Clinton opposes Pacific Rim trade deal

[The Straight Story]

MOUNT VERNON, Iowa (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton says she opposes the big Pacific Rim trade accord backed by President Barack Obama.

The Democratic presidential candidate says in an interview with PBS there are too many "unanswered questions" about the Trans-Pacific Partnership. She says, "What I know about it as of today, I am not in favor."

The free trade deal backed by the administration has been opposed by liberal Democrats and labor unions.

Clinton helped lay the foundation for the deal as Obama's secretary of state.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/c470a54cc2b341b19ff3a16ef17e5fcb/clinton-opposes-pacific-rim-trade-deal

[HerbChestnut]

1. Where's that weathervane gif when you need it?

[beam me up scottie]

13. This one?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

81. Seriously...little late. Tired of Hillary's "me too" phony populist rhetoric.

If you want the real deal, vote Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

114. She's getting ready for the debate next week

and what do you think of TPP Mrs. Clinton? Oh I'm for it - I've always been for it no wait no I'm against it.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

132. Can't wait to hear the polling data's flip-flop answer to that question, with a half twist of triangulation thrown in. Bernie will smoke Hillary in the debate...can't wait!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[PoliticAverse]

3. Link to the story on PBS.org...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/hillary-clinton-says-she-does-not-support-trans-pacific-partnership/

Youtube video of her comment:

[CharlotteVale]

4. Yeah, leaving herself the usual wiggle room.

[smilingwen]

11. Exactly

She is both for it and against it. We need an agreement. Does not meet the high bar I have set. This is NOT coming out against the deal, it's the usual double speak

[jwirr]

19. Yes, what I know today.

[840high]

6. I don't know what she stands for - changes

everyday. I wonder if she has core values, beliefs.

[MissDeeds]

8. Yeah, she stands for winning

at any cost.

[senz]

86. Yeah. She believes she should be president.

[Art_from_Ark]

135. You'd think that someone who has been involved in politics for 50+ years,

especially one who has been married to a politician for 40 of those years, would by now have a fairly-well developed set of core values...

[mvd]

7. Well this Bernie supporter is happy

Best news so far out of her campaign. It's something Prrsident Obama supports. Of course Bernie still aligns more with my views, but will take it.

[mmonk]

9. As a Bernie supporter, I welcome her opposition.

But if it is a done deal before she takes office, will it matter? My only question.

[pangaia]

95. Bernie is against it because-- he is against it.

Hillary is NOW against it because--- she wants to be presi----dent!

[Divernan]

10. Duck! Here comes that moving goalpost!

She's here!
She's there!
She's everywhere!
So beware!

Obama's biggest hurdle in getting the trade deal approved was always his own party, as my colleague Russell Berman pointed out last week, when negotiators reached a deal to fast-track the TPP. What's changed is that the TPP has collided with the presidential race—in ways that are risky for Hillary Clinton. The problem for Clinton is that she has historically backed free-trade deals, and as secretary of state called the TPP "the gold standard in trade agreements." Yet her campaign's big push over the last week or two has been to prove her liberal bona fides. Many progressives still don't like NAFTA, a product of Bill Clinton's administration (actually, many Americans don't like NAFTA), and while Hillary Clinton still looks like a favorite in the Democratic primary, rivals like O'Malley and Senator Bernie Sanders oppose it, as do the labor unions that are a major part of the Democratic coalition.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/democrats-produce-trade-discord/391224/

[SunSeeker]

12. "Not good enough!" say the Hillary haters.

How dare she be a responsible adult and only oppose what she knows is in the deal? She should make up shit and oppose that too!

[leftofcool]

24. The anti-Hillary crowd has been bashing her for days for not saying anything and now.....

How dare she come out against the TPP.

[virtualobserver]

101. How do you keep track of where she stands on things?

[workinclasszero]

131. Its too funny isn't it?

SMH

[Warren Stupidity]

14. Good for her!

Win or lose the pull from the left of the Sanders campaign is changing the political landscape.

