General Discussion

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)

117. I simply don't understand why some around here want TPA to pass.

Sun May 10, 2015, 09:55 AM

May 2015

It will be in effect for 6 years.

What happens if a Republican gets the Presidency and the Republicans maintain their hold on Congress?

We, as Democrats, stopped TPA in '07 to prevent that from happening, but we could be fighting for it to happen after Obama's Presidency is over.

It just doesn't make a lick of sense to me, and I believe it's extremely dangerous.

And, Warren and Sanders probably both believe that if TPA gets granted that the TPP will pass. Period. As do I by the way. So, if they want to stop the TPP from passing, they MUST stop TPA from being approved. This has the added benefit of not granting TPA to a future Republican Presidency.

Bilateral trade agreements please. Trade agreements that can be easily modified and ended if needed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

266 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Sanders and Warren were telling the truth, they'd argue FOR, not against, the TPA. [View all] ucrdem May 2015 OP

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