General Discussion

okaawhatever

(9,565 posts)

35. No. The poster was trying to point out that if you trust the President to negotiate something

Tue May 12, 2015, 10:11 PM

May 2015

like nuclear weapons with Iran you should trust him to negotiate a trade deal. Also, no one had a problem with the Iran deal being kept secret until it was appropiate to announce it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

116 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Y'all don't get it [View all] WestSideStory May 2015 OP

That makes no sense... brooklynite May 2015 #1

+1 daleanime May 2015 #16

If Mr. Obama becomes a lame duck out of this then he did roguevalley May 2015 #69

Yes, but H2O Man May 2015 #107

No ... sendero May 2015 #2

+ 1 cali May 2015 #5

I don't think that is even close to right Egnever May 2015 #15

no,the vast majority would not have cali May 2015 #29

Why would you think that? Egnever May 2015 #68

Of course the fight is not over.. sendero May 2015 #74

...^ that 840high May 2015 #45

+2 L0oniX May 2015 #55

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #3

Tiger Beat logic Skittles May 2015 #12

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #25

the usual Skittles May 2015 #27

Several of the usual suspects LondonReign2 May 2015 #43

Tiger Beat... bunnies May 2015 #59

When I was a kid, David Cassidy (aka "Keith Partridge") was all the rage among young girls Art_from_Ark May 2015 #70

You are so right. bunnies May 2015 #109

Oh, yeah, John Stamos and Scott Baio Art_from_Ark May 2015 #116

Exactly! Jamastiene May 2015 #83

right Skittles May 2015 #115

No. The poster was trying to point out that if you trust the President to negotiate something okaawhatever May 2015 #35

Yeah, but we didn't have Warren and Sanders playing politics with Iran. Hoyt May 2015 #49

Why? They aren't even similar areas. It is entirely possible to trust a person in one area but not TheKentuckian May 2015 #61

I stopped reading at this: Save this dumbass argument for the morons. nt okaawhatever May 2015 #63

Seems to me if you want to make an argument leftofcool May 2015 #76

You should have kept reading. 99Forever May 2015 #88

Actually, it is not that no one has a problem with nuclear weapons deals Jamastiene May 2015 #81

You have to support and trust Elizabeth Warren treestar May 2015 #94

that makes no sense cali May 2015 #4

3d chess eh Jesus Malverde May 2015 #6

methinks your logic is backward rurallib May 2015 #7

You ever watch House of Cards? WestSideStory May 2015 #11

no - nor do I have any intention to. rurallib May 2015 #14

Does that include Obama? Cal Carpenter May 2015 #18

What utter nonsense. Maedhros May 2015 #8

He was a lame duck after the 2014 election fadedrose May 2015 #9

Oh... It's Sooooo Tempting... WillyT May 2015 #10

Not really, but... JaneyVee May 2015 #13

"Turned their backs on Obama" = voting on the policy rather than the party/polotician LondonReign2 May 2015 #44

why is OFA relevant at all? grasswire May 2015 #52

Mailing lists, voter registration, volunteers, etc. JaneyVee May 2015 #60

but you say in your post that OFA members will punish anyone who ... grasswire May 2015 #67

Tiger Beat fandom Jamastiene May 2015 #84

but this is really creepy grasswire May 2015 #100

I agree. Jamastiene May 2015 #113

You make a really good point JustAnotherGen May 2015 #77

there's another threat grasswire May 2015 #101

How? How is it a threat? JustAnotherGen May 2015 #103

Right, that's what it is, a Republican plot. bemildred May 2015 #17

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words May 2015 #39

I get annoyed when people try to talk down to me. bemildred May 2015 #41

Bored with posting on the cave? n/t PowerToThePeople May 2015 #19

heh nt grasswire May 2015 #53

"A bit schizophrenic" is just rhetoric, but a bit far. More like "a bit inconsistent", ergo Iran, with their trust. Fred Sanders May 2015 #20

What does non proliferation have to do with trade? This is the dumbest tact yet. TheKentuckian May 2015 #65