That said, beware of local cyclonic activity here on du as Clinton's supporters spin like whirling dervishes splaining us how they were always against tpp.

[Broward]

16. My thoughts exactly. Bernie is having an impact.

[askew]

42. This isn't Bernie. This is Hillary wanting to lock down union endorsements before Biden

jumps in. The unions are telling her she needs to come out against TPP and she knows Biden will be lobbying for it on the hill. Simple as that. She is trying to cut off any establishment support for Biden before he gets in.

[tex-wyo-dem]

76. Well, there's that (wanting to lock down union endorsements before Biden)...

And there's this:

Historic: Bernie Sanders Files Sweeping Labor Bill Eliminating ‘Right-To-Work’ Laws

Hillary got the "official" endorsement of the NEA, but it was accompanied by a high profile protest by the rank and file teachers, and the Firefigher's union backed out of endorsing her...I think she should be rightfully worried.

Bernie is most definitely having an effect on Hil's weather vane.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

83. lol...good luck with that! Bernie will get the union vote over both Biden and Hillary.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[jfern]

15. "What I know about it as of today, I am not in favor."

Is that another triangulation, where she might be in favor tomorrow?

[Autumn]

17. Of course she does

[Broward]

18. She knows which way the political winds are blowing.

I don't trust her to maintain this position, but for now at least she's no longer to the right of Trump on this issue. She's probably trying to blunt any potential attacks on trade in next week's debate.

[left-of-center2012]

20. Thank God she finally made up her mind!

I've been wondering which way the wind would blow.

[restorefreedom]

21. "what i know about it as of today....."

bernie doesn't need a crack in the door to sneak out of later. he opposes it now and always.

more lying....er, calculated posturing by the chameleon candidate.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

133. Caught that too! The Hillary-speak...leave just a little wiggle room for triangulation proposes.

Bernie, an AUTHENTIC progressive, just speaks his mind, and tells it like it is. Go Bernie Go!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[beam me up scottie]

22. I'm glad she opposes it now but can we trust her to oppose similar agreements in the future?

[senz]

25. We can "trust" her to initate them ... if she has an office-holding future.

Her biggest donors are counting on it.

[uponit7771]

31. Yes, just like we can trust Sanders not to do stupid shit like support the Minuteman...

... with xenophobic gumper votes

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll224.xml

None of these candidates can throw stones

[Major Nikon]

122. Results...

On Wed Oct 7, 2015, 09:11 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yes, just like we can trust Sanders not to do stupid shit like support the Minuteman...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=654819

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Otherwise Inappropriate, citing "Spam." This is the sixth or seventh time he's posted the same link in the same thread, inevitably with some barely-there content implying that Bernie Sanders is a right-winger. Also, not that it needs to be said, but he's actively seeking to disrupt D.U. in a manner similar to the old Conservative Cave and using a similar format. There's no place on D.U. for active disruptors.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Oct 7, 2015, 09:23 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sanders ' supporters post the same stuff over and over as if it's today"s news. If you don't like the truth about your candidate, debate it. Don't do alerts.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I see no problem with the post. Posters often post the same articles over and over again to prove a point, so....
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Yeah, hide this dumb shit.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Potential idiot? Yes. Censor? No.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alerter.

[senz]

23. It's been fun watching her followers defend the TPP. It's going to even more fun

watching them backtrack.

[grasswire]

66. hahaha

excellent point

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

84. Good point...thought the same thing.

[uponit7771]

26. Sanders doesn't evolve on anything!! NOT ONE ISSUE!!

[beam me up scottie]

29. What has he evolved on?

Lgbt rights?

Supported them for decades, no need to evolve.

Gun control?

Supported it as far back as 1994, also no need to evolve.

[beam me up scottie]

33. A thread with that vile smear was hidden because it's from a banned DUer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251461135

But thanks for pimping their work on DU.

