General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow @#$%ing Stupid Are We?
I'm so goddamned mad at the TPP garbage that I've gotten the idea to write a pamphlet or book about all the ridiculous stuff going on, titled:
How @#$%ing Stupid Are We?
It's *your* fault America's this screwed up, and only *you* can fix it.
It would be a compilation of all of the provably dysfunctional nonsense that voters have let happen to America, that are just power-screwing us every day, things like "free" trade, outrageously expensive and crappy health care, insane military spending, absurd wars, upside-down tax policies, and so forth.
Just stupid, stupid stuff that we do to ourselves, for which their are easy fixes that are proven to work whenever they've been tried.
We won World War II in two theaters and put people on the Moon, now we can't even tie our shoelaces without severing a finger.
Talk me down - I'm sure it's a dumb idea and I'm just mad right now. I'll probably reconsider in about 5 minutes, grrr.
bradla
(89 posts)You have no idea what will be in it. Christ, get a pacifier already.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)How did we go on with out you?
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)And left-leaning politicians have gone on record as not liking what they see:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024089103
arcane1
(38,613 posts)When did multinationals suddenly earn the benefit of the doubt? When did secrecy become a virtue?
bigtree
(85,919 posts). . . private negotiations shouldn't allow them to keep the details of what they're proposing secret.
Sen Warren's letter:
http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/warren.pdf
Uncle Joe
(58,112 posts)I don't care for the TPP process one bit.
bigtree
(85,919 posts). . . the way presidents are allowed to negotiate these trade deals; trade promotion authority that empowers presidents to negotiate trade deals in secret and then present them to Congress for up-or-down votes, with no amendments allowed.
If ratified, the proposals - the Trans-Atlantic and Trans-Pacific Trade and Investment Partnerships - would create the largest free-trade zone in the world. Instead of trying to get Congress to give him authority to ram this thing through, the president should welcome Congress' input in crafting any deal.
That would help insure that American workers concerns, and U.S. environmental and other concerns are put forward first, and not as an afterthought or wish and a prayer for other countries to address.
Go Vols
(5,902 posts)on January 20, 1981.
I was screaming about it was going to happen prior to this date and have been since.
CrispyQ
(36,231 posts)I know a lot of dems who voted for Reagan. Most of them are very well off now & republicans. A few are still dems, but they are third way dems. None of them support a strong safety net, cuz hey, they made it on their own, so why can't you?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)been keeping up with things regarding this abomination of a so-called 'trade agreement'.
And since some of us HAVE been keeping up, let me assure you, no pacifier is going to help push back the justifiable outrage that anyone who sign this agreement is going to be facing.
Let me ask you something, do you understand that CONGRESS has been denied access to information on this bill. CONGRESS! Are you okay with foreign corporations writing legislation for this country?
Put it this way, YOU may be okay with it, but you can rest assured that when the American people are fully informed about the facts of this so-called 'trade agreement', you are welcome to try to calm them with 'pacifiers'.
I'd like to know when Liberals suddenly became fans of secret Trade Agreements that their Reps are denied access to that affect the environment legistlation such as it is, eg, adversely. Thanks to Whistle Blowers we know some of what is in store for the people due to these 'secret agreements' about which THE PEOPLE'S REPS have had no say!
pa28
(6,145 posts)sendero
(28,552 posts).... agree.
The only problem I see with your assessment is the assumption that most Americans will have any idea what is in this agreement even after it passes. Because most will only hear the MSM's whitewashed version.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
temporary311
(954 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This ought to help: We also allow republican owned companies to count our votes with their own private software. And we pay them billions to do so.
We could have open source code, but we don't. Banks do, so why don't we?
No wonder our politicians ""don't care"" what we think. They have us over the blackbox voting machines and are giving us a royal screwing.
CrispyQ
(36,231 posts)Paper ballots that are then scanned & digitized. But hey, it's okay cuz we have paper ballots.
Our electoral process is totally corrupt & compromised & no one is doing a thing about it.
leftstreet
(36,081 posts)I don't remember him saying Hope Change and Free Trade !
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)The fact is that Americans keep electing cowards and fools to high office, one after another. Not that voters in most cases have a realistic better choice - that's really the worst part.
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)He said he would work to fix NAFTA.
bigtree
(85,919 posts)'Can't even tie shoelaces without severing a finger?'
That sounds like a personal problem. Seek help.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Maybe you're right and it will help the 99%. But I doubt it.
But I'm sure that there are other things we do agree on.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)bigtree
(85,919 posts). . . I did all I could, but I'm not a doctor or a therapist.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)negotiations are just that. negotiations.
the only thing we are in disagreement with here, is you say it's a done deal and the 99% will be targeted. my thoughts, we do not know that.
ssssh calm down a little, i am doing what you asked, i am talking you down.
peace
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)And you disagree with Elizabeth Warren that it should be out in the open, and that it's being kept secret because it's bad, and Americans would fight it if they knew what was in it?
