Posted on 01/31/2015 4:27:21 AM PST by Libloather
PHILADELPHIA – President Obama on Thursday asked wary House Democrats to hold their fire, while the administration negotiates several trade deals opposed by scores of liberal lawmakers.
“Keep your powder a little dry,” he told the Democrats assembled here for an annual retreat, according to a source in the closed-door session.
"Get informed," Obama also advised, "not by reading The Huffington Post."
The president has long sought pacts expanding trade with both Asian and European nations, as well as trade promotion authority, known as "fast-track," from Congress.
The issue has sharply divided the Democrats, as centrists tend to support the president's strategy, while liberals have pushed back hard, citing concerns over currency manipulation, environmental problems, food safety and worker protection, among other things.
Top House Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), have drawn an additional line in the sand, saying they won't support any new trade deal before the administration can demonstrate that the result will be higher wages for American workers.
"The impact on the paychecks of America’s workers is the standard that we will use," Pelosi told reporters Wednesday.
Fielding private questions from the Democrats after a fiery speech before the caucus Thursday, Obama tried to defuse those concerns, saying his administration will make a "substantive case" for the new pacts.
"We share same values and are looking out for the same people," he said, according to the source.
It remains to be seen if that message resonates with the Democratic critics.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said Thursday that the current draft of the Asian pact, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, is a nonstarter with liberals.
"As it is right now … it would be unacceptable," Schakowsky told reporters a few hours before Obama's arrival.
"None of us … oppose a trade agreement," she added. "What we want is a good and fair trade agreement. And so if the president is willing to share, and come back to the table, and we can make some changes, I think we would support that."
> She is only worried about how much taxing she can do to the American wage. You can’t have Marxism without producers.
From everything I’ve seen I’m going to predict 2014 will be one of the weakest years for tax revenue in history despite the “great” economy and 5 % unemployment rate (really 23% according to the way it was calculated pre-Obama). The man doesn’t have a clue about how to stimulate the economy, only how to destroy it (it doesn’t help that he’s taking orders from Soros and Jarret; his handler). The SisreallyaboutTHF because his evil campaign to destroy America worked only too well but forgot to take into account it needed money to sustain it. The last two years killed a large percentage of those producers by killing their wages, their savings, and their jobs. They have no more to milk. Sorry evil one; this is the end of the line for you. Even LIVs are starting to see through your charade and the MSM’s Wizard of Oz curtain shield.
Get informed...
+++++
This coming from a jerk who has the NSA, FBI and Secret Service at his beck and call for information but claims he only relies on newspapers articles to stay informed.
Funny to read pelosi all busted up about a living wage.
What does she pay the workers at her properties in CA?
Bet that would be an eye opener.
He (it) did say that it watched Fox News for info.
I remember that , also . He’s giving them the Fox News treatment . Should be fun to see how that flys .
What is the point of the Huffpost reference?
How do you figure?
I am saying bring back American manufacturing.
I am not saying how, just saying we are on the (seriously) wrong track right now.
Now please explain how wanting jobs to be right here in the United States is more “in line with the left”, and how in the world is that opposed to liberty.
Thank you.
It is OK to want jobs in the United States. You seem to think that protectionism protects American jobs. FDR tried that in the 30s - how was our unemployment rate then?
Imports during 1929 were only 4.2% of the United States' GNP and exports were only 5.0%. Monetarists, such as Milton Friedman, who emphasize the central role of the money supply in causing the depression, note that the Smoot-Hawley Act only had a contributory effect on the entire U.S. economy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.