[beam me up scottie]

40. Got proof that Bernie the son of immigrants is anti-immigrant? Tia!

[arcane1]

48. That's just a list of who voted what. No content.

Where are the Minutemen referenced in the actual bill?

[uponit7771]

51. Here's some content...

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project.

Voting YES on this amendment supports the Minuteman Project, a group of volunteers who have taken on surveillance of the Mexican border for illegal immigrants. The amendment states that US funds will not be used to tell the Mexican government about the whereabouts of the Minuteman Project volunteers. Proponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are volunteer citizens doing what the federal government SHOULD be doing, but has failed to do. Opponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are vigilantes at best and anti-Mexican racists at worst. The amendment states:
None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.
The amendment's sponsor said on its behalf:
What this amendment does is it clarifies Congress' position on a Border Patrol practice or a practice of the US Government that tips off illegal immigrants as to where citizen patrols may be located.
As a response to the lawlessness along the Mexican border, a group has sprung up called the Minutemen Project, and the Minutemen Project is definitely not politically correct in Washington DC. However, they filled a void which the government was unable to fill.
There are over 7,000 volunteers in the Minutemen organization, and their help has been productive and good.
What my amendment does is simply says that the U.S. Government cannot tip off the Mexican officials as to where these folks are located. Plain and simple, nothing fancy about it. I am sure the Border Patrol will say, oh, no, we are not doing that, and yet one of the Web pages of the Secretary of Mexico had the information very explicit, and we just do not believe that is a good practice.
Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations; Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968 ; vote number 2006-224 on Jun 6, 2006

[beam me up scottie]

55. So where does it say he supports the Minutemen?

The amendment states:

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.

Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations; Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968 ; vote number 2006-224 on Jun 6, 2006

[arcane1]

60. So, government funds should be used for this purpose?

I'm not sure I care either way, he's still 10 times the candidate Clinton is. Why else would you go off-topic?

Side-question: why does that site identify him as "Socialist Jr Senator" and not "Independent Jr. Senator"?

[beam me up scottie]

50. You mean this bill?:

The amendment states:

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.

Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations; Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968 ; vote number 2006-224 on Jun 6, 2006

[uponit7771]

54. No, this one... http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

With context around it....

It was another xenophobic winger bill and Sanders supported it... not one of his best votes

Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project.

Voting YES on this amendment supports the Minuteman Project, a group of volunteers who have taken on surveillance of the Mexican border for illegal immigrants. The amendment states that US funds will not be used to tell the Mexican government about the whereabouts of the Minuteman Project volunteers. Proponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are volunteer citizens doing what the federal government SHOULD be doing, but has failed to do. Opponents of the Minuteman Project say that they are vigilantes at best and anti-Mexican racists at worst. The amendment states:
None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.
The amendment's sponsor said on its behalf:
What this amendment does is it clarifies Congress' position on a Border Patrol practice or a practice of the US Government that tips off illegal immigrants as to where citizen patrols may be located.
As a response to the lawlessness along the Mexican border, a group has sprung up called the Minutemen Project, and the Minutemen Project is definitely not politically correct in Washington DC. However, they filled a void which the government was unable to fill.
There are over 7,000 volunteers in the Minutemen organization, and their help has been productive and good.
What my amendment does is simply says that the U.S. Government cannot tip off the Mexican officials as to where these folks are located. Plain and simple, nothing fancy about it. I am sure the Border Patrol will say, oh, no, we are not doing that, and yet one of the Web pages of the Secretary of Mexico had the information very explicit, and we just do not believe that is a good practice.
Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations; Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968 ; vote number 2006-224 on Jun 6, 2006

[beam me up scottie]

57. Again, where is the proof he's anti-immigrant?

[arcane1]

41. Who is the "anti immigrant racist punk"?

[beam me up scottie]

59. Bernie says that we are a "nation of immigrants. That is, in fact, the strength of America."

Bernie says that we are a "nation of immigrants. That is, in fact, the strength of America." He believes the US must create an immigration system that invites greater innovation, diversity, and economic opportunity for both American-born citizens and the people who want to make this land their home. Bernie supports immigration reform that will address the legal status of the 11 million undocumented people in our country, protect American jobs by way of visa reform, secure the border, and protect undocumented workers from labor exploitation.

