Yes. I worried that taking out Qaddafi would just leave a power vacuum that could be even worse, all while further branding the US as a neo-imperialist meddler.
Mindless Partisanship
- Thread starter Oneuli
- Start date
Yes. I worried that taking out Qaddafi would just leave a power vacuum that could be even worse, all while further branding the US as a neo-imperialist meddler.
You're such a moron; you're congratulating one of the most partisan hacks on the forum. Dunce.
your terms are off kilter. Trump is far from an "Isolationalist" -
unless you think staying out of foreign civil wars like Iraq/Syria/Libya is isolationalism.
and again going after NAFTA ( which was greatly renegotiated to our behalf and Mexico and to a lessor extent Canada) and China WTO violations is "anti-free trade" even with temporary tariffs as a stick doesn't add up.
That's the point, though -- Republicans AREN'T wedded to those things. China was doing the same damned stuff back in 2008. In fact, it used to be worse, when it came to currency manipulation. But that didn't sour Republicans on free trade. Not only were they pro-free-trade by a significant margin, they were even more so than the Democrats, at the time. China didn't change --or, if it did, China changed to become slightly less malignant. So that doesn't explain why Republican approval for free trade twice took violent leaps south. It was about partisanship.
I agree.
Just look at the issue of Impeachment. After 4 years of Investigating Clinton, the best Ken Starr could do was to start quizzing Bill Clinton on his sex life. The Republicans jumped on that and became unglued in jubilation. Fast Forward to the Investigation of Trump and the attitude of the Republicans is just the opposite. Is Trump laundering money for the Russians? Why not disclose Trump's Tax Returns? Does Russia have something on Trump? Do the Saudis have something on Trump?
This seems a little more worthy of an Investigation than somebody's sex life.
It's much deeper then that.
Qadhafi was virulently anti-terrorist and we took him out anyways...but OK fine..Its good to see at least one Dem who gets it.. and that goes for the Republicans as well
Based Chad
Was it me?
globalists have taken over reps and dems. most establishment reps are globalists who conflate free trade with accepting any old shitty trade deal. trump is not like most republicans in this regard. trump won by bringing people out of the woodwork who had given up, due to both parties being globalist sellouts.
Last edited:
Irony; someone who campaigned for a Marxist dunce like Bernie whining about mindless partisanship.
Trade most surely was NOT a side issue for Bernie you lying hyper partisan hack.
http://ontheissues.org/Bernie_Sanders.htm
Don't believe that unfettered trade creates U.S. jobs. (Feb 2016)
I disagree with Obama on TPP, but he's done a great job. (Feb 2016)
I will take on corporations that take their jobs to China. (Feb 2016)
I strongly opposed NAFTA and DOMA from their inception. (Oct 2015)
Does not support ANY free trade agreements. (Oct 2015)
China trade has led to loss of 3M American jobs so far. (Sep 2015)
Priority of trade deals should be helping American workers. (Sep 2015)
Base trade policy on working families, not multinationals. (Jun 2015)
Wrong, wrong, wrong that trade deals create jobs here. (Apr 2015)
End disastrous NAFTA, CAFTA, and PNTR with China. (Mar 2015)
Stop TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership. (Jan 2015)
How can we compete against people who make 23 cents an hour? (Dec 2010)
48,000 US factories shut down under Bush due to trade. (Dec 2010)
Disastrous trade policies lead to collapse of middle class. (Dec 2010)
US trade policies represent interests of corporate America. (Jun 1997)
Agreed with Ross Perot's critique of trade policy. (Jun 1997)
NAFTA was a sellout to corporate America. (Jun 1997)
NAFTA, GATT, and MFN for China must be repealed. (Jun 1997)
Voted NO on promoting free trade with Peru. (Dec 2007)
Voted NO on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted NO on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on implementing free trade agreement with Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on withdrawing from the WTO. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on 'Fast Track' authority for trade agreements. (Sep 1998)
Rated 33% by CATO, indicating a mixed record on trade issues. (Dec 2002)
Extend trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy. (Jun 2007)
Review free trade agreements biennially for rights violation. (Jun 2009)
Impose tariffs against countries which manipulate currency. (Feb 2011)
Rated 13% by the USAE, indicating support for trade sanctions. (Dec 2012)
No MFN for China; condition trade on human rights. (Nov 1999)
TD. Do you notice the difference between Oneuli's posts and yours?
Yes. It was among his very long list of issues. But, as you can see, it wasn't particularly prominent in the list. Income inequality, living wages, and student debt were the big issues in speeches I listened to and events I attended.
Why do you think that shows a lack of knowledge by me? It's entirely consistent with my point. I"m getting the feeling you didn't actually read the top post. Go back and do so.
You're substituting the reality you'd like to believe in for the reality shown by the data. It's true there was a gradual shift among Democrats -- from a smaller majority to a larger majority supporting free trade, between 2009 and today. But there's nothing "gradual" about the Republican graph. It's a violent set of spasms from the majority supporting to a minority, to a majority again, to a tiny minority, to roughly equal on each side.
I get that the data doesn't fit the narrative you want to push. When reality butts up against the shit you wish were true, you need to make a decision about which to believe.
could be. I'm not all that interested in reading your graphs or discussing Republican or Dem.. I have no confidence in either party.
I'm just hitching a ride to Trumps ideas/policies
Willful liberal idiot thinks he can kick RW ass. The only ass you kick asshat is your own. 
[/img]
Semantic debates are a waste of time, so if you prefer some other label, that's fine. But Trump campaigned in favor of much lower immigration, a wall at the border, less use of our military abroad, a pull-back of foreign military bases, and higher trade barriers. That's what I'm referring to.
Based Chad
Was it me?
the thing about the system is it's insider traders planning the world so their corps are in the center. china is the next planned ascendant kingdom to prop up with their money power. just by changing the plan trump threatens these people.
totalitarianism is predictable. freedom is harder to game.
totalitarianism is predictable. freedom is harder to game.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
No they haven't. They don't like Trump.
More lies asshat? You seem to be quite full of them which is why you constantly prove your and idiot here.
Absolutely. Even if you think Trump himself wasn't conspiring with the Russians, the fact is we know that the Russians had a massive effort to subvert our election. Any patriot should be eager to see that investigated, so we can understand what they did and who helped them, so we can protect ourselves better in the future. But while they were cool grilling the president over whether or not he got a consensual blowjob, they want important stuff swept under the carpet, for entirely partisan reasons.
yep.all good.I agree with that platform. AfPak is a bitch there is no good way out