General Discussion

ucrdem

(15,720 posts)

234. LOL, probably.

Reply to Number23 (Reply #232)

Mon May 11, 2015, 02:37 AM

May 2015

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