• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Deal Reached on Fast-Track Authority for Obama on Trade Pact


Yes a centrist. A very big centrist. Just because your views are either so far right, or much of the republican party has moved so far right does not mean Obama is some "far left wing leftist" as many in the Tea Party have made him out to be. I mean for ****s sake he promotes many of the policies of ****ing Reagan...
 

Name ONE President who has been left of Obama? And supporting data and examples.

You are obviously just ashamed and embarrassed for having supported and voted for that worthless narcissistic lying empty suit.....TWICE
 

I think Chomsky says it best.

 
Chainsaw said:
Name ONE President who has been left of Obama? And supporting data and examples.
Click to expand...
Easy FDR. Massive publics works program, introducing one of the most progressive VP's of all time Henry Wallace, introduced a second bill of rights which essentially promoted social democracy in America but unfortunately died before it had a chance.

You are obviously just ashamed and embarrassed for having supported and voted for that worthless narcissistic lying empty suit.....TWICE
Click to expand...
Meh. I would say I voted for Obama. Never really been impressed with him, or "excited". If you mean "ashamed" as I will criticize the man, I mean either way I would be criticizing if McCain won or Romney won. They are clear corporatists.

I mean for ****s sake, if Obama is some "far left" President, then ****, Eisenhower might as well be "far left" as well.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Easy FDR. Massive publics works program, introducing one of the most progressive VP's of all time Henry Wallace, introduced a second bill of rights which essentially promoted social democracy in America but unfortunately died before it had a chance.
Click to expand...

Hhhhhmmmmmmm....ssssuuuurrrrreeeee. Was FDR 'left' enough for you?
 

I never said China made high quality manufactured products, only that they we of comparable quality to those products built by high cost unionised US Labor. In the end, I would rather support those trying to recover from Socialism than those trying to force Socialism down my throat.

The only reason for anyone in the US to fear competition is because they know they are losers who cannot compete. Those who support Liberalism and other forms of socialism in the US fear competition because they are losers. Others simply accept the challenge and work to meet it.
 
Helix said:
sorry, i don't agree. before environmental regulations, creeks were catching on fire. **** that.
Click to expand...

Apparently you don't understand that when I speak against the greenie-weenies and environmentalist political agenda that I am not against reasonable and firmly provable environmental protections. However, there is nothing "reasonable" about the EPA.

Not dumping chemicals into the water is reasonable. However, many of their agendas are not reasonable but socialistic in intention. Such as the clean air act and the EPAs push for government control of all fresh water.

The clean air act is so screwed up that it is illegal to change your vehicle to cleaner fuels or even to electric because it "alters the fuel system" and associated environmental equipment. It gives a means to enforce a "government knows best" ideology and cripples individual efforts of innovation.

If you ever worked in a safety office, then you would also realise that OSHA doesn't just enforce reasonable, common sense safety but creates metric tons of useless paperwork to show that a company has trained stupid people not to be stupid and to hold companies responsible should someone stupid do something stupid on the companies properties. In other words, it is not about safety, but about exerting greater government control.
 

Agree and we should also require a right to organize labor and a reasonably representative/democratic government.
 
American said:
Why is Obama championing it?
Click to expand...

Because in the end on most things, there's a dimes thickness in difference between the elephant and the ass. You do know that the GOP is all about TPP, right?
 

That's all fine and good and sounds great, but the fact is the people negotiating these trade deals don't give the slightest damn about any of that. These are agreements negotiated by global behemoths and their representatives, in secret, to serve their interests, period. These are deals by and for the top 1/10th of 1%. Bottom line is I don't believe a word of any of the lofty goals. We'll pass TPP because the people who own the country and the politicians want it and it helps the elites capture a growing share of the global income and wealth. That's all anyone needs to really know. And that this whole process has been done behind closed means we won't like what comes out of it.

For that reason, I'm asking those who represent me to vote against this deal. They're job is to represent us here in the U.S. Other countries have leadership that serves THEIR interests.



The problem is we don't really know since this is all in secret and even our own Congress isn't allowed to see the details. Parts have been leaked but that's about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…