Border Security: We can and must secure borders without building a fence.
We ought to provide a path to citizenship for people from many different countries.
DREAM Act: Supports the path toward permanent residency for young, undocumented immigrants.
Visa Reform: Reject the exploitation of workers and the use of visas for cheap, foreign labor. Increase opportunities for qualified individuals to take steps towards permanent residency.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[beam me up scottie]

61. Bernie: Offer path to citizenship; waive deportation for DREAMers

Offer path to citizenship; waive deportation for DREAMers

On immigration: Offer path to citizenship. Waive some deportations now.
Sanders generally agrees with President Obama that most of the undocumented immigrants in the country now should be given a path to citizenship. He voted for the senate immigration bill in 2013, which would have increased border security and issued a provisional immigrant status to millions of undocumented residents once some significant security metrics had been met. In addition, Sanders has supported President Obama's use of executive orders to waive deportation for some groups of immigrants, including those who were brought to the United States as children.

Source: PBS News Hour "2016 Candidate Stands" series , Apr 30, 2015

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[beam me up scottie]

63. English-Only, based in xenophobia, hurts legal immigrants

English-Only, based in xenophobia, hurts legal immigrants

As in other countries with economic problems, xenophobia is intensifying. The issue for some can be summarized by the writing I recently saw on a t-shirt: "If you can't speak English, get the f--k out of the US."
The "English Only" bill mandates that all official communication by the federal government be in English. This means that members of Congress from a heavily Hispanic or Polish district, for instance, would be prohibited from communicating with their constituents in Spanish or Polish. Election, tax, and other information needed by millions of citizens would be available only in English. President Clinton indicates that he will veto this legislation, and the bill will not go anywhere--not even to the Senate. But it passes in the House by a vote of 259 to 169. 8 Republicans, 160 Democrats, and I vote against the bill.

Source: Outsider in the House, by Bernie Sanders, p.136 , Jun 17, 1997

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[beam me up scottie]

64. Anti-immigration Bernie voted YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities".

Voted YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities".

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: To create a reserve fund to ensure that Federal assistance does not go to sanctuary cities that ignore the immigration laws of the United States and create safe havens for illegal aliens and potential terrorists. This vote is a motion to table the amendment; voting YES would kill the amendment.
SUPPORTER'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING NO ON TABLING MOTION:Sen. VITTER: There are so-called sanctuary cities which establish as an official policy of their jurisdiction: We are not going to cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement officials. That is wrong. What is more, it is completely contrary to Federal immigration law. My amendment says: We are going to put some consequence to that defiance of Federal law. We are not going to give them COPS funds. We are going to send those funds, instead, to all of those other jurisdictions which abide by Federal law.OPPONENT'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING YES ON TABLING MOTION:Sen. DURBIN: There are sanctuary cities in about 23 different States across America. What the Vitter amendment will do is to take away the COPS funding from those cities. Police departments will tell you they need the cooperation of everyone to solve crimes and stop crime. If you create fear in the minds of those who are here in an undocumented status that any cooperation with the police will result in their arrest, they will not cooperate and criminals will go free. Let's not use the COPS Program as some sort of threat. If you want to deal with immigration, deal with it responsibly in a comprehensive way. SUPPORTER'S RESPONSE:Sen. VITTER: If folks feel that way, they should come to Congress and change Federal law, not simply defy Federal law. This is another amnesty vote. Are we going to give folks in sanctuary cities amnesty for defying Federal law and refusing to cooperate with Federal immigration officials? LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Motion to Table Agreed to, 58-40

Reference: Bill Table S.Amdt.4309 to S.Con.Res ; vote number 08-S069 on Mar 13, 2008

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[beam me up scottie]

68. Anti-immigration "racist punk" Bernie rated 0% by FAIR

Rated 0% by FAIR, indicating a voting record loosening immigration.