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)So I ask politely, that you do not presume to put words in my mouth.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Do you agree with Elizabeth Warren:
For months, the Trade Representative who negotiates on our behalf has been unwilling to provide any public access to the composite bracketed text relating to the negotiations. The composite bracketed text includes proposed language from the United States and also other countries, and it serves as the focal point for negotiations. The Trade Representative has allowed Members of Congress to access the text, and I appreciate that. But that is no substitute for public transparency.
I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States."
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)Fluff and Puff. Oh and pictures of Obama looking hot.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Blind men in the market, buying what we're sold.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)You only said)(*&^%$%^
Talk me down! (Condensed version yes) however there was not much else there.
You just wanted to light a fire.
~later
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)Sorry about that........
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)I know I need new glasses, however. It's not there.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Or is it an... um... inconvenient subject?
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #34)
Post removed
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)For months, the Trade Representative who negotiates on our behalf has been unwilling to provide any public access to the composite bracketed text relating to the negotiations. The composite bracketed text includes proposed language from the United States and also other countries, and it serves as the focal point for negotiations. The Trade Representative has allowed Members of Congress to access the text, and I appreciate that. But that is no substitute for public transparency.
I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025224336#post26
really?
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)I ask you again....
I gave you the link and EW's letter.
Was that or was that not in the OP!?
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)You are trite and I am too smart for you.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)You're to smart for me... Got it.
Sadly, I am not the one that needs new glasses since you were the one that did not read the thread. And had not a clue to what I was responding to.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)Sadly you have no grasp of grammar and you need new glasses. I am so sorry and I am praying for you.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)sheshe2
(83,354 posts)Thanks Bobbie Jo
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Can't win them all.
That was an insult, the jury got it wrong.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)This place is a tad crazy these days.
Hope you are recovering nicely.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)Sadly you did not. You obviously never bothered to read the post I was commenting on. Your bad.
Grammar is more important to you than reading a tread before you comment. Got it.
Oh, and you can save your insincere prayers.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I can't copy from it because it is a PDF file, but it points out the errors in your post.
Just based on the fact that the agreement negotiations are so secretive, we know that what is being agreed to would be rejected, probably vehemently rejected by the American people. The very fact of the excessive secrecy is a sign our government is doing something wrong and knows it.
My mother raised a good-sized family of children born in close succession. She used to say that when things got very quiet she knew we were up to mischief.
When our government gets very quiet about what it is doing, it is up to mischief. We need to stop it.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)access to information on those negotiations. Since when is Congress not allowed to know what is being negotiated on behalf of the people THEY represent? And even worse, since when has that been okay with Democrats?
We also have seen some of what is being 'negotiated' thanks to leaks by Wikileaks and it appears considering what we DO know so far, there has not been enough drama, as you call it, unless of course we Liberals have suddenly decided that the Environment is no longer important and that the Reps we elect have no right to know what is going on with legislation that will effect the lives of those who elected them.
The cause of the drama, as you call it, is the very fact that not only do WE not know what is in it, our Reps in Congress have been denied access to the information. Congress, I think we can agree, has a RIGHT to be a part of negotiations like this.
Elizabeth Warren eg, certainly seems to think so. So I'll take her assessment on whether or not Manny is being dramatic or justifiably concerned.
Marr
(20,317 posts)What exactly is your position on the TPP? Before you answer, "GOBAMA" is not a position.
conservaphobe
(1,284 posts)On a day the frivolous lawsuit against him moves forward.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)That's great news. Someone should tell the rich banker who he has negotiating the thing.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)effen A
840high
(17,196 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)betterdemsonly
(1,967 posts)and not just Congress people and Senators. Presidents negotiate those things. They also make appointments such as to the Federal Reserve, The US Treasury, The State Department, The Education Department, and the FCC. These institutions all control areas of policy where we have been sold out by neoliberal Democrats. Please Warren run already!
babylonsister
(170,963 posts)I will recommend this #sonofagun-not!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)For months, the Trade Representative who negotiates on our behalf has been unwilling to provide any public access to the composite bracketed text relating to the negotiations. The composite bracketed text includes proposed language from the United States and also other countries, and it serves as the focal point for negotiations. The Trade Representative has allowed Members of Congress to access the text, and I appreciate that. But that is no substitute for public transparency.
I have heard the argument that transparency would undermine the Trade Representative's policy to complete the trade agreement because public opposition would be significant. In other words, if people knew what was going on, they would stop it. This argument is exactly backwards. If transparency would lead to widespread public opposition to a trade agreement, then that trade agreement should not be the policy of the United States."
