Reply #4

In the discussion thread: Obama and Romney Both Backing Secret Job-killing Deal? Trans-Pacific Partnership lurks [View all]

Response to Teamster Jeff (Original post)

Sat Jul 14, 2012, 10:00 AM

Octafish (33,462 posts)

4. Gee. I remember when Democrats supported American workers.

That was before NAFTA, though.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

114 replies	Author	Time	Post
Obama and Romney Both Backing Secret Job-killing Deal? Trans-Pacific Partnership lurks [View all]	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	OP
I see a lot of criticism about the TPP.	Blanks	Jul 2012	#1
There isn't anything secret about the TPP. The negotiation sessions are announced publicly	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#2
Contents of potential agreement are under the radar because they know people will be outraged	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	#13
Of course the countries in a trade agreement are subject to an enforcement arm of the pact	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#15
They were secret until a whistle-blower leaked them. That is when we found out about them.	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#51
There is no agreement yet. It's negotiations. And there is no reason for them to be public	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#61
Even the WTO releases draft negotiating texts	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	#62
Executive privilege. The president and his representatives have to be able to negotiate	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#63
Corporate input every step of the way is OK though.... n/t	PoliticAverse	Jul 2012	#101
There is every reason why trade agreements should be discussed openly by CONGRESS, NOT by foreign	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#94
No, Senator Levin's demand is outrageous. The congress will vote on the agreement. They do not	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#95
Sen. Levin was absolutely correct to be outraged that foreign etities are busy writing laws for this	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#96
Congress will vote on the final agreement. The president and the executives of the other	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#106
'You people'??? You mean Americans who think that Congress is our legislative body, you know, the	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#107
Treaties are also law of the land If the executives of those	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#108
Congress was barred from knowing anything about this. If it had not been for a whistle-blower	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#109
Did you also agree with the congress when members said the Attorney General had to hand over	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#110
The constitution says 'Advice and Consent'...	PoliticAverse	Jul 2012	#102
And they will do that when they vote	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#105
Ask Senator Wyden. Subcomitee chair on trade.	pa28	Jul 2012	#56
The negotiations aren't finished, once they are what will actually be in the agreement will be	RB TexLa	Jul 2012	#60
Are we just to assume it is "job killing" or at least, try to explain why	treestar	Jul 2012	#3
Can you name a "free" trade agreement that hasn't been job killing?	MannyGoldstein	Jul 2012	#6
That doesn't explain how	treestar	Jul 2012	#7
NAFTA: 700,000 US jobs destroyed (and counting)	MannyGoldstein	Jul 2012	#9
Page 3 we have now trade deficits with Mexico	treestar	Jul 2012	#18
LOL. "You say workers in both countries are WORSE off, while corporations are much richer?"	Romulox	Jul 2012	#21
How is it not possible is the better question.	former9thward	Jul 2012	#26
I was poking fun at the poster's (feigned?) incredulity. I agree with your title. nt	Romulox	Jul 2012	#27
Sorry, I missed the other poster.	former9thward	Jul 2012	#38
What incredulity?	treestar	Jul 2012	#67
Is this a joke? Nobody can educate you on basic economics, here. Nor is your lack of understanding	Romulox	Jul 2012	#69
But then you can't seem to explain it	treestar	Jul 2012	#73
You have proven to be a waste of time in the past. nt	Romulox	Jul 2012	#75
You still aren't making your argument.	treestar	Jul 2012	#77
Nonsense. I'm not going to bother to disprove your ill-informed argument; there's no point. nt	Romulox	Jul 2012	#81
Taxpayer subsidies is the biggest reason, but there are many.	Egalitarian Thug	Jul 2012	#36
Excellent post.	Romulox	Jul 2012	#19
I'm still waking up, but this report does not seem to cover jobs created in Mexico	amandabeech	Jul 2012	#92
Sen. Obama said in 2008.........	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	#11
Did Obama ever explain why?	treestar	Jul 2012	#20
Don't be obtuse.	amandabeech	Jul 2012	#91
TPP has been referred to as NAFTA on steroids.	Blanks	Jul 2012	#22
Pretty simple	JonLP24	Jul 2012	#65
If it is moved to Mexico presumably from the US and Canada	treestar	Jul 2012	#68
Reality, treestar: "Since NAFTA was enacted, U.S. manufacturing employment has fallen by 5 million"	Romulox	Jul 2012	#70
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc	treestar	Jul 2012	#72
This information is available to anyone who is even remotely curious. You haven't found it for a	Romulox	Jul 2012	#76
Then explain it	treestar	Jul 2012	#78
Nope. Won't be derailed by your ignorance. Make an effort to READ THE LINKS ALREADY POSTED to	Romulox	Jul 2012	#83
What would you do if you were in a real debate?	treestar	Jul 2012	#99
This is a MESSAGE BOARD. The way we communicate is through the written word. If you won't read,	Romulox	Jul 2012	#111
This is a PATHETIC way to try to derail, btw--the "feigned" ignorance as a debating tactic. nt	Romulox	Jul 2012	#112
