Dems deal Obama huge defeat on trade. Fast track legislation fails 302-126.

[Bumble_Bee_Tuna]

Jesus, that's such a dumb line. She was just saying that legislators would see the benefits when the law was in action. Nothing in the ACA was a secret or anything.

Yet it stands that Congress rarely if ever reads these thousands of pages of legislation and in the case of Obamacare, most did not read it and why the senior Democrats refused to make the text of the bill public. You can spin that as much as you'd like since you're beholden to your party-think.

 

[44nutman]

I got a broke watch that is right twice a day.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yet it stands that Congress rarely if ever reads these thousands of pages of legislation and in the case of Obamacare, most did not read it and why the senior Democrats refused to make the text of the bill public. You can spin that as much as you'd like since you're beholden to your party-think.

Of course. No one can disagree with the great Bumble Bee Tuna just because they looked at the evidence and came to a different conclusion. Everyone but you is brain-washed, even though you're the one linking to hacks misleading the public.

If you've actually seen the full context (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the-context-behind-nancy-pelosis-famous-we-have-to-pass-the-bill-quote/), you're knowingly repeating an obvious lie.

 

[Bumble_Bee_Tuna]

Of course. No one can disagree with the great Bumble Bee Tuna just because they looked at the evidence and came to a different conclusion. Everyone but you is brain-washed, even though you're the one linking to hacks misleading the public.

If you've actually seen the full context (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the-context-behind-nancy-pelosis-famous-we-have-to-pass-the-bill-quote/), you're knowingly repeating an obvious lie.

Nice job of evading the point and adhering to the ostrich version of reality. When confronted with an epistemic error, your childish reaction comes out which is in contrast to the image of yourself that you usually try to peddle on these forums as the cool, coherent poster. The last typical refuge of the ideologue.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Nice job of evading the point and adhering to the ostrich version of reality.

The point I made is that you were clearly misrepresenting what Pelosi said (or stupidly believing someone else presenting an implausible version of it).

You responded to it by posting Republican hackwork. The posts are still up.

When confronted with an epistemic error, your childish reaction comes out which is in contrast to the image of yourself that you usually try to peddle on these forums as the cool, coherent poster. The last typical refuge of the ideologue.

Meow. In reality, you fell for pretty obvious propaganda and passed it on without even realizing that someone would question it, and now you're mad. But look up the actual words (and, again, really just realize that even people who disagree with you are human beings--you seem to have real trouble with that, consistently).

 

[Possum Jenkins]

To what end? Helping China tighten control over the region? I mean, I don't want to overstate it. From what I can see, this is much ado about nothing. But it just somehow became a symbolic issue for the left (kind of like Keystone). So, like, congratulations, but where was this kind of unity behind additional stimulus or something that really matters and clearly helps their cause?

It was a pretty big deal.

The public is slowly becoming wary of so-called free trade agreements. NAFTA isn't very popular and this one involved many more countries and lots more money. The results of this aren't gonna be felt as immediate as domestic policy, but it was still very important.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It was a pretty big deal.

The public is slowly becoming wary of so-called free trade agreements. NAFTA isn't very popular and this one involved many more countries and lots more money. The results of this aren't gonna be felt as immediate as domestic policy, but it was still very important.

Seems to me that there were pretty good arguments on both sides of it, and it's impossible to tell whether defeating it is a net benefit or a net loss, and whether it was one or the other, it's not by much. The main victory for the left is the symbolic one--demonstrating that they have more clout in the Democratic Party than most had previously thought.

 

[emefer]

Fixed

Especially these three.

 

[emefer]

Seems to me that there were pretty good arguments on both sides of it, and it's impossible to tell whether defeating it is a net benefit or a net loss, and whether it was one or the other, it's not by much. The main victory for the left is the symbolic one--demonstrating that they have more clout in the Democratic Party than most had previously thought.

How can there be any good arguments for a deal that is done in secret.

 

[Jack V Savage]

How can there be any good arguments for a deal that is done in secret.

This came up in the last thread. Everyone was freaking out (just based on affinity with the people opposing it) but showing no signs of even understanding what they were so upset about. I linked to some analysis.

http://origin.forums.sherdog.com/forums/106288727-post48.html

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Fixed

Not really. Obama is of the left, he does what he does.

But what really pisses me off royally is when when leaders of the opposition not only don't do their job, but join hands with the political enemy in 'bi-partisanship.'

