Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recommendations

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

Reduced to trolling for Obama's bad decisiont to support Wall Streets and Multi-national Larkspur May 2015 #1
He can't release it because it doesn't yet exist. ucrdem May 2015 #3
You say the TPP doesn't exist until the President gets fast track authority? delrem May 2015 #7
The negotiating docs exist, but there's no final draft. ucrdem May 2015 #9
Well duh, of course it isn't signed into law yet! delrem May 2015 #11
Sgning it into law happens after the signatories sign off on a final draft. ucrdem May 2015 #14
I see, the signatories sign off on the deal, THEN some "approval process begins". delrem May 2015 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author A-Schwarzenegger May 2015 #27
! Hiraeth May 2015 #159
LOL! BrotherIvan May 2015 #168
there have been over 20 negotiating rounds cali May 2015 #50
They're happy with the current 'unfinished' version..... daleanime May 2015 #58
What the signatories want is a dealbreaker. Chan790 May 2015 #103
It is amazing that any international agreements ever got passed before they could be SECRET. Vincardog May 2015 #203
Umm... when in history have they not been secret during negotiations? Recursion May 2015 #231
We are no longer "during negotiations" the president is asking authority for it to be voted on up or Vincardog May 2015 #235
Yes, we are, though the ministers say they're nearly done Recursion May 2015 #242
Post removed Post removed May 2015 #243
It's close enough to finished to show is what's in it. IF Onama wanted Exilednight May 2015 #81
No one follows pretzel logic thinking like that. cui bono May 2015 #160
It's making my head hurt! BrotherIvan May 2015 #169
I'm ready to take a hide and call this OP what it is... cui bono May 2015 #172
I think people see it exactly for what it is BrotherIvan May 2015 #178
That's why the OP had to rec his own thread to get it up to 5 recs. cui bono May 2015 #181
ooh ouch BrotherIvan May 2015 #188
Don't feed it energy. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #201
Trolling? Making a solid point is NOT trolling. Buzz Clik May 2015 #69
Oh, the OP made a solid, but it was not a solid point. cui bono May 2015 #161
potty humor Buzz Clik May 2015 #171
Better than potty posts cui bono May 2015 #175
No shit. Buzz Clik May 2015 #184
potty mouth cui bono May 2015 #185
Because people are tired of seeing their real-world jobs ibegurpard May 2015 #2
I've been educated on textbook economic theories JonLP24 May 2015 #5
Same and I agree. nt laundry_queen May 2015 #251
"... the idea that international trade tribunals can actually overrule our own laws and regulations. pampango May 2015 #67
It is what liberals do best: fear the unknown. Buzz Clik May 2015 #70
Which is why they want things to become known. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #87
Your metaphor is wrong. Buzz Clik May 2015 #89
Your metaphor is fine by me too. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #101
The only way to examine the TPP is to accept fast-tracking the agreement. No other options. Buzz Clik May 2015 #116
Then we must reject fast tracking. We don't buy pigs in pokes. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #129
"We don't buy pigs in pokes." Pure fallacy. Buzz Clik May 2015 #130
Accept fast-tracking, and we can't demand we get a bag with a pig in it. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #134
Ok, but it will take the same type of vote to reject fast tracking. Buzz Clik May 2015 #138
If the agreement is bad for American workers the Republicans will save us is your argument? TheKentuckian May 2015 #140
And then it can still be voted down! Fast track doesn't equal approval. They can stop it. freshwest May 2015 #228
Bullshit, can you count to 51 or 216? How are we supposed to stop it? TheKentuckian May 2015 #241
Good. Reject both. cui bono May 2015 #183
Well, this board is liberal. If you don't like liberals, consider other destinations. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #98
Poor baby. Doesn't like being challenged. So here's my question: Buzz Clik May 2015 #99
