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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Is anyone beginning to notice the trend with Sanders? [View all]guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)224. Rather than dismiss the subthread, perhaps you need better sources.
I realize that this source is one of your "union bosses" meme sources, but if you read it your opinion of the TPP might just change.
From your own example:
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA): In the Metalclad case, a U.S. corporation sued the Mexican federal government over a local governments decision to deny a permit to operate a toxic waste dump. Local citizens felt the dump would pollute their water supply and petitioned their government to deny the permit. Metalclad won more than $15 million
.
So you are in favor of a process that, in reverse action, would permit foreign corporations to sue the US over the right to pollute?
Another, older example:
NAFTA: In the Methanex case, a Canadian company sued the U.S. federal government over the state of Californias decision to prohibit the use of MTBE as an additive in gasoline. Although Methanex lost the case, the state and federal government spent millions defending the case. Millions they would not have had to spend without ISDS: Methanex could not have brought the same complaint under U.S. domestic law.
http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/What-Is-ISDS
Again, wasted money because a corporation used the concept that a local law interfered with the corporation's presumed "right to profitability" and sued for damages. Your contention that ISDS suits have not been successful ignores the real costs of litigation, and the possibility that future laws will not be passed out of fear of a suit.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
224 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
Voting to give Cheney and Bush a blank check to invade any country they please
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#56
you mean voting to fund the TROOPS that bush and hillary already sent to war.
restorefreedom
Dec 2015
#72
No--a continuing resolution would pay those troops at the last year's level without an 'up' vote on
MADem
Jan 2016
#156
You don't even have to do that--just do what always is done when the budget isn't resolved...
MADem
Jan 2016
#208
That he voted to support my brother after Hillary voted to send him to Iraq?
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#134
Lol! Nice try. Bernie didn't vote for "more war" in Iraq. There, fixed that for you.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#158
Yes, he did--every time he voted for a Defense Authorization, he voted for "more war."
MADem
Jan 2016
#161
Bernie voted against the Iraq war, no amount of spin from Camp Weathervane can change that fact.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#163
It's supposed to make him feel better. There's plenty for you too, help yourself!
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#170
Then you're voting for the wrong candidate. "Cut it out" isn't magic juju, it didn't work.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#172
If you don't want to hear opinions from other people don't respond to them.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#174
Except I wasn't the one who said "if I want your opinion on my choice, I'll ask for it"
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#179
You were responding to an opinion. And you should really try that Bern cream.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#182
I was going to suggest you use it for that but you went there first.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#184
You want to hang on to that, I think--you'll need it for the searing you'll be feeling
MADem
Jan 2016
#190
You're the one with the supply of soothing creams and childish cartoons--not me!
MADem
Jan 2016
#195
You're the one repeatedly using the "hurt" word. I think you might want to introspect!
MADem
Jan 2016
#204
Saying they did nothing wrong with emails and then saying it was a mistake.
Live and Learn
Dec 2015
#9
I really could care less what YOUR standards are to judge what is or what isn't GOP. I've been here
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#99
My longtime DU membership is merely to point out I've been thoroughly vetted and I AM a proven
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#110
I just saw some research on your posting history re: marriage equality.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#141
No. It doesn't. But keep trying. It isn't the first time I've had to correct you.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2016
#210
Yeah. The pro-Keystone XL Pipeline and anti-2006 immigration reform bill AFL-CIO
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2016
#113
He voted against the Brady Bill (for whatever reason he concocts now) and in favor of protecting....
George II
Jan 2016
#138
He voted for the bill because it included the Violence Against Women Act and a ban on assault weapons.
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#140
I am niether dead, nor wrong. Your posts, on the otherhand, are simply ridiculous. nt
Live and Learn
Dec 2015
#87
You consider my posts ridiculous only because they disprove yours and unmask you for
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#92
Jaysuz, that's despicable. Right up there with our resident former freeper...
SMC22307
Jan 2016
#223
"Why calling a gay man a so-called female name, like "GiGi", is ***NOT*** automatically homophobic"
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#129
Yeah, but difference is, she was never considered by anyone as a diehard liberal. He was.
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#91
Well, if Clinton never was a diehard liberal, why should I want her to be nominated as
Betty Karlson
Dec 2015
#94
Maybe because she's the most qualified candidate? Or maybe because she's running for president
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#96
A leader needs the ability to listen to the issues at hand and make a decisions.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2016
#147
I think the biggest point to take from this OP and discussion is that saying one thing...
George II
Jan 2016
#133
Exactly! No politician is perfect, and yes, Sanders *is* a politician first and foremost,
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2016
#146
Bernie stated publicly that he wasn't against the investigation, just the corporate media's
Uncle Joe
Dec 2015
#20
Apparently the FBI does't take Sander's opinion into consideration when they are
libdem4life
Dec 2015
#58
We substantiate them all the time, Scoot. You just ignore them and then claim we never
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#54
Except that I do. I can't help it you don't like what's presented to you. That's your bias, not
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#68
I think you meant Hillary. And yes, she does tend to do a lot of flip flops. nt
Live and Learn
Dec 2015
#2
And that, right there, is what's inconvenient about his message--he doesn't really walk that walk.
MADem
Jan 2016
#194
O'Malley lied about Bernie's socialism during the debate, why should we be surprised by this?
beam me up scottie
Dec 2015
#32
Oh, I read about this meme - take your candidate's weakness and accuse the other candidate
djean111
Dec 2015
#26
So you admit that Sanders only had to shift on ONE issue, while Clinton flipflops all over
Betty Karlson
Dec 2015
#49
Not to indulge in pedantry, but is 'cognitive dissonance' a polite term for
KingCharlemagne
Dec 2015
#44
There does seem to be a disconnect between him and his scorched earth advisers.
BlueCheese
Dec 2015
#51
and some of her supporters are printing nastiness I have not heard in
Douglas Carpenter
Jan 2016
#213
Happy New Year to you and yours, too, riversedge! I never drink, but I'm having a nice,
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2015
#105
And the "Biggest hypocrite on DU" award judging from his past opposition to marriage equality:
beam me up scottie
Jan 2016
#136
Boy that's an issue you should really not bring up your own views being recorded on DU
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2015
#108
No no no!!!! Out of the 10,000 tenants the left holds dear Sanders wont compromise on not ...
uponit7771
Jan 2016
#151
You mean the trend that supporters of another candidate are now attacking nonstop
peacebird
Dec 2015
#85
Whereas Hillary is more stable. She always says, and does, whatever is most expedient.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2015
#98
What I've noticed is that Hillary supporters (and proxies like MOM) are stepping up the attack.
Romulox
Dec 2015
#103
A candidate changing positions? Someone becomig too popular and the need for an attack ....
slipslidingaway
Jan 2016
#120