Sanders scores 0% by FAIR on immigration issues
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a national, non-profit, public interest membership organization of concerned citizens united by their belief in the need for immigration reform. Founded in 1979, FAIR believes that the U.S. can and must have an immigration policy that is non-discriminatory and designed to serve the environmental, economic, and social needs of our country.
FAIR seeks to improve border security, to stop illegal immigration, and to promote immigration levels consistent with the national interest—more traditional rates of about 300,000 a year.
With more than 70,000 members nationwide, FAIR is a non-partisan group whose membership runs the gamut from liberal to conservative.
The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Source: FAIR website 03n-FAIR on Dec 31, 2003

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[beam me up scottie]

69. Anti-immigration Bernie Voted NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment.

Voted NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment.

Vote to pass the bill that would require hospitals to gather and report information on possible illegal aliens before hospitals can be reimbursed for treating them. The bill would also make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention, unless the employer meets particular conditions for exemption. The bill would specify that hospitals aren't required to provide care to undocumented aliens if they can be transported to their home country without a significant chance of worsening their condition.
Reference: Undocumented Alien Emergency Medical Assistance Amendments; Bill HR 3722 ; vote number 2004-182 on May 20, 2004

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Immigration.htm

[Raine1967]

70. That Member of DU is not banned, Not PPR'd — not even on a timeout.

Just wanted to make that clear.

So please, let's mislead about our fellow DU members. and maybe let's bring people into a discussion when they are not part of said discussion.

Thanks.

[beam me up scottie]

73. You're really going to defend the honour of Spandan Chakrabarti?

[Raine1967]

80. My point remains:

This is simply what I was referring to:

beam me up scottie (36,554 posts)
33. A thread with that vile smear was hidden because it's from a banned DUer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251461135

But thanks for pimping their work on DU.

The member you linked to is not banned, PPR'd or on a break. What you are doing is not nice. I emended nothing, so perhaps you are misunderstanding what I wrote. It as pretty clear, I thought.

[beam me up scottie]

82. I cited info from the hidden thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=461211

[Raine1967]

103. No you didn't.

beam me up scottie (36,554 posts)
33. A thread with that vile smear was hidden because it's from a banned DUer.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251461135

But thanks for pimping their work on DU.

That was your post.

That is the member you linked to. Now if you are caging that what I am linking to in post #33 is wrong, please show me how it is wrong.

That is the member you claimed is a banned DU member. I am trying to tell you that you are posting misinformation.

You still have a chance to edit the post I am quoting.

I will say this, if you want to accuse people of posting misinformation about your candidate, make sure you don;t do the very thing you claim is so very wrong.

It's not cool.

[beam me up scottie]

104. Are you saying the author of that article isn't a banned DUer?

Then I take it back.

[Raine1967]

105. No I am not saying that. I am saying that you said

a DU member was banned for posting a link.

Go back and read what you posted in #33.

I am quoting what you wrote and the link you posted. HEre is Link #33:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=654828

And this is where is takes people: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251461135 That member is not banned.

Why is this so hard to understand?

[beam me up scottie]

106. That is most certainly NOT what I said.

A thread with that vile smear was hidden because it's from a banned DUer.

The vile smear (the article) WAS from a banned DUer - he wrote the article, did he not?

Now you're going to tell me that I claimed the op is banned?

[Raine1967]

108. Go back and take a look at post #33.

Read what you yourself wrote. I copied and pasted it a few times.


Once more, I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend.

The member you linked to in that post is NOT BANNED not is the member PPR'd.

[beam me up scottie]

109. Point out where I said the member who posted the article was banned.

One more time:

A thread with that vile smear was hidden because it's from a banned DUer

The smear was from a banned member, the person who posted it is not banned and I never said they were.

I have no idea why you're misrepresenting my posts and I really don't care but it's pathetic.

