He fails to deliver...

[Magox]

President Obama can't close deals at G-20 summit

 

 

President Barack Obama failed to reach agreement on two international deals to help spur the U.S. economy, unexpected setbacks on an Asia trip that was supposed to emphasize his stature abroad and change the subject from last week’s electoral drubbing.

 

Obama was unable to achieve a free trade agreement with South Korea, vowing to keep talking to get a better deal for U.S. auto makers. And after meeting with the leaders of Germany and China, he continued to meet resistance from the two countries about reducing their trade surpluses with the U.S. to give a boost to American manufacturing, putting the best face on a compromise that only calls for the goal of lowering them.

 

 

Obama also met with Chinese President Hu Jintao for an hour and 20 minutes Thursday, and White House officials said that most of their session was focused on China’s currency. Unlike the United States and most economic powers, which let markets set currency values, China controls the value of its currency and keeps it low to make its products cheaper and more competitive abroad.

 

Obama faces legal and political pressure to make more progress with the Chinese on the currency issue. Under a law championed by Democrats that calls for trade retaliation against countries that manipulate their currencies, Obama faces a decision in the next month or so about whether to continue a waiver for China. Failure to make progress will bring more calls from U.S. manufacturers and labor unions for action.

 

Nick Lardy, an expert on China’s economy at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that China is actually moving slowly toward an agreement to reduce its trade surplus, in keeping with its own plans to invest more in its domestic economy.

 

Obama left for Asia three days after a Republican landslide that won control of the House and added to the GOP minority in the Senate. Presidents usually make postelection foreign trips, either enjoying a victory lap or leaving behind the headaches of a bad loss. In this case, Obama’s problems seemed to come with him. The president faces doubts at home about his ability to lead a politically divided government, and the bumps he faced on this trip also reflected doubts from other governments that the president can achieve aims such as the international deal to curb trade surpluses.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44989.html#ixzz14zAtGj5c

 

 

Just like the last G20 meeting, this one produced no results, in fact to everything that I have been hearing and reading it was quite contentious, with flinging accusations from just about all quarters blaming one another. Mainly the blame was on China for their currency manipulation policies and the U.S's world wide inflation policies.

 

It appears pretty clear to me that the U.S has lost a lot of clout and respect and our worldwide standing has definitely weakened, meanwhile China and Germany have weathered this storm much better than we have and they appear to be emboldened as a result of this.

 

What the world needs is for a global coordinated effort to get out of this mess that we are in, and that has not been the case. Europe is tightening, we are stimulating and China is doing what it pleases. It is one big cluster!@#$, and in my view the odds of trade disputes occuring is rising.

 

How will Obama handle this embarrassing setback? Will he continue to push for these free trade agreements? ANd if he does, he has lost so much political capital, that I don't see the Liberals (who are beholden to the Unions) going along with it. Obama's goal is to double our exports within 5 years. I think that is a great goal, but he is having difficult closing the deal with his foreign partners. Look at the global warming deal that went on last year, he went and they rejected his proposals. Same here.

 

My guess is that he will soon strike a deal with the South Koreans, but it will be a deal that is much more beneficial to the S. Koreans and they will trump it as a success. It doesn't matter, I don't see it getting approved from COngress. It's not just the liberals, but even the Tea Partiers aren't enthusiastic about Free Trade.

 

Too bad, because it is our best hope of structurally improving this economy.

[Rob's House]

President Obama can't close deals at G-20 summit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44989.html#ixzz14zAtGj5c

 

 

Just like the last G20 meeting, this one produced no results, in fact to everything that I have been hearing and reading it was quite contentious, with flinging accusations from just about all quarters blaming one another. Mainly the blame was on China for their currency manipulation policies and the U.S's world wide inflation policies.

 

It appears pretty clear to me that the U.S has lost a lot of clout and respect and our worldwide standing has definitely weakened, meanwhile China and Germany have weathered this storm much better than we have and they appear to be emboldened as a result of this.

 

What the world needs is for a global coordinated effort to get out of this mess that we are in, and that has not been the case. Europe is tightening, we are stimulating and China is doing what it pleases. It is one big cluster!@#$, and in my view the odds of trade disputes occuring is rising.

 

How will Obama handle this embarrassing setback? Will he continue to push for these free trade agreements? ANd if he does, he has lost so much political capital, that I don't see the Liberals (who are beholden to the Unions) going along with it. Obama's goal is to double our exports within 5 years. I think that is a great goal, but he is having difficult closing the deal with his foreign partners. Look at the global warming deal that went on last year, he went and they rejected his proposals. Same here.

 

My guess is that he will soon strike a deal with the South Koreans, but it will be a deal that is much more beneficial to the S. Koreans and they will trump it as a success. It doesn't matter, I don't see it getting approved from COngress. It's not just the liberals, but even the Tea Partiers aren't enthusiastic about Free Trade.

