid ward to see the intubation process, and men their age having to be on dialysis, and otherwise put into a medical coma.  All of which brings Janice's favorite cartoon to mind;


The cartoon perfectly embodies the ultimate "feminization" these wannabe tough guys face as they continue their ludicrous risk taking.  A pose especially choice given most of these macho apes run for cover and scream like little girls when you show them the face of even a 2 -inch diameter spider, i.e.
Image result for brane space, spider face
 But especially now in the midst of a virus they know nothing about, their fake bravado is laughable, given they also feel the need to march with their guns.  But then are reduced to hapless, impotent invalids after Covid lays them low.  Especially justified after we read that they regard the CDC, WHO scientists as (ibid., 'When The Mask You're Wearing Tastes Like Socialism'):

 " typical liberal pansies who just can’t accept the reality that people die."

Yeah, but not 93,000 in 3 months!  Headed for 100,000 plus by June 1.  As Janice puts it, all this posturing makes her want them to "choke on their own snot" - to see what  a Covid death is like.

All of which brings up a timely warning from Krugman (ibid.):

 "Suppose, after all, that the epidemiologists are right, and that premature reopening leads to a second wave of infections. What we’ll need in that case is a second lockdown. But all indications are that Republicans are totally opposed to extending benefits. What they want, instead, is legislation that would protect businesses from liability if their employees get sick.  That is, they want to force Americans to go to work even if it kills them."

But, of course, the Reeptard tough guys love that stuff, that hyping of faux masculinity - part of which entails an anti- expertise mindset, which itself reflects a long -standing anti-intellectualism in American life.   In the end it's all well and good for this sliver of non- college educated white male miscreants to parade their imbecility. It's a "free country" as they like to say.  But that doesn't mean the rest of us ought to follow like freaking lemmings, or buy into their batshit crazy conspiracy ideations - like the medical workers are behind the pandemic and making it appear worse than it is.  

Fortunately, it looks like the sensible, cautious segment of the nation is in the majority - for now.  According to a new AP-NORC poll 83 percent of Americans are concerned lifting restrictions will lead to many more infections.  53 percent are prepared to continue those restrictions indefinitely.  So the racist death mongers on the Right don't yet realize their precious corporate economy will still founder if so many lack the confidence to engage with it - never mind the minority of loudmouth simpletons now getting all the press coverage.  What we need more of is sane voices like that of Dr. Richard Besser, former CDC head, who said last night ('All In'):

"Public health is not about keeping people unemployed... But you need to dial this up slowly and carefully, so that we don't see major outbreaks occurring and going back to the same situation of everyone under lockdown."


This was reinforced last night by Jeffrey Shaman,  the lead researcher of the Columbia University study, which showed 54,000 lives could have been spared had the lockdowns begun 2 weeks earlier.  In Prof. Shaman's word, from his MSNBC appearance:

"This pandemic is not over by any means, and most of the country has not been exposed, not been infected. So it's really vital that we actively seek it out in our communities and monitor what is happening as we loosen restrictions.  Especially as we open the economy further and further to make sure we don't have flare ups. And if we identify any growth in cases we have to respond more quickly, That's because if you stop the virus in the early stages you will limit the number of deaths that occur over time. Important because the growth process can sneak up on you,

I like to use the illustration of  a pond and there's this invasive lily flower that gets into it.  Every day it doubles in size, the number that are there. By day 30 the entire pond is covered with lilies. And the question is 'On what day was it halfway covered?'  Well, on day 29, just the day before, because it is a doubling process.  So we can't get complacent particularly as we're moving into summer.  We need to squash this virus, at least until a vaccine is available."