Because I'm a liberal and I've been here since 2001, watching pinheads come and go. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #105
Sorry, but you don't get to decide who fits on this board and who doesn't. Buzz Clik May 2015 #114
Well this LIBERAL Bobbie Jo May 2015 #162
There are those who are trying to narrow the spectrum of "liberal" Buzz Clik May 2015 #173
And others who are trying to widen it to include centrists. cui bono May 2015 #177
They're definition of liberal is anything Obama does neverforget May 2015 #186
"Centrists" "Third Way" Neo-Liberals" Buzz Clik May 2015 #187
If the shoe fits LondonReign2 May 2015 #189
Why do you think that is done to alienate? It isn't. It is simply a political description of cui bono May 2015 #192
It doesn't faze me in the slightest; however, those terms are used as insults: Buzz Clik May 2015 #193
Yes, people try to use them as insults, just as people try to use liberal as an insult. cui bono May 2015 #195
Yeah, I'm not a supporter of TPP BainsBane May 2015 #174
Indeed. And who said such a dastardly thing? DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #205
Since you asked BainsBane May 2015 #209
"consider other destinations". It's good advice for those who don't care for liberals. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #216
You are not a liberal. cui bono May 2015 #176
Another arrogant post Bobbie Jo May 2015 #197
So what stances do you take that are liberal? From what I've seen you agree with Obama on everything cui bono May 2015 #198
You don't know me. Bobbie Jo May 2015 #199
Why so combative? I'm not holier than thou, unless you yourself believe I am. I certainly do not. cui bono May 2015 #200
Enough Bobbie Jo May 2015 #208
Fine. I'll keep my assessment of you as is then, based on the posts I've read by you. cui bono May 2015 #213
Who cares? Bobbie Jo May 2015 #214
You seemed to care enough to declare yourself a LIBERAL. Why do you want that so badly? cui bono May 2015 #215
Same as I told your partner... Bobbie Jo May 2015 #218
How do you know my partner? How do you know whether or not I even have a partner? cui bono May 2015 #221
Yeah, here's the thing... Bobbie Jo May 2015 #224
Oh the irony... cui bono May 2015 #225
Do all-caps LIBERALS also fear the unknown? DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #204
Who are you trying to impress? Bobbie Jo May 2015 #210
What do you suppose I'd hope to accomplish by trying to impress you? DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #217
Didn't read, don't care Bobbie Jo May 2015 #219
Didn't read, don't care. I'll bet you're a hoot at the book club. nt DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #220
In what feel-sorry-for-yourself fantasy did I request to have you banned? DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #202
This message was self-deleted by its author DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #246
Buzz? Mr Click? Is everything ok? DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #247
Never said it. Buzz Clik May 2015 #248
You left the subject out: "You never said it"--is that what you meant to type? If so thank you. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #249
It was a hypothetical spawned by your exclusionary attitude Buzz Clik May 2015 #250
If by hypothetical you mean "vicious lie I tried to push as truth", then I accept your apology again DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #260
Now you've morphed from melodramatic to hysterical Buzz Clik May 2015 #262
You just admitted telling lies about me. I won't be taking correction from someone of your caliber. DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #263
Oh my god. You've taken the hysteria to a new level. Buzz Clik May 2015 #264
"I'm sure they'd be interested in your request to have me banned"--Buzz Click DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #265
Yes, indeed. You have now joined the ranks of unapologetic bullshitters. Buzz Clik May 2015 #266
Slamming liberals on DU? think May 2015 #106
It's not a slam -- it's an observation. Buzz Clik May 2015 #121
The majority of Dem politicians oppose Fast Tracking the TPP. It's the GOP that SUPPORTS it. think May 2015 #149
Majority? JayNev May 2015 #230
Buzz Clik Diclotican May 2015 #131