 

Too bad, because it is our best hope of structurally improving this economy.

That's because our President is a big wet kitty who thinks bowing down and kissing ass somehow commands respect. This guy is a !@#$ing joke.

 

Limp wristed college know-it-alls, MTV viewers, and people who think Stephen Colbert is intelligent may buy into his slogans and rhetoric, but foreign leaders are not so easily duped. They know an empty suit when they see one.

[Adam]

That's because our President is a big wet kitty who thinks bowing down and kissing ass somehow commands respect. This guy is a !@#$ing joke.

 

Limp wristed college know-it-alls, MTV viewers, and people who think Stephen Colbert is intelligent may buy into his slogans and rhetoric, but foreign leaders are not so easily duped. They know an empty suit when they see one.

Don't hold your breath, we will elect another empty suit in 2012

[....lybob]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

[Rob's House]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

That's kind of the point. The rest of the world doesn't care about his ability to read a speech in a charismatic voice. He comes off as ridiculous, doesn't get jack squat, and makes himself (and by extension, us) look weak and impotent for attempting and failing in such a pathetic and absurd way.

[....lybob]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

 

 

That's kind of the point. The rest of the world doesn't care about his ability to read a speech in a charismatic voice. He comes off as ridiculous, doesn't get jack squat, and makes himself (and by extension, us) look weak and impotent for attempting and failing in such a pathetic and absurd way.

 

Rob I'm shocked that a person of keen powers observation and insight failed to see sarcasm in that first line.

[DC Tom]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

 

You'd think after two years in office he'd have learned by now that the key to geopolitics isn't speechifying or negotiating, it's rubbing Angela Merkel's shoulders.

[Magox]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

Yes, you are right. It is amazing how the charismatic Bush was able to assemble a team to broker a deal with Colombia and Panama against their own self interest. Shocked I tell ya, Shocked!

[....lybob]

Yes, you are right. It is amazing how the charismatic Bush was able to assemble a team to broker a deal with Colombia and Panama against their own self interest. Shocked I tell ya, Shocked!

 

Yes, you are right!,Colombia and Panama are exactly equivalent to G20 countries and I'd be shocked, shocked I tell you if anyone on this board would dispute that.

[GG]

Yes, you are right!,Colombia and Panama are exactly equivalent to G20 countries and I'd be shocked, shocked I tell you if anyone on this board would dispute that.

When the POTUS can't even get piddly slam dunk Colombia trade deal done, how will he have standing against the heavyweights? Is South Korea a lightweight country?

[Magox]

Yes, you are right!,Colombia and Panama are exactly equivalent to G20 countries and I'd be shocked, shocked I tell you if anyone on this board would dispute that.

Yes, you are right! One insignificant countries self interest is different than a G20 countries self interest.

 

Let's be real here, for the last two years it has been amateur hour at the White House and the world is beginning to see what many of us knew all along.

[....lybob]

When the POTUS can't even get piddly slam dunk Colombia trade deal done, how will he have standing against the heavyweights? Is South Korea a lightweight country?

wait I thought Bush got those agreements done in 2007? so Bush got them done he just didn't get them done done it was for Obama to get them done done- so what is the status of these agreements? alive, dead or in limbo.

[Rob's House]

Rob I'm shocked that a person of keen powers observation and insight failed to see sarcasm in that first line.

I got it, I was agreeing with your point [that other countries don't care about his charisma] and expounding on it by pointing out what a dumbass Obama and a good many of his fans are for being unaware of it and how it makes him (and therefore us) look ridiculous.

 

I'm surprised a man of your intellect didn't catch that.

Edited November 12, 2010 by Rob's House

[Magox]

wait I thought Bush got those agreements done in 2007? so Bush got them done he just didn't get them done done it was for Obama to get them done done- so what is the status of these agreements? alive, dead or in limbo.

The deals were done. Except that the party you support, you know the one's who are beholden to the Unions, took their marching orders and voted it down. Of course they did, they are bought and paid for, no play no pay....

[GG]

wait I thought Bush got those agreements done in 2007? so Bush got them done he just didn't get them done done it was for Obama to get them done done- so what is the status of these agreements? alive, dead or in limbo.

 

Bush handed the slam dunk trade deals on the platter for the golden one with total partisan control of Congress. Yet here we are two years later ...

[....lybob]

Yes, you are right! One insignificant countries self interest is different than a G20 countries self interest.

Magox I know you are smarter than this- it's not that one country's self interest is different than another country's self interest, it's the amount leverage that we have to apply a third world country is different than to a G20 country.

 

Let's be real here, for the last two years it has been amateur hour at the White House and the world is beginning to see what many of us knew all along.

