General Discussion

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)

66. Its kind of well known, old news, how embarrassing for you, Here you go~

Mon Nov 17, 2014, 11:17 PM

Nov 2014

Ahead of the fall 2011 Asia Pacific Economic Forum (APEC) meeting in Hawaii, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlined a plan to transfer U.S. military, diplomatic, and economic resources from the Middle East to the Pacific, in what she called “America’s New Pacific Century.” Describing the pivot in militaristic terms as “forward-deployed diplomacy,” Clinton hailed the TPP as a “benchmark for future agreements” leading to “a free trade area of the Asia- Pacific.”

Yet the TPP excludes China, which has become the second largest economy in the world and is poised to outpace the U.S. economy in a matter of years — a fact that is none too pleasing to U.S. elites accustomed to unrivaled hegemony.
http://fpif.org/open-fire-open-markets-asia-pacific-pivot-trans-pacific-partnership/

Promoting TPP to China, because Big Busine$$ wants an even playing field, like mentioned above~~

Clinton, speaking in Singapore a day before President Barack Obama arrives in Southeast Asia, said the US aims to combine the 11-country Trans-Pacific Partnership with other regional trade agreements to transform global commerce. "We welcome the interest of any nation willing to meet the 21st century standards of the TPP - including China."
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1084966/hillary-clinton-courts-asia-welcomes-china-us-led-trade-talks

Selling TPP to Japan~

Clinton: "We also discussed the Trans-Pacific Partnership and we shared perspectives on Japan’s possible participation, because we think this holds out great economic opportunities to all participating nations."
http://still4hill.com/2013/01/18/video-hillary-clinton-with-japanese-foreign-minister-fumio-kishida/

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It�s Elizabeth Warren�s party now! How to remake it in the liberal heroine�s image [View all] ashling Nov 2014 OP

Excellent article, with some very good pointers. Thanks! ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #1

Be careful. Because of wild claims like this, anything and everything that goes wrong... wyldwolf Nov 2014 #2

"If they're smart,..." BKH70041 Nov 2014 #4

But then Warren will be just another bought-and-paid-for puppet of the RW Third Way baldguy Nov 2014 #5

lol AgingAmerican Nov 2014 #45

Yeah. By you. Union Scribe Nov 2014 #15

People are coming to a determination that meets their biases. MADem Nov 2014 #29

Where's the blame? aspirant Nov 2014 #40

But but but I hear Third Way libertarians on here howling that liberals have no power in the party. Rex Nov 2014 #3

To the contrary, I thought it was us liberals who howled that liberals had no power in the party. pampango Nov 2014 #7

Well if you listen to libertarians, we have none. So when someone liberal runs Rex Nov 2014 #8

Pure, Purity doesn't that just ring of Frank Luntz? aspirant Nov 2014 #41

Yes it does! Rex Nov 2014 #42

Good article! peacebird Nov 2014 #6

Agreed ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #53

Elizabeth is too far left for the Hillary voters who more comfortable right of center. bowens43 Nov 2014 #9

And HRC is too far right for voters who are more comfortable middle or left. peacebird Nov 2014 #10

Hillary is left, she is not right, where did you get your information? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #13

Oh you ARE funny!! Hillary is LEFT!! Riiiight... RiverLover Nov 2014 #16

Site: http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #18

What she says running for president doesn't match what she has done. RiverLover Nov 2014 #19

Obliviously you did not go to the site, if you would have you would have found Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #20

She promoted the TPP, and that helps the 90%? Yep, you're funny. RiverLover Nov 2014 #26

I may be funny but I am correct. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #27

Yeah, she really threw her weight on Walmart's Board of Directors closeupready Nov 2014 #57

Yes she did, thought more females should be promoted. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #58

LOL, save it for an audience that will not know better. closeupready Nov 2014 #60

Have you ever served on a board of directors? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #61

Not over a 7-year period of time like Hillary. closeupready Nov 2014 #62

Serving on a board does not make one bad, if Hillary served on a board of directors for seven years Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #63

I realize you are heavily vested in this, but that was then. Hillary promoted offshoring American RiverLover Nov 2014 #64

Your proof of Hillary promoting offshoring of jobs is not in the article you posted. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #65

Its kind of well known, old news, how embarrassing for you, Here you go~ RiverLover Nov 2014 #66

I do not have anything to be embarrassed on this subject. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #68

Then how could you not know Hillary was heavily promoting the TPP? ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #69