See also:


by Jaime O'Neill | May 20, 2020 - 6:32am | permalink

AND:


And:


Friday, June 10, 2016

Elizabeth Warren Cremates Trump And Shows She's Ready To Be Hillary's VEEP

Watch Elizabeth Warren burn it all down in epic takedown of "thin-skinned, racist bully" Donald Trump: "He will never be President of the United States"

"Like all federal judges, Judge Curiel is bound by the federal code of judicial ethics not to respond to these attacks. Trump is picking on someone who is ethically bound not to defend himself, exactly what you'd expect from a thin--skinned racist bully"

"Donald Trump is a loud, nasty, thin-skinned fraud who's never risked anything for anyone and who serves no one but himself. You, Donald Trump, are a total disgrace. You shame yourself and you shame this great country "

"And we will not allow a small, insecure, thin-skinned, wannabe tyrant or his allies in the Senate to destroy the rule of law in the United States of America."

Excerpted remarks from Elizabeth Warren's address to the American Constitution Society yesterday.

---------
After a blistering, firerbrnd speech to the American Constitution Society (ACS)  yesterday evening,  Elizabeth Warren appeeared on Rachel Maddow and has declared herself ready to be Hillary Clinton’s running mate in the US presidential election. This came at the end of a lengthy (25 min.) interview by Maddow which ended with her citing one Dem dead head  (Ed Rendell) who complained she wasn't ready to step in as  President if anything happened to HRC. Maddow asked Warren “Do you believe you would be capable of stepping and doing that job if you were called upon to do it?”

Her response was calm and concise: “Yes, I do.”

Of course, I've excoriated this dingbat Rendell before,  to do with his connections to 'Fix the Debt'  - a Neolib outfit (created by billionaire former hedge funder Peter G. Peterson)  dedicated to cutting "entitlements", e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2013/01/fix-debt-cover-to-undermine-your-future.html


Personally, I think it is a terrific idea and would be a vastly better move than HRC putting a  centrist on the ticket.. (Which Sherrod Brown is). Warren would not only seal the  current fracture with the progressive wing (which mere words will not as the MSM doesn't seem to get) but also unleash a brand name attack dog on Trump and the Reepos. One who will no longer have to make excuses for being away from her Senate obligations and tending to her Massachusetts constituents.

A Warren VP would also not be any "weak sister" to Hill and she could play a key role keeping HRC's military inclinations at bay, see e.g.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/magazine/how-hillary-clinton-became-a-hawk.html?_r=0

Warren would also be critical in keeping Hillary's feet to the fire to ensure she upholds her end of any bargains made at the Dem convention, i.e. to make peace with Bernie and his supporters. At the same time, this could be one reason why Hillary absolutely would not want Warren on her ticket (apart from the fact that she may believe a two-female ticket would be doomed.)

In another interview with the Boston Globe on Thursday, Warren endorsed Clinton as the party’s presidential nominee, saying: “I’m ready to jump in this fight and make sure that Hillary Clinton is the next president of the United States and be sure that Donald Trump gets nowhere near the White House.”

Then, on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show on Thursday evening, Warren said the Sanders campaign had been “powerfully important”. This is putting it mildly, given Bernie echoed the exact same themes on the demise and attacks on the middle class that Warren has. And lest we forget, Bernie only stepped in after Warren demurred - opting to remain in the Senate (her words at that time). This devastated millions of progressives hankering to see someone of the Left compete with Hillary (a known Neolib) and that is when Sanders stepped in.

Warren added:

“He ran a campaign from the heart, and he ran a campaign where he took these issues and really thrust them into the spotlight – issues that are near and dear to my heart – and he brought millions of people into the democratic process,”

Then  Warren said, “Hillary Clinton won. And she won because she’s a fighter, she’s out there, she’s tough. And I think this is what we need.”

Actually, I believe most Sanders' primary voters would say Hillary won precisely because of the undemocratic super delegate system - which allowed party bosses, lobbyists and others to sign on for Clinton even before the first primary votes were cast. Some idiot defenders, e.g. on The Financial Times website, actually claimed the SD system was a case of "separation of powers" that the Founders embedded in the Constitution. This, obviously, is total codswallop. The separation of powers applies specifically to the separation of the branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial. The Dems, meanwhile, adopted the SD system of their own accord to be able to trump voters' will if it wasn't compatible with their pro-corporate agenda.