 

Obama may be a problem, but he is not the problem- we are losing (have lost) our relative advantages in education, R and D, infrastructure, the worlds 1# market, and in the near future the advantages of the worlds reserve currency- most of the G20 members are making perpetrations for when, not if the U.S has another financial collapse, not that they wish this, but they think it and they are all trying to set up their own little trading blocks,- they are buying each others currencies now in perpetration, what they are not going to do is allow the U.S to export our problems to them, expect capital controls at least and increased protectionism or even trade wars are not out of the question .

 

now unless someone brings back Nixon's madman theory or some other belligerent outside the norms of civilized relationships policy

[Magox]

Magox I know you are smarter than this- it's not that one country's self interest is different than another country's self interest, it's the amount leverage that we have to apply a third world country is different than to a G20 country.

 

You must have forgotten. Bush did sign a deal with the South Koreans back in 2007. You know who opposed it back then? Take a wild guess. These deals were done, but since the Unions didn't approve of them, they never passed. I find it somewhat ironic that Obama voted a free trade deal down with South Korea, a deal that was already all wrapped up and now that he is president, he flies out to South Korea, fully anticipating a deal and he fails to deliver a pact that was giftwrapped for him coming into office.

 

This has been a really bad week for our president. But I mean, are we really surprised? The knock on him coming into office was his lack of executive experience. He's a professor, an academic, one who can communicate but when it comes to leadership, well.....

Edited November 12, 2010 by Magox

[Nanker]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

 

 

That's kind of the point. The rest of the world doesn't care about his ability to read a speech in a charismatic voice. He comes off as ridiculous, doesn't get jack squat, and makes himself (and by extension, us) look weak and impotent for attempting and failing in such a pathetic and absurd way.

 

I would dispute that.

He speaks in, in halting tones that that makes him sound like a like a mouth-breather.

Yes, a mouth breather that that reads himself to sleep at night and

only passes out from exhaustion from exhaustion when his lips get tired. Tired.

[OCinBuffalo]

I am shocked that a man of Obama's charisma couldn't get countries to go against their own self interest for the sake of propping up the U.S. economy- previously America had two coercive factors, our military might to use on third world counties and the worlds largest consumer market to get our way in economic matters, that consumer market is contracting in relative terms and in the near future will probably contract in absolute terms.

You may think this is sarcastic, but sorry to say: Obama's charisma was this administration's foreign policy plan. No joke.

 

Well actually huge joke, for us. They honestly believed that Obama's mere presence would:

1. Settle the Israel issues.

2. Force China, and the rest of the usual suspects to stop supporting Iran

3. Deal with Iran

4. Force the entire world to accept his climate change agenda...and again China made him look stupid.

5. Plan and execute a way to force China to stop playing games with their currency

 

Notice a pattern here? China owns Obama, and has been owning him since day one.

 

Why? Because China is not Communist any more. They are headed towards feudalism. Apparently nobody told Obama that Chinese ideology is not merely further to the left than he is. China doesn't have any ideology. China is basically turning into an oligarchy, and Obama thinks that somehow he can appeal to their shared values? They have nothing in common with him, or his ideals, and I wouldn't be surprised if they find his "charisma" approach, and the man himself, laughable.

 

All the way back in 2004 I told the Dem political professionals that hung in out my bar in Philly that they better nominate a President that knew how to deal with China and the debt/entitlements. They kept talking about the ennvironment and health care. Sound familiar? How much do you want to bet I could go right back to that bar now, and see those people, recently moved back to Philly, from DC, in a few months?

 

This if for you ...lybob: Looks like I was right, again.

Edited November 12, 2010 by OCinBuffalo

[Magox]

The president complained several times during his news conference about the U.S. media’s coverage of the G-20 summit. He pushed back at the suggestion that he’s weaker on the world stage because of the midterm elections and argued that his fellow leaders are no tougher on him than they were a year ago when he was new to the scene and his poll numbers were high.

 

“I remember our first G-20, you guys writing the exact same stories you’re writing now. Don’t you remember that, Sheryl?” Obama snapped at the New York Times’ Sheryl Stolberg.

 

Asked by CBS’s Chip Reid what complaints heard from other leaders during the summit, Obama shot back: “What about compliments?”

 

He appeared thin-skinned about the characterizations of his time at the summit, grumbling that nobody wrote about leaders setting the stage for financial regulatory reform at the last G-20 summit because it “wasn’t real sexy” and criticizing reporters’ “search for drama.”

 

“Sometimes, I think, naturally there’s an instinct to focus on the disagreements, because otherwise, these summits might not be very exciting -- it’s just a bunch of world leaders sitting around intervening,” he said

 

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1110/foreign_and_domestic_5c8146b5-efc7-45a6-93bd-da7cf500fa22.html

 

The president has thin skin? nooooooo