[Raine1967]

110. Maybe you could actually share a link (permalink, perhaps) from the Member who was PPR'd.

instead of a hidden OP from a member that is not PPR'd.

Saying that I am misrepresenting something is disingenuous.

You can edit your post. I have been quite clear about this. Pathetic is trying to associate a member in good DU standing as banned when that member is not.

Have you double checked the link you posted in post #33 and saw what you seem to think I am misrepresenting?

[beam me up scottie]

112. No, pathetic is repeatedly claiming I said something I didn't and not proving your assertion.

I never said the member who posted it was banned.

Once again I have clarified my post and if you won't back off I will assume this is an attempt to get my post hidden.

And all I can say is good luck with that.

[Raine1967]

118. you may assume whatever you choose.

I have no intentions of trying to get you a hidden post.

Everything thing I have stated, stands. Everything I have said is as clear as crystal.

I am disappointed — that I will say — in that you cannot understand the point I am making. It was and is very simple.


Have a nice evening.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

120. What a bizarre subthread.

BMUS said a thread with a vile smear was hidden because "it's" - meaning the vile smear - it is from a banned DUer.

The vile smear was from a banned DUer.

The thread was hidden.

Who posted the hidden op is not even part of the equation. Except their op was hidden.

Jeesh.

[beam me up scottie]

123. Thanks, I was beginning to wonder if I was crazy.

I kept going back and reading my post, and even after I explained what I meant they kept on and on.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

121. Nothing personal, but you have to parse the language to get it right.

You're not getting it right.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

124. The wording was a bit clumsy.

I always have to be careful about using too many pronouns. It's a bad habit. Using too many pronouns is a bad habit - not being too careful.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

125. It was a little clunky, yes. And I did have to read it again to make sure I got it right.

[beam me up scottie]

126. You'll have to forgive me, I was angry to see it posted here again.

I expect that kind of swift boating from Republicans, always takes my breath away when I see Bernie get fragged.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

128. You are forgiven!

[beam me up scottie]

129. Tank you veddy much!

[arcane1]

37. Yeah, this was due to be re-re-recycled any day now.

I hate reruns.

[uponit7771]

39. You mean his vote for the Minutemen to be recycled!? http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll224.xml

... just posting the vote... not the article

Facts do matter

[beam me up scottie]

43. Please cite proof that he "voted for the Minutemen". Tia!

[uponit7771]

47. The GOP gumper legislation was in support of them, play obtuse... I could care less.

The vote is all for folk to see but to answer your original question, he's "evolved" on that...

I bet today he wouldn't vote for such punk ass'd legislation...


Hell, he doesn't even want to talk about it

[beam me up scottie]

53. Where does it say he voted for the "Minutemen" specifically?

The amendment states:

None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to provide a foreign government information relating to the activities of an organized volunteer civilian action group, operating in the State of California, Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona, unless required by international treaty.

Reference: Department of Homeland Security appropriations; Bill HR 5441 Amendment 968 ; vote number 2006-224 on Jun 6, 2006

[Gloria]

74. Oh, he evolved when he betrayed Ron Paul on their

joint effort to have bills voted on to audit the FED. Sanders suddenly switched to the watered down version, which
caught Ron Paul by total surprise...I posted that video/link a while back...

So, he can rant all all he wants about the evils he sees but he cops out on auditing the FED in any meaningful way...the outfit that has manipulated our markets in favor of the top 1% for years...

ugh

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. Did she give a clue to what the "unanswered questions" are?

[senz]

89. "How will this affect my run for president?"

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

96. LOL. I think you're on to something there.

[closeupready]

28. So what. Would she veto it if she became President?

No.

[ram2008]

30. "As of today" But what about tomorrow?

Who can possibly know with Hillary Clinton.?

[arcane1]

34. Good. Let's keep it that way n/t

[askew]

36. I don't know how Hillary supporters aren't just embarassed by their candidate.

My candidate may be behind in the polls but at least I can be proud to support him. There is literally nothing that Hillary won't flip-flop on to win votes. She is completely lacking in a moral compass.

