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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If Sanders and Warren were telling the truth, they'd argue FOR, not against, the TPA. [View all]cui bono
(19,926 posts)170. Sanders and Warren DON'T WANT THE TPP. End of your argument right there.
You claim their end goal is knowing what's in the TPP so they should just approve fast track - which the GOP will be able to use as well if they are in control (have you thought about that?).
But they both know that without TPA, there won't be any trade bill, because the parties won't sign off without it. But if TPA does pass, Warren and Sanders get exactly what they claim to want -- public access to the complete, final TPP.
They are not stupid as you seem to think they are. You are the one who has twisted up the logic so much to make it something where you can't even see what you are saying makes absolutely no sense what so ever.
Their goal is to stop the TPP, not to give it fast track. They have seen enough to know it's a terrible deal. History shows you that these trade deals are horrendous and the TPP is far more egregious than NAFTA based on the leak we have seen and what we have heard from those who have seen it.
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:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
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
I see, the signatories sign off on the deal, THEN some "approval process begins".
delrem
May 2015
#21
It is amazing that any international agreements ever got passed before they could be SECRET.
Vincardog
May 2015
#203
We are no longer "during negotiations" the president is asking authority for it to be voted on up or
Vincardog
May 2015
#235
"... the idea that international trade tribunals can actually overrule our own laws and regulations.
pampango
May 2015
#67
The only way to examine the TPP is to accept fast-tracking the agreement. No other options.
Buzz Clik
May 2015
#116
Accept fast-tracking, and we can't demand we get a bag with a pig in it.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
May 2015
#134
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
Well, this board is liberal. If you don't like liberals, consider other destinations.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#98
Because I'm a liberal and I've been here since 2001, watching pinheads come and go.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#105
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
"consider other destinations". It's good advice for those who don't care for liberals.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#216
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
Why so combative? I'm not holier than thou, unless you yourself believe I am. I certainly do not.
cui bono
May 2015
#200
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
You seemed to care enough to declare yourself a LIBERAL. Why do you want that so badly?
cui bono
May 2015
#215
How do you know my partner? How do you know whether or not I even have a partner?
cui bono
May 2015
#221
What do you suppose I'd hope to accomplish by trying to impress you?
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#217
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
You left the subject out: "You never said it"--is that what you meant to type? If so thank you.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#249
If by hypothetical you mean "vicious lie I tried to push as truth", then I accept your apology again
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#260
You just admitted telling lies about me. I won't be taking correction from someone of your caliber.
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#263
"I'm sure they'd be interested in your request to have me banned"--Buzz Click
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#265
The majority of Dem politicians oppose Fast Tracking the TPP. It's the GOP that SUPPORTS it.
think
May 2015
#149
There's one thing "liberals" do even better... pretend to know what liberals do best.
LanternWaste
May 2015
#240
faulty conclusion - the parties don't HAVE TO give up on the bill without a TPA, that's just
msongs
May 2015
#4
Millions in other nations see these trade agreements as the POS cover to transfer more
polly7
May 2015
#86
Oh, come on, you know those Brookings folks are just a bunch of well educated elites.
Hoyt
May 2015
#78
Some amendments might be nuisances, others might be significant and desireable.
HereSince1628
May 2015
#144
The outline and progress of the current agreement have been available to the public since 2011:
ucrdem
May 2015
#12
They've succeeded in having you and others THINK that that is the way it works!
cascadiance
May 2015
#65
No. That is NOT the way it works. If it were nothing would have gotten done without it.
cui bono
May 2015
#167
A bad deal affect us for ill way more than the millionare Congress so the shit would be on US
TheKentuckian
May 2015
#146
Because the chief reason Sanders and Warren offer for opposing it is its secrecy,
ucrdem
May 2015
#18
Perhaps but I'm not arguing. I'm setting the record straight so that it CAN be argued. nt
ucrdem
May 2015
#30
"If" it is bad we have no way to prevent the TeaPubliKlans and Obama from passing it...none.
TheKentuckian
May 2015
#139
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
He is the one pushing it! Your logic is crap on this. If Congressional Republicans and Obama want a
TheKentuckian
May 2015
#145
I know. I keep banging my head against a wall, too. Over and over again, the same screwing
Nay
May 2015
#153
When Barack Obama finds himself in coalition with the GOP against his own party...
Chan790
May 2015
#115
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
Thanks. I think I've got it now (not that my understanding will change the outcome).
Buns_of_Fire
May 2015
#75
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
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
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
We don't have the votes to stop a bad agreement if FastTrack is approved
TheKentuckian
May 2015
#119
And some of them are here on DU pushing the corporate/republican trade agenda. (nm)
Elwood P Dowd
May 2015
#190
yes you can. you absolutely can. You can't add amendments to the tpp if the tpa passes
cali
May 2015
#211
In this thread, I've learned that Sanders and Warren are liars (hat tip to the OP)
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2015
#207
It is surely a shame that some DU'ers, when faced with the fact that the Truth hurts them,
truedelphi
May 2015
#180
The Chamber of Commerces and the Republicans are Wild about it? What's not to trust for
libdem4life
May 2015
#194
Is this the thread that inspired the latest round of: OMG PAId SHILLS1!one!1 PAID SHILLLS11!!
Number23
May 2015
#232
This is right up there with "populism means trickle down!" as one of the dumbest threads ever. nt
Romulox
May 2015
#236
The tortured and twisted rationalizations of primary seasons begins now...
LanternWaste
May 2015
#239
Public Access AFTER the slides have already been greased by passing Fast Track for the next 6 years
Faryn Balyncd
May 2015
#253
So making briefings classified, so that details cannot be analyzed by independent trade experts
Faryn Balyncd
May 2015
#255