Traitors.

Warren and Pelosi wouldn't join Obama on this, but McConnell and Baehner did. Fucking pathetic.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Not really. Obama is of the left, he does what he does.

But what really pisses me off royally is when when leaders of the opposition not only don't do their job, but join hands with the political enemy in 'bi-partisanship.'

Traitors.

Warren and Pelosi wouldn't join Obama on this, but McConnell and Baehner did. Fucking pathetic.

The reason is simple: Obama is to the right of a lot of the Democratic Party. Democrats were split between more conservative and more liberal ones, and Republicans were split between ideological conservatives and knee-jerk partisans.

 

[emefer]

This came up in the last thread. Everyone was freaking out (just based on affinity with the people opposing it) but showing no signs of even understanding what they were so upset about. I linked to some analysis.

http://origin.forums.sherdog.com/forums/106288727-post48.html

I believe I read one of the links you posted in that thread, an article by a Neil something or other, but it doesn't pertain to the deal as he didn't read it. Only a few of our elected representatives have and they can only do so under strict conditions. And, if thy repeat what they've read, that is if they can remember any of it as that can't take notes, they may end up in prison. Any argument for it is invalid in my opinion.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

The reason is simple: Obama is to the right of a lot of the Democratic Party. Democrats were split between more conservative and more liberal ones, and Republicans were split between ideological conservatives and knee-jerk partisans.

Tell me that after the trade bill is leaked online.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I believe I read one of the links you posted in that thread, an article by a Neil something or other, but it doesn't pertain to the deal as he didn't read it. Only a few of our elected representatives have and they can only do so under strict conditions. And, if thy repeat what they've read, that is if they can remember any of it as that can't take notes, they may end up in prison. Any argument for it is invalid in my opinion.

So your position is that any argument for the deal is wrong, regardless of the merit of the argument.

Tell me that after the trade bill is leaked online.

I'm not even sure how the events make sense within your framework, but what else is new, I guess.

 

[emefer]

Not really. Obama is of the left, he does what he does.

But what really pisses me off royally is when when leaders of the opposition not only don't do their job, but join hands with the political enemy in 'bi-partisanship.'

Traitors.

Warren and Pelosi wouldn't join Obama on this, but McConnell and Baehner did. Fucking pathetic.

The only thing left about Obama are the campaigns he ran. I'm pretty sure any policy he made has helped the billionaires add to their horde. The liberal conservative war the billionaire owned media is constantly selling is a load of horse shit. Their only difference is appealing to people's emotional weaknesses and religious beliefs. Beyond that, they have all been cut from the same cloth.

 

[Mike]

The only thing left about Obama are the campaigns he ran. I'm pretty sure any policy he made has helped the billionaires add to their horde. The liberal conservative war the billionaire owned media is constantly selling is a load of horse shit. Their only difference is appealing to people's emotional weaknesses and religious beliefs. Beyond that, they have all been cut from the same cloth.

Pretty much this. There's little real difference, it's all about lining the pockets of the rich.

 

[2GunTommy]

http://www.citizen.org/TPP

"Under the TPP, any U.S. food safety rule on pesticides, labeling or additives that is higher than international standards would be subject to challenge as "illegal trade barriers." The U.S. could be required to eliminate these rules and allow in the unsafe food under threat of trade sanctions." This is an obvious shield for Monsanto.


The NAFTA-style offshoring incentives that the TPP would expand have contributed to the net loss of more than 57,000 American manufacturing facilities and nearly 5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs

 

[emefer]

So your position is that any argument for the deal is wrong, regardless of the merit of the argument.



I'm not even sure how the events make sense within your framework, but what else is new, I guess.

I'm not saying they are wrong as we don't know what's in the bill, and for that reason any argument for it would be based assumption.

I think the secrecy of it stinks. Add to that that this is the one time the republicans are with Obama just adds to the stench.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

We are not out of the woods yet.

There are 3 separate trade bills involved here.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) - The big trade bill.
The Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)- A protection bill for people who have lost their job as a result of foreign trade.
The Trade Promotional Authority (TPA)- The fast track eliminates the ability of Congress to amend the bill. It reduces the TPP bill to an up/down vote.

What's the worry?

TPA passed and TAA can be voted on again.
Obama and the 600 International Corporations that wrote the TPP can sweeten the pot some more to get it passed the next time around.