She's basically Mitt Romney as a Democrat. Remember how we mocked his daily flip-flops? That is exactly what the GOP will do to Hillary as a general election candidate. Where does she stand on an issue? Wait until she gets the focus group polling back so she can tell you.

[Doctor_J]

46. I haven't seen an issue oriented post from them in ages. their campaign seems to have three planks

1. She's ahead in the polls
2. Black people don't like Sanders
3. Professional dc dems endorse her

They would have been ashamed months ago if they were capable of shame

[askew]

52. Yeah, I guess that is it.

Truly bizarre. I am just mortified she is the leading Democratic candidate right now and the potential first female president. She stands for nothing.

I can only hope O'Malley, Sanders, or Biden can catch on and win the nomination.

[DonCoquixote]

97. and when she starts attacking Obama

number two may go bye bye

[Fawke Em]

99. She already has.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/10/hillary-clinton-obama_n_5665901.html

[kenfrequed]

113. Yeah...

I have always been a bit edgy about how many of Hillary supporters have been working so hard to convince everyone that black people don't like Sanders. It kind of seems patronizing.

[arcane1]

49. Oh they are. It expresses itself in vitriolic smears n/t

[Doctor_J]

38. she'll be in favor again as soon as the primaries are over

She's now trying to get liberal voters. When she needs conservative voters she'll be for it

[ibegurpard]

45. We'll see how hard she fights it.

My guess not very.

[cpompilo]

56. I wonder "what I know about it as of" tomorrow will bring?

[ion_theory]

58. Well done Mrs. Clinton. Finally something I can actually get behind if she wins the nod.

Still will say that this would have NEVER happened if Bernie, Warren, labor/enviromental groups, and the rest of us weren't so vocal about it. Hopefully it isn't just a ploy to get elected and she really means it.

[Gloria]

62. ANY adults here ?

It was negotiated for 8 (e i g h t) years.
HRC has not been Sec. of State for several years...she has not been involved in any of it since then. No one really has seen this thing...so, being against from the start is largely an ideological position with no first hand knowledge.

Deals do not happen in a vacuum...she was specific about more recent events...like currency manipulation, etc. If you pay attention to business news, you are aware of the changing conditions.

So, who gives shit what she 4 or 5 years ago???
It's pretty irrelevant as the deal has taken years to do since she was out of it...

A lot of people here sound like the media herd....ohoh, she said this THEN... it's the final doc which is real...

So, get over it and use some thinking skills once in awhile...jeesh!!!

PS...I've been against the TPP, but am surprised at some of positive environmental sections.

[tex-wyo-dem]

85. "positive environmental sections"...?

Environmentalists: The Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement Is A Disaster For Climate Change

Aside from that, to think that she is "out of the loop" on this is a bit naive. Even if she hasn't paid attention, she certainly has people working for her that are in the know or can find out details. I would hope that anyone running for POTUS would have a good understanding of all the major issues and have formed a defendable position...and the TPP is a very major issue.

[Gloria]

115. There was a lot more in there than expected, that's

all I'm trying to say....there could have been nothing....

Oh, please, everyone not at that table negotiating was out of the loop...Of course, we know that Sanders is a clairvoyant...

What a load of ridiculous nonsense!

[Armstead]

88. These all-encompassing "free trade" agreements negotiated in secret are bad by definition

THat is not to say trade is bad. It's a good thing.

However these one-size-fits-all overreaching corporate backed monsters are bad by definition. They are Ttojan Horses designe to undermine civil laws and make it easier to outsource jobs and do all kinds of mischief.

There are many better alternatives to support trade that do not have the same bad repercussions or motives.

[Gloria]

116. I totally agree..

eom

[Bernblu]

65. It's a good day for some kabuki

As of today she is against it. Tomorrow is another day. She'll be watching how the wind blows. Of course it is going to pass anyway. The Republicans will never in the end go against their corporate masters. So, Hillary is playing it safe at least until she gets her union endorsements and the nomination.