Oy veh. cyberswede May 2015 #21

The tide has turned. 99Forever May 2015 #22

I'm "a bit schizophrenic" if I disagree with Obama on TPP? Jackpine Radical May 2015 #23

He's right 100% of the time! Duh! One poster tonight even said that the Democrats in the Senate and neverforget May 2015 #30

Rush must be mad at the Tea Party for not passing TPP or something. Jackpine Radical May 2015 #98

oh geez, gmafb nt steve2470 May 2015 #24

Huh? You and big business disappointed ? Boo hoo Person 2713 May 2015 #26

The Senate Democrats should have afforded the President a vote. WestSideStory May 2015 #28

what a heaping pile of horse shit cali May 2015 #32

Yeah they should have vote with the "lily white Caucus" Republicans neverforget May 2015 #38

so is the NAACP racist too? cali May 2015 #47

Not to cast aspersions on your asparagus, but dmr May 2015 #50

This post and the thought process to get to it is weapons grade, hate mongering stupid TheKentuckian May 2015 #66

They did. Jamastiene May 2015 #85

! rurallib May 2015 #87

wow m-lekktor May 2015 #31

oh, schizophrenic? Raine1967 May 2015 #33

Maybe they meant -Schadenfreude- they got everything else wrong,so maybe they meant that instead Person 2713 May 2015 #42

Well, I knew I was crazy. This thread confirms it. bigwillq May 2015 #34

and ,if you are against TPP, apparently RACIST as well! m-lekktor May 2015 #36

Well that be a twoffer! nadinbrzezinski May 2015 #56

A Republican plan to get Obama to do their bidding? DJ13 May 2015 #37

Any opposition to Obama's policies is racism LondonReign2 May 2015 #40

Well, don't you get it? bigwillq May 2015 #46

Thanks Britney WhaTHellsgoingonhere May 2015 #48

Your use of the word "schizophrenic" is inaccurate, bigoted, and insensitive. CBGLuthier May 2015 #51

Unrec L0oniX May 2015 #54

Absolutely absurd MissDeeds May 2015 #57

and lay low..........OOPS! Phlem May 2015 #58

Don't make this about the man. This is about a trade agreement that no one has any Baitball Blogger May 2015 #62

Full control huh? bluesbassman May 2015 #64

Bunch of hooey Tsiyu May 2015 #71

I see. Obama embraces the Republicans and the Democrats vote against them both. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2015 #72

If Republicans were in control today, why didn't they get what they wanted? n/t eridani May 2015 #73

Bingo MaggieD May 2015 #75

I Will No Longer Settle For The Lesser Of Two Evils - Go Bernie Go cantbeserious May 2015 #78

If I don't support LWolf May 2015 #79

I'll take my diagnosis from a qualified psychiatrist. Jamastiene May 2015 #80

BS. The TPP should have come to us written on toilet paper. NaturalHigh May 2015 #82

Since the bunny with a pancake on its head isn't available, Alkene May 2015 #86

^^^ This should be an OP ^^^ Octafish May 2015 #90

They're full of win when it comes to taking a popular Dem president down a notch. ucrdem May 2015 #89

can't argue the substance of TPP, eh? TheSarcastinator May 2015 #91

I've been arguing the substance since January. Check my journal. nt ucrdem May 2015 #92

You've been catapulting propaganda and utilizing fear tactics to try and persuade. stillwaiting May 2015 #96

Jan. 30: "The point of TPP is to boost US exports. That's why PBO is behind it." ucrdem May 2015 #97

We disagree on the point of the TPP. stillwaiting May 2015 #99

No Alittleliberal May 2015 #106

Except... Oilwellian May 2015 #93

If Republicans were given full control of the federal government ... dawg May 2015 #95

Oh for fuck's sake WilliamPitt May 2015 #102

I am a Democrat first ... Trajan May 2015 #104

Incorrect. Orsino May 2015 #105

Obama has been a great President CanonRay May 2015 #108

The president is not always right. Blue_In_AK May 2015 #110

Globalization is a wedge issue in the republican party, too. Their base hates the UN, the WTO, pampango May 2015 #111

Maybe you need to get out more. nolabels May 2015 #112

Huh? Puddy May 2015 #114