When asked if I like Barry Obama I rudely respond with a question. “Are you republican?” If they say, “No, I’m a Democrat,” then I respond thus: He’s ok, but I’m very disappointed. If they respond, “Yes, I’m a Republican,” I respond thus: I love him. With that in mind, dear worst-reader, I’m disappointed in Barry-O because:
- He’s from Chicago
- He’s (obviously) naive
- I wanted Hillary but took him when #americant females showed how much they hate their own kind
- Neo-Liberalism
Which brings me to TPP and the ridiculous stance he’s taking on it. Btw, the difference between Democrat and Republican is quite simple. It is a question of fun-ideology that dates back to the founding of what could have been a great nation. But since #americant decided to go the way of the neanderthal-reactionary über-conservative mind-set post Reagonomics, its current iteration of radical politics, which should be of no surprise to anyone, is really nothing more than a big, super, über-mess that will require the same amount of time to get out of that it took to get in to. Barry-O is literally stuck between a rock and, well, being from (schooled neo-liberal) Chicago. Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not generalising here. Of course I don’t mean all Chicagoens. Actually I mean just one: Milton Friedman. Friedman is the father of the economic ideology that has perverted politics for the better part of the last thirty years. And nomatter how bad Friedman’s economics are, no one seems to get it. And since no one seems to get it–or has never gotten it–it’s payback time. All of the “business” that has sold-out the country has to be paid for–eventually. Eventually is now. Hence, Barry-O can’t rationalise the true meaning of the TPP–nor could his predecessor Bill-O with NAFTA. The TPP (and NAFTA), btw, is not a trade agreement but is instead a treaty among a few powerful economies and a few fledgling, wannabe, weak economies. Good luck suckers. Rant on. -Tommi
worstwriter 