Ok. Both groups are afraid of the unknown. Buzz Clik May 2015 #135
Buzz Clik Diclotican May 2015 #147
There's one thing "liberals" do even better... pretend to know what liberals do best. LanternWaste May 2015 #240
I can document this endlessly. Care to play? Buzz Clik May 2015 #245
faulty conclusion - the parties don't HAVE TO give up on the bill without a TPA, that's just msongs May 2015 #4
Technically perhaps, but practically speaking, it's necessary for two reasons: ucrdem May 2015 #6
Are the other nations passing Fast Track laws? BainsBane May 2015 #40
Millions in other nations see these trade agreements as the POS cover to transfer more polly7 May 2015 #86
The other countries are mostly Westminster systems that don't need them Recursion May 2015 #244
Oh, come on, you know those Brookings folks are just a bunch of well educated elites. Hoyt May 2015 #78
IMO objection to TPA is about right to amend the agreement HereSince1628 May 2015 #102
You've hit the mark... Chan790 May 2015 #108
Wrong. Buzz Clik May 2015 #125
Some amendments might be nuisances, others might be significant and desireable. HereSince1628 May 2015 #144
The public has never been consulted on this trade deal. delrem May 2015 #8
The outline and progress of the current agreement have been available to the public since 2011: ucrdem May 2015 #12
You said the doc doesn't exist but LateKnight85 May 2015 #38
Spot on. cui bono May 2015 #212
Pretzel logic there. You say if no TPA no trade deal. morningfog May 2015 #10
Call it a Catch-22 that certain politicians have exploited to their advantage. ucrdem May 2015 #13
They've succeeded in having you and others THINK that that is the way it works! cascadiance May 2015 #65
If no TPP without TPA...then NO TPP!! n/t Chan790 May 2015 #110
The TPA is needed to get the TPP period. morningfog May 2015 #155
No. That is NOT the way it works. If it were nothing would have gotten done without it. cui bono May 2015 #167
It's a tight knot. delrem May 2015 #17
Congress was consulted repeatedly ucrdem May 2015 #22
Then some peeps should just stfu about Warren and Bernie etc. doing just that! delrem May 2015 #24
USTR Froman: ‘We Have Had Over 1,200 Meetings With Congress On TPP’ ucrdem May 2015 #25
Is that why the transcript are available? delrem May 2015 #32
funny,over a hundred dems say, essentially, that cali May 2015 #52
even pissed off about it! cui bono May 2015 #196
This message was self-deleted by its author newfie11 May 2015 #57
A bad deal affect us for ill way more than the millionare Congress so the shit would be on US TheKentuckian May 2015 #146
This is just stupid MFrohike May 2015 #15
Because the chief reason Sanders and Warren offer for opposing it is its secrecy, ucrdem May 2015 #18
Wow MFrohike May 2015 #35
precisely ibegurpard May 2015 #19
+1 cali May 2015 #53
SOP for this OP LondonReign2 May 2015 #191
LOL PSPS May 2015 #16
Okay I get it, but instead of acting as honest brokers ucrdem May 2015 #20
So... How's this thread workin' out for you, ucrdem? Scootaloo May 2015 #23
It's getting the facts out, for example ... ucrdem May 2015 #26
I kinda like the escheresque logic of it. delrem May 2015 #28
This message was self-deleted by its author A-Schwarzenegger May 2015 #36
Do you have something to say about the OP or just treestar May 2015 #96
The latter. I have learned it's a waste of time to engage True Believers™ Scootaloo May 2015 #165
I guess this is a better argument than the xenophobic/isolationist one. neverforget May 2015 #29
Perhaps but I'm not arguing. I'm setting the record straight so that it CAN be argued. nt ucrdem May 2015 #30
Such nobility and sincerity while labeling those opposed as xenophobes. neverforget May 2015 #33
YOU'RE setting the record straight? cui bono May 2015 #222
Why are you so proud to be standing with Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein? n/t eridani May 2015 #31
Personally I'd just like to see the finished bill. If it's bad we'll know it ucrdem May 2015 #34
Jamie and Lloyd can see it. Why can't you and I? n/t eridani May 2015 #49
"If" it is bad we have no way to prevent the TeaPubliKlans and Obama from passing it...none. TheKentuckian May 2015 #139
*cough* bullshit AtomicKitten May 2015 #37