Warren’s endorsement came within hours of President Barack Obama formally giving his endorsement to Clinton’s candidacy. “I’m with her,” Obama said, in a video recorded on Tuesday. “I don’t think there has ever been someone so qualified to hold this office.”

But, of course, Obama would say all that given he also is a Neoliberal. (Though recently he has at least backed away from his earlier chained CPI proposals, and now backs expansion of Social Security). 

In any case, it is now time for the Dems to heal their rifts and move forward which means halting the wretched gasbag Trump from getting his pudgy, Hitlerite paws near the nuclear codes. This, to me, means Hillary has little choice other than to name Elizabeth Warren as her VP choice. This will, right now  - before the convention, be the biggest and boldest step to unify the party and thrust if forward to victory.

If Hillary really wants to be Prez, I think her ego ought to be able to handle having a sidekick like Elizabeth Warren!

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-reich/67586/a-public-note-to-my-friend-bernie-sanders

Monday, April 27, 2015

Obama's Over the Top Rhetoric on TPP Risks Splitting the Democratic Party

Democrats’ free trade war is getting ugly, and Obama is bending the truth

As I've said many times before, I am not an Obama-bot or mindless, blind follower of Obama. When he is right  (as on the Keystone pipeline veto and improving relations with Cuba) I will deliver kudos and plaudits, but when he is wrong - as he is on the TPP- I will not hesitate to go after him and criticize him.  This is what a true democracy and freedom of speech is about. (Apart from which I am not a Democrat but an Independent - so pride myself on being "non-partisan" in the sense of presidential adulation.)

Now it is time to go after him again. Obama has allowed his sense of self-righteousness, entitlement and power to get ahead of him regarding the current debate (with Sen. Elizabeth Warren) on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal. In the most recent barrage, on Friday, Obama  accused Warren and congressional Democrats of being "dishonest" and spreading "misinformation" about the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But by far the worst insult is when Obama actually compared TPP critics to "Sarah Palin touting death panels", to do with Obamacare.  Are you fucking kidding me? Those are fighting words, and Senators Warren and Sherrod Brown didn't take them kindly.

Especially as, according to 'Common Dreams':

"It was an unusually aggressive attack for the president -- accusing members of his own party not of having misplaced priorities, but of actively working to deceive the public. Obama is rarely so severe even with his Republican opponents. "

So again, one wonders if these are Obama's own ill-advised words, or if it's some duncie numbskull advisor telling him to say them to expedite this shady TPP baloney without "upstarts" from the left giving him problems. This recalled putdowns by his former press secretary Robert Gibbs and later, angry remarks made a number of years ago by another toad, Rahm Emmanuel - who referred to liberals at one White House meeting as "f*cking retards".  That despicable outburst and putdown has burned forever in progressive brains and explains why many aren't prepared to take any shit now, including from Obama or any of his minions.


In any case it was dumb, precipitous and only stirred more rancor. Obama ought to damned well know better, especially with a critical mid-term election coming up next year and the Dems with a chance to win back 5 seats to re-take the Senate.

Obama actually  said that the Democratic criticism that "gets on [his] nerves the most" is the notion that his TPP pact is "secret," and went on to insist that the terms of TPP will help American workers.

All of which is patented hogshit. For once Obama needs to come clean and tell the truth. The TPP IS secret since it is classified on account of "ongoing negotiations" (by corporo-lobbyists) and the only way we know anything is thanks to leaks. Neither Obama or any of his people in his administration have given us duck squat.  From the existing leaks  according to Public Citizen, we know that the "TPP could ship millions of good-paying US jobs overseas.  We also know that the TPP could increase the costs of health care and medicine, while hurting health and safety standards. And we know that the TPP could make corporations even stronger and undo what few reforms are left on Wall Street."