- Elizabeth Warren
babylonsister
(170,963 posts)Big fat difference. You like to rile people up; I get it.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Be specific, thanks.
babylonsister
(170,963 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)"This is about our values," the senator said, "and our values tell us that we don't build a future by first deciding who among our most vulnerable will be left to starve."
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/11/elizabeth-warren-social-security-retirement
Idunno... Talking about starving the elderly might seem pretty low-key to you, but to some of us...
How about:
"Look around. Oil companies guzzle down the billions in profits. Billionaires pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries, and Wall Street CEOs, the same ones that direct our economy and destroyed millions of jobs still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors, and acting like we should thank them. Does anyone here have a problem with that?"
Or accusing Eric Holder of staggering dereliction of duty:
"If youre caught with an ounce of cocaine, the chances are good youre going to jail
.Evidently, if you launder nearly a billion dollars for drug cartels and violate our international sanctions, your company pays a fine and you go home and sleep in your own bed at night."
Sounds pretty laid back
babylonsister
(170,963 posts)You and Ms. Warren.
All I'm saying is there are other issues that merit attention. Peace.
sheshe2
(83,354 posts)bigtree
(85,919 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)$15/hr minimum wage? Fast Food strikes, trucker strikes, well, no worries, we have a solution for that underway now. The permanent "will work for less" are coming to save the day and big business can't be happier.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)How did the Mafia corrupt unions? The unions needed muscle, and asked the Mafia for help. Once the bosses saw how much money the unions were controlling, they took over.
In the case of the Dem Party, it was the lure of easy money from corporations. Hey! Fundraising problems solved.
Beware the Trojan Horse you invite inside the gates.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
MannyGoldstein This message was self-deleted by its author.
pbmus
(12,418 posts)""
Demeter
(85,373 posts)Well, a lot more than I thought we were. But in all justice, stupidity is built into the system for purposes of theft by the 1%. It wasn't generated by the 99% from the grassroots....
I think the body politic had a psychotic break when Reagan was elected. The inmates began running the asylum and the 1% bought themselves a do-it-yourself fascism lab.
Good people want to follow the systems of society, but the systems have been purposefully broken, and they are deteriorating more with every day that passes. Good people are seeing the stupidity of trying to follow a broken system. I think that the body politic is starting to mend, finally. But that's a 40 year pendulum swing to undo. It will take another 40 years.
I'm not sure we have another 40 years, frankly, before a shortcut revolution resets the clock.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)STUPID enough to keep buying shit from the people who have been screwing them six ways to sunday.
ClarkeVII
(89 posts)^^^^ truth right here. nuff said
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)not gonna do it.
Writing a book work by far more impressive than writing "hit and run" posts to an anonymous message board ... Plus, it'll allow you to take a public stance on our opinion!
I say, Go for it ... if you are right, you become (more of) a DU hero; but if you are not even on the field ... well, DU doesn't mean much.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)They did pretty well.
Not in this field, though.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)But to quote a recent poster comments about why we have changed..."we have went from dreamers to schemers."
As for me, I blame Timbuc 3 for it all
FOW (feminist outrage warning) contains photos of sexy women in sexy dress.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)pa28
(6,145 posts)Remember, Indignez-vous was a 30 page pamphlet read by millions of people written in a fit of anger.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)will lead to their education.
Manny, I've made this exact mistake in teaching college biology courses. Put huge amounts of time into providing on-line resources that basically depended upon more reading.
The education of voters will require information transfer, but in video sound bites disguised as comedy and probably limited to 15 seconds, easily confused as clips from Ridiculousness or America's Funniest Video.
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)...a cash prize for participating.
"The education of voters will require information transfer, but in video sound bites disguised as comedy and probably limited to 15 seconds, easily confused as clips from Ridiculousness or America's Funniest Video."
.
n2doc
(47,953 posts)really, I am serious. Because I don't see a clear path. You and I both know the 2016 primaries will be dominated by a few candidates with lots of money to spend and name recognition. I have yet to see anyone with a "I will stop TPP" as one of their main planks. If we think Warren will do that, she first has to start running (which means a lot more than just writing books and articles, but putting together a ground team). And people have to donate massive amounts (thinking 10 million people donating ten
As far as voters, who do we vote for? Here in Georgia I have no illusions about Nunn, she would undoubtedly support TPP. And she would be the absolute BEST we can hope for down here. Voting third party does nothing.
If you want to blame voters, blame those who don't bother to even think about who they will vote for until the voting booth. And those who don't bother to vote at all. But it isn't like we are being given free and clear choices.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)More very apt words.
K&R