bullshit of the worst kind. let's parse cali May 2015 #39
Thanks for that explanation. BainsBane May 2015 #42
#1: Wrong. He's playing the secrecy Wurlitzer for all to hear: ucrdem May 2015 #43
fail. I didn't say that he had never objected cali May 2015 #47
Do you honestly think the bill will not be passed Llanganati May 2015 #41
Welcome to DU BainsBane May 2015 #44
Yes, TPA is needed or the treaty dies on the vine. ucrdem May 2015 #45
I have not disputed that Llanganati May 2015 #46
Right, I misread it. I added an ETA with my best guess which is that if there's still a hue and cry ucrdem May 2015 #48
We'll see, clearly Llanganati May 2015 #51
Why would he be pressing so hard for something he won't sign BainsBane May 2015 #54
He is the one pushing it! Your logic is crap on this. If Congressional Republicans and Obama want a TheKentuckian May 2015 #145
AKA: Feudalism, v 2.0 - nt KingCharlemagne May 2015 #157
Jesus Hopped-Up Baldheaded CHRIST... AzDar May 2015 #55
Its 1993 all over again. Some of us never learn. Elwood P Dowd May 2015 #56
I know. I keep banging my head against a wall, too. Over and over again, the same screwing Nay May 2015 #153
Is today April 1? marmar May 2015 #59
Wow...some of the worst propaganda yet. Katashi_itto May 2015 #60
Goofiest post of the morning. hobbit709 May 2015 #61
if by goofy you mean cali May 2015 #62
I was trying to be polite hobbit709 May 2015 #63
I miss the unrec button. Scuba May 2015 #64
600 corporate lobbyists appreciate your efforts. The unions think May 2015 #66
Excellent point. One I have been making for weeks Buzz Clik May 2015 #68
Thanks, and if ever there was an object lesson in confirmation bias ucrdem May 2015 #93
When Barack Obama finds himself in coalition with the GOP against his own party... Chan790 May 2015 #115
Trade treaties are a hallmark of liberalism. We claim to be liberals ucrdem May 2015 #118
I've been anti FTA for decades...the rest of liberalism is catching up to me. :) Chan790 May 2015 #152
How is a statement like 'Warren and Sanders lie" not a violation of DU's ToS? - nt KingCharlemagne May 2015 #158
Okay, so the way I understand it: Buns_of_Fire May 2015 #71
well.. no. You are correct re passage of the tpa cali May 2015 #74
Thanks. I think I've got it now (not that my understanding will change the outcome). Buns_of_Fire May 2015 #75
thanks. I never imagined I'd become so fascinated with cali May 2015 #76
Nobody with 2 brain cells... sendero May 2015 #72
That's just loco. Autumn May 2015 #73
Very nice way to put it marym625 May 2015 #223
I love the smell of neoliberal desperation in the morning. n/t 99Forever May 2015 #77
The negotiating framework is fatally flawed - take it or leave it, secret till complete. Scrap that leveymg May 2015 #79
Wrong. In addition to small and large corporations who trade internationally, these are some of the Hoyt May 2015 #80
No environmental groups; I don't see any of these unions advocating strongly for TPP. leveymg May 2015 #83
Do you know how to search for information? Hoyt May 2015 #90
Don't be a condescending advocate. Didn't they teach you that? leveymg May 2015 #91
Apparently there's a small army of environmental groups involved in the process: ucrdem May 2015 #113
Again, that's a small army of industry trade groups and astroturf "environmental" groups leveymg May 2015 #151
Your argument seems to be 'If they were honest, they'd call for a fait accompli'. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2015 #82
Boo hoo, Multi-national Corporations have a sad. PowerToThePeople May 2015 #84
Seems like I heard this before MichMan May 2015 #85
OP is desperate double-talk. GoneFishin May 2015 #88
The sad fact is that politicians lie, even the ones you like. ucrdem May 2015 #92
Obama's argument for TPA is let me sign the treaty, lock it in so it's assured passage bigtree May 2015 #94
He would sign it only after we've had at least 60 days to review it and Congress endorses it. ucrdem May 2015 #97
The bill would make any final trade agreement open to public comment for 60 days bigtree May 2015 #107
Thanks, that's good info. The "switches" are what I meant by safeguards. nt ucrdem May 2015 #111
the 'switches' are cosmetic bull bigtree May 2015 #126
I see. nt ucrdem May 2015 #127
