Home | About | Donate

For Love or Profit? The Different Worlds of the Pope and the President


For Love or Profit? The Different Worlds of the Pope and the President

Scott Klinger

President Obama is desperate to pass the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, marshalling most Republicans and some Democrats last month to narrowly push through a pact that was earlier defeated in the House.


How odd it is to see a photo of a man who serves God shaking hands with a man who serves mammon. I assume the Pope is forgiving ( :innocent: ) or willing to be but the corporate beast has learned to be secretive and gets what it wants because no one knows what it will get or can say anything about it anyway.

The secrecy of the confessional meets the secrecy of the TTP. trade deal.

Funny though …I thought living in a democracy meant you participated in what laws were passed in your name? How does keeping a trade pact merit being classified? Where is that secrecy over corporate deals that have the power to suborn the laws and regulations of our democracy constitutional? It is in fact an abuse of power and a sign that democracy as a political ideal is on its way out.


Obama’s TPP, TTIP and TISA will go beyond “sanctioning and blessing unbridled economic activity”, they will enable and protect unbridled economic activity. Contrary to the corporate propaganda promoting these “trade deals” are protectionist, 180 degrees from “free trade”. They will enable unprecedented global environmental destruction and negative economic impact on 99% of the world’s population.


Obama is stuck on his “legacy”, which will be written by the victors of “his” policies. The planet and the people be damned…


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


For America, it already is too late. This is something that our better-off really don’t understand. At the heart of this issue is America’s poverty crisis. I am not referring to min. wage workers, but to the masses of jobless poor, and many of the unemployable, and the realities that created this poverty crisis. Hopelessness and rage have only continued to grow. These are complex issues that should have been publicly addressed all along.

From FDR to Reagan, the US implemented policies and programs that took the country to its height of wealth and productivity. Then we chose to reverse course, doing just the opposite. When Reagan was first elected, launching the long campaign against our poor, the overall quality of life in the US was rated at #1. By the time Obama was elected, this had already plunged to #43, and we can no longer adequately compete in the modern world market. The US continues sinking.

Consider that not everyone can work (health, etc.), and that there aren’t jobs for all. The US shipped out a huge share of our jobs since the 1980s, ended actual welfare in the 1990s.The last I heard, there are 7 jobs for every 10 people who urgently need one. Instead of addressing this, Democrats and liberals have spent another 6+ years ignoring our poverty crisis, standing in solidarity only with those who are of current use to employers/the corporate state. While the international community increasingly views the US as the greatest potential threat to the survival of all life, the American “masses” have been so deeply divided that we have been left powerless to push back (against the corporate state).


How is Obama a “phoney”? True, he did not deliver rainbows and unicorns, but he never said he would. He was honest all along, from the start of his first run for election, repeatedly laying out his agenda. He stated his goals, what he would work for, and that’s what he has done.

I think it’s very important to remember that Obama had stressed a key point: To get the change we need, the People would need to figure out what they agree on, and then organize, get to their feet, and MAKE Congress listen. We almost did that, too, with Occupy. But before we could even catch our breath, Occupy was redefined – by Dem pols, lib media, then a number of participants – as a “movement of middle class workers” alone. So the rest of us – the poor, and those who get why unrelieved poverty is sinking the US – walked away.


I don’t think you’re CAPABLE of recognizing truth, or discerning it from twisted PR fictions.

Obama LIED about most of his positions. that’s why there are many articles attesting to the space between “Obama, the candidate” and “Obama, the President.” But this nonsense is about as accurate as your “We changed course” pabulum… which belies the FACTS of the corporate takeover of this nation’s courts, congress, media, and much of academia. Oh, and its purchase of the Presidency and most, if not all, state governor positions. The net result–like Fast Track shows–ain’t about any We, The People, pal. It’s a corporatist coup, a deep state covert apparatus masquerading as a Vichy democracy. To THAT deceit, you grant the collective WE imprimatur.

You shamelessly spin your disinformation tales here.


Yet it’s this contrast that’s so rare in a single photo - a depiction of he who sides with the 99% versus the other who sides with the 1%, the godly and the satanic, etc: an eternal binary with nothing in common.


In a way you could be right. For example, people often called him a liar for mouthing about “the audacity of hope” when his actions seem to suggest that hope is the last thing anyone should have - unless he/she is from the 1%. Remember, though, that the word “audacity” is rather ambiguous: it could certainly mean “bold” but more often it also suggests contempt for the listener. Hence “an audacious lie” or "an audacious liar."Thus when he talked about “the audacity of hope” what he’d meant was probably, a la Dante, “abandon all hope, ye who listen to me here.”


This discussion of the decisions being made by people is being carried out by using some of the technological systems that has been installed in industrialized economies by irreversibly using natural resources, producing irrevocable material waste and degrading the environment. the operation and maintenance of this aging infrastructure is an unsustainable process.
Rational discussion about what people should do should bear that reality into account. Promotion of consumerism is rightly regarded as an abuse of nature at the expense of making money for some. But what about the attitude of consumers? Many people enjoy easy land, sea and air transportation without consideration of the fact that future generations will not be able to do that because oil has got beyond reach. How many of those people who appreciate entertainment, communication and business convenience of the wide range of electronic devices realize that the information revolution is doomed? Problems like that will arise because of widespread lack of that understanding about how technological systems operate.