So he's talking trash about  the TPP not being secret, and indeed, after refusing to allow release of the JFK assassination files from the National Archives in 2013 and continuing to prosecute whistle blowers (under the 1917 Espionage Act), we already know the Obama administration is the most secretive in history, see e.g.

http://time.com/27443/study-obama-administration-more-secretive-than-ever/

SO who is fooling WHOM?  As for Obama's lame claim that it "will help American workers" we have only his words to go by. Sure, he may want to burnish his legacy but we still need to see the actual documents because no matter how much a "good guy" a prez may believe he is - so he wouldn't jeopardize his legacy - he ought to have the sense to realize that real citizens still need independent  confirmation of  that, not merely taking him at his word. (And btw, this is also a wakeup call for Hillary to come clean and announce where she stands on the TPP)

Anyway, on Saturday, Sen. Warren and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) responded with a letter "essentially telling Obama to put up or shut up" - according to Common Dreams. . If the deal is so great, Warren and Brown wrote, the administration should make the full negotiation texts public before Congress votes on a "fast track" bill that would strip the legislative branch of its authority to amend it.  Warren and Brown's request is totally reasonable and such disclosure is a touchstone of democracy. (Which is also why we expect GMO foods to be labeled!)  On the other hand, if we are no long a democracy but a corporatocracy, with the deal being written by lobbyists - then it is no wonder it would be kept under wraps, or that GMO purveyors would decry labeling. Where the wonder arises is in a President who claims to be acting in our interest and promised "full transparency" at the outset of his first term in office- but now conveniently hurls it into a ditch. What the hell happened to that full transparency?

As the two protesting Senators wrote (letter obtained by The Huffington Post):

"Members of Congress should be able to discuss the agreement with our constituents and to participate in a robust public debate, instead of being muzzled by classification rules"

This references the fact that Democrats  and some Republican critics have been particularly frustrated by Obama's decision to treat the TPP documents as classified information, which prevents them from responding to Obama's claims about the pact in detail.

Why "classified"? The only reason would be to prevent open disclosure, to keep aspects hidden that would be known in advance to arouse lots of public ire.

The Senators went on:

"Your Administration has deemed the draft text of the agreement classified and kept it hidden from public view, thereby making it a secret deal. It is currently illegal for the press, experts, advocates, or the general public to review the text of this agreement. And while you noted that Members of Congress may 'walk over ... and read the text of the agreement' -- as we have done -- you neglected to mention that we are prohibited by law from discussing the specifics of that text in public."

Again, confirming an enraged public would  result if the details were actually known.

Warren and Brown were particularly miffed at being accused of lying, as they ought to be. This is shameful rhetoric more consistent with an asshole like Rahm Emmanuel than a President who supposedly has made the people's welfare  a priority.  At first, I had to read Obama's remarks several times, then wondered what kind of "choom" this guy had been smoking. He's never used such invective on the GOP including  their Tea Party faction which often depicted him as the Antichrist, e.g.

As well as portraying him as a "witch doctor" while dissing Obamacare. Why didn't Obama get as apoplectic about this misrepresentation as he is now with Liz Warren? Why can't he be honest when he tries to compare us with Sarah Palin  and her "death panels" garbage? Anyway, the letter goes on:

"We respectfully suggest that characterizing the assessments of labor unions, journalists, Members of Congress, and others who disagree with your approach to transparency on trade issues as 'dishonest' is both untrue and unlikely to serve the best interests of the American people,"

Common Dreams went on to note:

"Some of Obama's claims about TPP on Friday took some creative license with the truth. He said that he wanted a trade deal that would allow American automakers to sell more cars overseas, without mentioning that Ford and autoworker unions do not support the pact. He also said that he had not included any language barring currency manipulation -- a key tactic by which Japan and China undercut American production -- because it might hamper the Federal Reserve's monetary policy operations"

Most brutal, according to Common Dreams:

The Warren-Brown letter also includes a subtly vicious Democrat-on-Democrat dig, suggesting that Obama's trade transparency record is worse than that of former President George W. Bush. They note that Bush published the full negotiation texts of a major free trade deal with Latin America several months before Congress had to vote on giving the deal fast track benefits. The Obama administration has resisted calls to follow suit with TPP.he

Here we see the potential for a Democratic Civil war. A total circular firing squad. A plausible demolition of any coalition that might enable a Dem Senate takeover next year.