I mean, there are detailed links IN THIS VERY THREAD, and you still pretend your ignorance of the	Romulox	Jul 2012	#79
Read the links in THIS THREAD yet, oh seeker of knowledge?	Romulox	Jul 2012	#98
how would we know, since the public & legislators are denied access that's given to corporations?	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#33
By the time it gets to Congress it would have to be public	treestar	Jul 2012	#80
"by the time it gets to congress"... our government is negotiating terms now. why is it secret?	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#88
Ever hear of the Patriot Act?	westerebus	Jul 2012	#89
This isn't just about 'job-killing'. It is way worse than that. Have you read what was	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#52
How is that going to come about without the ultimate agreement	treestar	Jul 2012	#82
Now it cannot. Had it not been for the whistle-blower no one would know about it.	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#87
But how could it become law without going through the usual process?	treestar	Jul 2012	#100
The media will keep all the dirty details as secret as possible.	Elwood P Dowd	Jul 2012	#90
Gee. I remember when Democrats supported American workers.	Octafish	Jul 2012	#4
Gee, my job was shipped out of the country 10 years before NAFTA though	NNN0LHI	Jul 2012	#8
Sorry to read that.	Octafish	Jul 2012	#10
Our entire business landscape has changed.	progressivebydesign	Jul 2012	#28
The automation wave is threatening the UMC now.	Octafish	Jul 2012	#40
Hilarious	kenny blankenship	Jul 2012	#46
Did America give up its sovereignty to affect these changes in the past?	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#54
Sorry about your job, but that is not the only issue regarding these 'agreements'. It is way more	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#53
I don't think that foreign corporations, or any corporations, should be planning our future,	amandabeech	Jul 2012	#93
+1	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#24
You're living in the past, citizen!	kenny blankenship	Jul 2012	#45
LOL!	Octafish	Jul 2012	#49
Not dry behind the ears yet. Bought gas at 17 cents a gallon. Then it went to 19. Kids these days!	freshwest	Jul 2012	#103
This post was hidden by jury decision.	a kennedy	Jul 2012	#5
We already have trade with the trans-pacific nations	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#12
One item leaked...	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	#14
This is similar to what the WTO "trade court", arbiter of trade disputes	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#16
The WTO Trade court is an arbiter of trade disputes between member countries...	Teamster Jeff	Jul 2012	#17
Many other countries (e.g. Japan, South Korea, China) have active partnerships between gov't and	Romulox	Jul 2012	#23
no, it's not. and there are fewer jobs in the us today than on the day bush took office.	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#25
Yes it is - nearly identical in organization and intent	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#35
jobs created during us presidential terms:	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#37
"free trade" is crap	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#39
'regulated' for the benefit of the biggest boys on the block. also crap. 'regulated' for the	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#41
That's assuming Obama is a RW corporate shill	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#42
Assuming nothing about Obama personally, but about the system.	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#43
Ok, assuming then that Obama is incapable of constructing a good trade agreement	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#47
i disagree that obama constructed the agreement. i am 4th generation pnw. trade has always	HiPointDem	Jul 2012	#48
So we agree that trade is not the problem	bhikkhu	Jul 2012	#50
Thank you, I've been reading the comments here and it seems to me that a few people defending	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#55
Our law cannot be overruled that way	treestar	Jul 2012	#86
Thanks.. guess I'm going to go vote for Ron Paul now.	progressivebydesign	Jul 2012	#29
We live in a "democracy". Maybe we can stop this?	Romulox	Jul 2012	#31
The Rule of Law is always a good place to turn to when corruption rears its ugly head.	sabrina 1	Jul 2012	#59
Yeah,	ProSense	Jul 2012	#30
You seem to see politics as lining up behind Team A or Team B. Many of us want to PLAY for a team.	Romulox	Jul 2012	#32
No	ProSense	Jul 2012	#34
Of course there is "evidence to suggest that Obama would support a deal that would lead to jobs"	Romulox	Jul 2012	#44
So you will soon be starting a Group here on DU called 2016 Progressive Prez, right?	JoePhilly	Jul 2012	#58
YOU sure as shooting haven't kept your mouth shut these past 4 years. Why should I?	Romulox	Jul 2012	#66
Didn't tell you to keep your mouth shut. Suggested some one like you start	JoePhilly	Jul 2012	#71
I haven't relented on this issue since before 2008. Don't dictate my priorities to me. nt	Romulox	Jul 2012	#84
Why does advice from your corner always-- ALWAYS boil down to "shut-up while our guy is in office"?	Marr	Jul 2012	#85
If domestic corporations are people I guess foreign corporations are too.	pa28	Jul 2012	#57
Take a look at what happens when we do a "free trade" deal.....	Cronkite	Jul 2012	#64
Not dimes bit of difference.	Hotler	Jul 2012	#74
Why TPP will not blunt Bain attacks.	hay rick	Jul 2012	#97
Can you spell "collusion"?	woo me with science	Jul 2012	#104
Yeah.	ananda	Jul 2012	#113
Kick. nt	woo me with science	Jul 2012	#114

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.