[azmom]

71. Yep. As of today blah blah blah. N/t

[Qutzupalotl]

67. It's been signed. It's too late to change it.

Congress *could* stop it, but I doubt they will.

I wish she had come out against the proposed terms a few weeks ago. If both our leading contenders had voiced strenuous opposition, we might have been able to make a few changes at least.

[Bucky]

72. She totally Berned Obama on that one!

[Armstead]

75. Well, if she truly has, Good for Her

As always with Clinton, will probably take a couple of lawyers to interpret her actual answer, and political strategists to interpret he motive.

But if she means it, every bit of challenge to the TPP is helpful.

[tritsofme]

77. Incredibly disingenuous and disappointing.

No one believes this would have been her position were it not for Sanders nipping at her heels. Maybe Biden deserves a look.

[ornotna]

78. As of today I'm happy she does.

[Gothmog]

79. I am glad that Hillary Clinton is taking this position

[senz]

90. Yeah it's a good thing her focus group finally weighed in.

[DonCoquixote]

98. then she shoukd have taken it

when she had the chance to stop it, instead of defending it, and then only doing an electoral fake.

[Bernblu]

100. Cynical Politics - Too little too late!

It might help her politically getting union endorsements and in the Primary but it is too little to late to actually help defeat TPP. She took no position when TPP was fast tracked. Then was the time to speak up. It will almost surely pass now that it is an up or down vote, needing only 50 votes in the Senate. The Republicans will in the end never defy their corporate masters.

Hillary's position to be against it "as of today" is the most cynical form of politics, especially since she promoted it in 45 speeches as SOS. Who knows what she say tomorrow? Bernie has fought against TPP from the beginning and does not blow with the political wind. That is why I support Bernie.

[Doctor_J]

102. I'm even more glad that Sanders took it (more firmly) months ago

[Fawke Em]

87. .

[DemocratSinceBirth]

91. Pacific Rim sounds like a double entendre

[senz]

92. There is much bad in the TPP, but the worst is this:

Like NAFTA, it allows corporations to sue sovereign governments for loss of profits.

[joshcryer]

93. Surprised, did not see this coming.

TPP is going to be one of Obama's biggest achievements (for better or worse, not saying it's good). Riding Obama's coat tails is part of the strategy.

I got keystone right anyway.

[DonCoquixote]

94. so one of the main archoitects of this deal

is turning against it? After supporting it?

Let me guess, this is payback for Obama not telling Biden "thou shalt not run against Hillary."

It is going to be really funny to see all those stalwart Clinton people stay when Hillary attacks Obama, maybe she will finally let Bill out to blow all those dog whistles again. (sarcasm)

[bullwinkle428]

107. You all realize that this will make Biden THE "pro-TPP" candidate,

should he choose to enter the race.

[Gloria]

117. Yes, it does....

smart timing...

And yes, it IS about winning....

Which is what a political race is all about...

[Egnever]

134. Which might actually work in his favor

We will know when the actual details are published.

If it does turn out to be a decent agreement there will be some epic backpedaling going on that is for sure.

Still reserving my judgement till I can actually read it.

[kenfrequed]

111. I don't buy it.

Seriously, this is just another transparent switch leading up to the debate so that she won't get stuffed with her work in crafting this job killing trade pact.

I mean, does anyone honestly believe that one of the more strident third-way democrats is suddenly a born again economic progressive? I do not trust a word of it.

[840high]

127. I don't believe a word she says anymore.

[lumberjack_jeff]

119. So she was for it, until Pharma CEO's, Big Tobacco and Republicans were against it.

Now she is too. Such a progressive, that one!

Head. Fake.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/tpp-take-two/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body

[delrem]

130. Now *that* is cynicism. Like - in your back, Obama.

Because she knows her courageous last minute change of stance is neither believed, nor would matter to the vote even if believed by some fool.