Go back and read the post again, never said I did not know of Hillary promoting TPP. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #70

If I say the sky is blue, would you expect me to post a link proving it? RiverLover Nov 2014 #72

What? I said while she was on the walmart board she promoted made in America Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #73

That -may- be true, I only know she's not for "Made in America" anymore. TPP proves it. RiverLover Nov 2014 #81

Well, you can distort the facts all you want, doesn't make it true. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #82

I don't understand what you're arguing. The other poster is correct-- Marr Nov 2014 #84

NAFTA did Recursion Nov 2014 #37

Your own graph shows Median Income declining after the passage of NAFTA. U4ikLefty Nov 2014 #38

Nope. It started in 1994 Recursion Nov 2014 #39

Shhh ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #54

You have to pass minimum wage increases, though. joshcryer Nov 2014 #79

Of course we do. And invest in job training and infrastructure Recursion Nov 2014 #83

Yep, but these truths will be shut down soon. TheNutcracker Nov 2014 #22

Are you talking about the sites where politicans stand on the issues? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #25

Also loves H1-B visas. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #34

And Obama is a communist.... daleanime Nov 2014 #24

Hard core liberals don't support the TPP or H-1B Visa program... cascadiance Nov 2014 #30

I am not a hard core liberal. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #32

Well, duh. If you were, you wouldn't be promoting Hillary. ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #33

Go to the site referred in earlier, and if you venture to the end you will find Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #51

So Chuck Schumer just about always works a deal pushing H-1B program expansion in legislation... cascadiance Nov 2014 #87

Are you serious? Since immigration is on the minds of many Democrats you want to point to this as Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #89

Yes, H-1B programs are indentured servant slave labor programs. cascadiance Nov 2014 #92

Disagree with you, kinda getting sidetracked. Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #93

Why are you doing this? Over & over, "Hillary is Hard Core Liberal" when that is laughbable RiverLover Nov 2014 #90

Disproved, no, why do you continue to reply without proof she is not liberal? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #91

But you ARE just claiming in so many words that Hillary is in your post here! cascadiance Nov 2014 #44

Where does it state unless one is as hard core as another I can not support them? Thinkingabout Nov 2014 #52

It's Thanksgiving dinner Ink Man Nov 2014 #11

pretty sure they agree on big defense spending JI7 Nov 2014 #14

Elizabeth is 19th most liberal Senator. Clinton was 10th. joshcryer Nov 2014 #43

So is the poll that puts these kind of nonsense numbers too corporatist to post a link to? cascadiance Nov 2014 #46

Uh, look it up. joshcryer Nov 2014 #49

Links: joshcryer Nov 2014 #76

As the comments note at the bottom these "ratings" are a JOKE! cascadiance Nov 2014 #86

+1 I would like to see how they tallied that up. ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #88

All data that does not support my pre-conceived judgment ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #55

There are several potential reasons for this. joshcryer Nov 2014 #78

I suspect that Warren is DU's uber-liberal ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #80

Put that thing away, josh. You'll put someone's eye out around here Number23 Nov 2014 #75

Hey! Thanks for responding! joshcryer Nov 2014 #77

No, not particularly... brooklynite Nov 2014 #50

You are a 1%, so who cares what you think? (Sarcasm) ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #56

Correct Iamthetruth Nov 2014 #94

http://www.elizabethwarrenforpresident.com/ ~nt RiverLover Nov 2014 #12

Howard Dean brought back to head DNC would help. Faryn Balyncd Nov 2014 #17

Ding Ding. We have a winner! nt 99th_Monkey Nov 2014 #28

Why? Recursion Nov 2014 #31

It's my impression that both have the capacity to inspire & energize a grass roots movement, and Faryn Balyncd Nov 2014 #36

I would say the opposite Amishman Nov 2014 #48

I don't think its opposite. Faryn Balyncd Nov 2014 #74

She better get Tant Richards out of Florida! TheNutcracker Nov 2014 #21

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #23

It's her party when she becomes a presidential nominee geek tragedy Nov 2014 #35

Unfortunately with the corporatists infecting the party for 20+ years, it is hard to get experience cascadiance Nov 2014 #47

Why, when I read some of the comments to these kind of OPs ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #59

Elizabeth Warren's take on the Trans-Pacific Partnership RiverLover Nov 2014 #67

And at a speech this year, on the TPP~ RiverLover Nov 2014 #71

Kick. n/t area51 Nov 2014 #85