I think they both see it as an issue to use treestar May 2015 #95
The internet food-fight is getting some ink . . . ucrdem May 2015 #104
Um...this one is obvious. Chan790 May 2015 #100
LOL, I assumed this was from the Onion, what a totally silly post. nt Logical May 2015 #109
Might be the lamest post of the year whatchamacallit May 2015 #112
I simply don't understand why some around here want TPA to pass. stillwaiting May 2015 #117
I don't see where the objection to regulating international trade arises. ucrdem May 2015 #123
OMG. Way too heavy handed. Boo! Fucking BOO! Try again. nt stillwaiting May 2015 #137
We don't have the votes to stop a bad agreement if FastTrack is approved TheKentuckian May 2015 #119
Ever notice how the people here at DU who say the TPP isn't so bad Marr May 2015 #120
Oh most definitely ibegurpard May 2015 #122
But you object to making the argument about personalities. Got it. ucrdem May 2015 #124
Your OP was asinine and so poorly done, the deceit was hard to miss. Marr May 2015 #128
Well so? treestar May 2015 #133
It is interesting how Obama supporters ibegurpard May 2015 #136
I imagine they don't agree with you on that treestar May 2015 #141
I would imagine you are correct ibegurpard May 2015 #142
No, pro-corporate is not just a label. Just as liberal is not just a label. cui bono May 2015 #166
There's a word for third-way pro-corporate Democrats. SwankyXomb May 2015 #154
this. n/t PowerToThePeople May 2015 #156
And some of them are here on DU pushing the corporate/republican trade agenda. (nm) Elwood P Dowd May 2015 #190
trust him and everything will be fine neverforget May 2015 #150
Yes. Because Obama. cui bono May 2015 #164
you're joking, right? magical thyme May 2015 #132
Take somewhere else we know better here upaloopa May 2015 #143
You can't add amendments to fast track WhiteTara May 2015 #148
+1 cui bono May 2015 #179
yes you can. you absolutely can. You can't add amendments to the tpp if the tpa passes cali May 2015 #211
I took the post to mean no amendments to the TPP if fast track is passed. cui bono May 2015 #226
BWAHAHAHA... Had to rec your own thread to get it on the 'greatest' page. cui bono May 2015 #163
Sanders and Warren DON'T WANT THE TPP. End of your argument right there. cui bono May 2015 #170
In this thread, I've learned that Sanders and Warren are liars (hat tip to the OP) DisgustipatedinCA May 2015 #207
No not a weird thread, it's a crazy loco thread. Autumn May 2015 #256
It is surely a shame that some DU'ers, when faced with the fact that the Truth hurts them, truedelphi May 2015 #180
And btw... what exactly are the lies Sanders and Warren are telling? cui bono May 2015 #182
The Chamber of Commerces and the Republicans are Wild about it? What's not to trust for libdem4life May 2015 #194
lame.... mike_c May 2015 #206
Ugh DJ13 May 2015 #227
OP needs a reality check JayNev May 2015 #229
Is this the thread that inspired the latest round of: OMG PAId SHILLS1!one!1 PAID SHILLLS11!! Number23 May 2015 #232
If DU is a "little slice of Libertarian hell", why are you still here? neverforget May 2015 #233
For the lolz. Purely for the lolz Number23 May 2015 #238
LOL, probably. ucrdem May 2015 #234
This is right up there with "populism means trickle down!" as one of the dumbest threads ever. nt Romulox May 2015 #236
Dumbest, possibly... alternatively... JayNev May 2015 #237
The tortured and twisted rationalizations of primary seasons begins now... LanternWaste May 2015 #239
Nothing tortured about it, and yes, I really do wonder why. ucrdem May 2015 #252
Public Access AFTER the slides have already been greased by passing Fast Track for the next 6 years Faryn Balyncd May 2015 #253
Arguing the merits is fine, but that isn't what I'm objecting to. ucrdem May 2015 #254
So making briefings classified, so that details cannot be analyzed by independent trade experts Faryn Balyncd May 2015 #255
"they have complete access to the negotiating docs" - Funny! JayNev May 2015 #258
It's President Obama, alas, who is lying. cali May 2015 #259
Cali, your post is thoughtful, well argued and important. Thank you! JayNev May 2015 #261
Two reasons. NCTraveler May 2015 #257
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If Sanders and Warren wer...»Reply #60