Joan Walsh on salon.com has written (http://www.salon.com/2015/04/27/democrats%e2%80%99_free_trade_war_is_getting_ugly_and_obama_is_bending_the_truth/)

 "In fact, here are three big ways the president is lamentably shading the truth when it comes to TPP.

1. Secrecy: It’s true that members of Congress can personally “walk over” and “read the text” of the agreement. Alone, without staff, and without taking notes. And they’re prohibited by law from discussing the details with the media or their constituents.  The administration has deemed the negotiations “classified.”

When Rep. Brad Sherman, a TPP critic, told Salon’s David Dayen that’s the only way members of Congress can review the text, it reminded me of the way they can review sensitive intelligence and national security issues they’re overseeing.

2. Marginalizing opposition as Warren and “the unions.” Warren is joined by Democrats ranging from frequent ally Brown to pro-business voices like Sen. Chuck Schumer to moderate Sen. Bob Casey. While the president hoped to win support from the Congressional Black Caucus, skeptics remain. And yes, labor has been a loud voice against the deal – along with the rest of the Democratic base, and then some.

The coalition opposing TPP includes the National Resources Defense Council, Doctors without Borders, the Electronic Frontier Foundation; critics of certain aspects of the likely deal include New York Times food writer Mark Bittman and the AARP. They are concerned about the way TPP could affect not only manufacturing jobs, but drug prices, intellectual property, environmental regulation and food safety. Obama is facing a remarkably broad-based pushback to his plans, and his effort to isolate Warren and unions is disingenuous.

3. Denying the vast, pro-corporate power of the “Investor State Dispute Settlement” panel. The wrangling between Warren and the White House over TPP isn’t new. Ever since her March 4 op-ed denouncing the “Investor State Dispute Settlement” provisions of the trade deal, frankly, administration officials have been trying to make Warren look a little batty.

The ISDS process – a private arbitration system that replaces public courtrooms as the venue for conflict  resolution — is common in trade deals. It began as an effort to protect Western corporations from capricious (and/or populist) governments in developing countries. Warren argued that the ISDS provisions in the TPP “would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws.”  The Obama administration countered by saying that “ISDS does not and cannot require countries to change any law or regulation,” and that the U.S. has never lost an ISDS case anyway.

That’s true, too – if misleading. An adverse ISDS decision doesn’t “require” nations to change laws or regulations; they can pay a steep fine instead. It’s also true the U.S. hasn’t ever lost such a case, but this is the largest trade agreement in history, covering a third of the world’s commerce. That could change.

Just as important, it lets U.S. corporations, and other big multinationals, bully other countries. Famous examples involve tobacco — American tobacco firms have challenged restrictions on packaging in Australia and Canada – mining and fracking "
----

Obama needs to decide WHOSE side he is on, and whether he stands with the Neoliberal punks, poltroons and parasites or the PEOPLE.  Also whether he really supports truth and transparency or continued obfuscation and attacking democratic principles and fellow Dems. He also needs to recognize who his real enemies are, those who depict him as a tribal Witch doctor and "son of Satan" or those who support him in general  - but demand he live up to principles and the Constitution as JFK would have done.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/dean-baker/61981/the-battle-over-the-trans-pacific-partnership-and-fast-track-gets-hot

Excerpt:

"The rules in the TPP can be used to challenge any consumer, labor, or environmental regulation approved at the state, local or federal level. The enforcement powers will rest with an extra-judicial dispute settlement mechanism that will impose penalties that are not subject to appeal.

On this issue President Obama's assurance that the TPP will not challenge financial regulation or other types of regulation are worthless. He has no idea what sort of people will be appointed to these tribunals in future years."

and:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/dave-johnson/61941/obama-says-critics-of-trade-deal-sound-like-palin-touting-death-panels

Excerpt:

"The President’s alignment with Republicans, Wall Street, and corporate lobbying organizations like the Chamber of Commerce, and against progressives, labor, and almost all Democrats to push TPP is frustrating Democrats across the board"

Enraging us is more like it!