<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: In the State of the Union Address Did President Obama Really Support An FTA With South Korea?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rokdrop.com/2010/01/27/in-the-state-of-the-union-address-did-president-obama-really-support-an-fta-with-south-korea/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rokdrop.com/2010/01/27/in-the-state-of-the-union-address-did-president-obama-really-support-an-fta-with-south-korea/</link>
	<description>Korea From North to South</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:47:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Cathcart</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2010/01/27/in-the-state-of-the-union-address-did-president-obama-really-support-an-fta-with-south-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-380815</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Cathcart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:33:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=18913#comment-380815</guid>
		<description>Glad to see this discussed, and JoeC is also right on -- I also thought it was interesting that the FTA with South Korea was so on the President&#039;s mind that he just sort of burst out with it near the end of his session with House Republicans in Baltimore. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glad to see this discussed, and JoeC is also right on &#8212; I also thought it was interesting that the FTA with South Korea was so on the President&#039;s mind that he just sort of burst out with it near the end of his session with House Republicans in Baltimore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: In the State of the Union Address Did President Obama Really &#8230; &#124; northkorea News Station</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2010/01/27/in-the-state-of-the-union-address-did-president-obama-really-support-an-fta-with-south-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-380805</link>
		<dc:creator>In the State of the Union Address Did President Obama Really &#8230; &#124; northkorea News Station</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 07:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=18913#comment-380805</guid>
		<description>[...] from: In the State of the Union Address Did President Obama Really &#8230;     Related ArticlesBookmarksTags      The Therapist: North Korean Missile Bul... North Korean [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] from: In the State of the Union Address Did President Obama Really &#8230;     Related ArticlesBookmarksTags      The Therapist: North Korean Missile Bul&#8230; North Korean [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JoeC</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2010/01/27/in-the-state-of-the-union-address-did-president-obama-really-support-an-fta-with-south-korea/comment-page-1/#comment-380793</link>
		<dc:creator>JoeC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 20:32:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=18913#comment-380793</guid>
		<description>If you saw the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/35147797#35147797&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;President&#039;s hour long exchange with House Republicans&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; at their conference today, he did comment more on FTAs in general and on the need for an FTA with South Korea in particular. 
 
&lt;blockquote&gt; 
On the specific issue of trade, you&#039;re right, there are conflicts within and fissures within the Democratic Party. I suspect there are probably going to be some fissures within the Republican Party, as well. I mean, you know, if you went to some of your constituencies, they&#039;d be pretty suspicious about it, new trade agreements, because the suspicion is somehow they&#039;re all one way. 
 
So part of what we&#039;ve been trying to do is to make sure that we&#039;re getting the enforcement side of this tight, make sure that if we&#039;ve got a trade agreement with China or other countries, that they are abiding with it -- they&#039;re not stealing our intellectual property or making sure that their non-tariff barriers are lowered even as ours are opened up. And my hope is, is that we can move forward with some of these trade agreements having built some confidence -- not just among particular constituency groups, but among the American people -- that trade is going to be reciprocal; that it&#039;s not just going to be a one-way street. 
 
You are absolutely right though, Peter, when you say, for example, South Korea is a great ally of ours. I mean, when I visited there, there is no country that is more committed to friendship on a whole range of fronts than South Korea. What is also true is that the European Union is about to sign a trade agreement with South Korea, which means right at the moment when they start opening up their markets, the Europeans might get in there before we do. 
 
So we&#039;ve got to make sure that we seize these opportunities. I will be talking more about trade this year. It&#039;s going to have to be trade that combines opening their markets with an enforcement mechanism, as well as just opening up our markets. I think that&#039;s something that all of us would agree on. Let&#039;s see if we can execute it over the next several years. All right, is that it? 
&lt;/blockquote&gt; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you saw the <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/35147797#35147797" rel="nofollow"><b>President&#039;s hour long exchange with House Republicans</b></a> at their conference today, he did comment more on FTAs in general and on the need for an FTA with South Korea in particular.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>On the specific issue of trade, you&#039;re right, there are conflicts within and fissures within the Democratic Party. I suspect there are probably going to be some fissures within the Republican Party, as well. I mean, you know, if you went to some of your constituencies, they&#039;d be pretty suspicious about it, new trade agreements, because the suspicion is somehow they&#039;re all one way.</p>
<p>So part of what we&#039;ve been trying to do is to make sure that we&#039;re getting the enforcement side of this tight, make sure that if we&#039;ve got a trade agreement with China or other countries, that they are abiding with it &#8212; they&#039;re not stealing our intellectual property or making sure that their non-tariff barriers are lowered even as ours are opened up. And my hope is, is that we can move forward with some of these trade agreements having built some confidence &#8212; not just among particular constituency groups, but among the American people &#8212; that trade is going to be reciprocal; that it&#039;s not just going to be a one-way street.</p>
<p>You are absolutely right though, Peter, when you say, for example, South Korea is a great ally of ours. I mean, when I visited there, there is no country that is more committed to friendship on a whole range of fronts than South Korea. What is also true is that the European Union is about to sign a trade agreement with South Korea, which means right at the moment when they start opening up their markets, the Europeans might get in there before we do.</p>
<p>So we&#039;ve got to make sure that we seize these opportunities. I will be talking more about trade this year. It&#039;s going to have to be trade that combines opening their markets with an enforcement mechanism, as well as just opening up our markets. I think that&#039;s something that all of us would agree on. Let&#039;s see if we can execute it over the next several years. All right, is that it?</p>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

