RED ALERT: Flag burning, Paris Hilton, and abortion are intended to distract you

Darla said:
The best move they have made lately is holding up trade agreements.

The flat-earthers who have their heads stuck in Tom Friedman's butt, won't know wtf hit them.
Click to expand...


LOL

Oh, the Dems are getting the message. Far too many of them sold out working americans in 1994. On CAFTA we had an overwhelming majority of Dems vote against that. But, we need to get virtually all Dems on board with this.

You can see how SF desparately wants to share equal credit for NAFTA/CAFTA with Dems....just like bush fans try to share equal credit for the iraq war. And there's a reason they want to share equal credit. You can guess why that is ;)
 
Darla said:
The best move they have made lately is holding up trade agreements.

The flat-earthers who have their heads stuck in Tom Friedman's butt, won't know wtf hit them.
Click to expand...

How cute... now those that believe in free trade are 'flat earthers'. How quaint.
 
Superfreak said:
"You didn't provide that number. "

YOU said 60% of Dems in Congress... that would imply that you knew what the number was. Plus, I did provide you with the 27 who voted for it. Simple math would have gotten you close to the rest. There were 56 dems at the time in the Senate.
Click to expand...


Stop with the false outrage. That's very girly of you.

You know, that you only provided the House numbers. I was going off YOUR numbers.
 
"You can see how SF desparately wants to share equal credit for NAFTA/CAFTA with Dems....just like bush fans try to share equal credit for the iraq war. And there's a reason they want to share equal credit. You can guess why that is ;)[/QUOTE]

Right... its out of complete desperation... has nothing to do with showing you that you are wrong in your idiotic claim that it was a Rep idea.
 
Lmao....

Cypress said:
Stop with the false outrage. That's very girly of you.

You know, that you only provided the House numbers. I was going off YOUR numbers.
Click to expand...



You and darla/Lady T are the biggest offenders of "False Outrage" then you accuse evryone else who disagrees with you of doing it...if ya can't bully someone into submission/dog piles... here comes the name calling...how so very quaint!
 
Cypress said:
Stop with the false outrage. That's very girly of you.

You know, that you only provided the House numbers. I was going off YOUR numbers.
Click to expand...

No false outrage... just using your technique back on you. You know the one... where you try to pick one tiny piece of what someone said and twist it around and make an argument out of it. But you are good with small pieces aren't you? Not much of the big picture kind of guy. Which is why you cherry pick numbers that make you think you are making a point.
 
"SF, don't make me explain this to you again."

So if you believe in free trade you are somehow a "flat earther"... again, how quaint. I must believe the earth is flat.
 
Superfreak said:
"You can see how SF desparately wants to share equal credit for NAFTA/CAFTA with Dems....just like bush fans try to share equal credit for the iraq war. And there's a reason they want to share equal credit. You can guess why that is ;)

Right... its out of complete desperation... has nothing to do with showing you that you are wrong in your idiotic claim that it was a Rep idea.
Click to expand...

First, it was a GOP idea. NAFTA was first introduced by either Poppy or Reagan (don't remember which). Clinton of course enabled them, by signing it.

Second, most Dems in 1994, and certainly a large majority of Dems today in congress oppose NAFTA/CAFTA trade agreements.

If you're proud of NAFTA/CAFTA, please continue to support your party's position on those trade agreements.
 
Cypress said:
First, it was a GOP idea. NAFTA was first introduced by either Poppy or Reagan (don't remember which). Clinton of course enabled them, by signing it.

Second, most Dems in 1994, and certainly a large majority of Dems today in congress oppose NAFTA/CAFTA trade agreements.

If you're proud of NAFTA/CAFTA, please continue to support your party's position on those trade agreements.
Click to expand...

It was enacted by BOTH parties. Sorry to break it to you, but that makes it bi-partisan.
 
Superfreak said:
It was enacted by BOTH parties. Sorry to break it to you, but that makes it bi-partisan.
Click to expand...

Yep, it had bipartisan support. I never denied that.


I said that NAFTA was both a republican idea, and oppossed by a majority of democrats.

BTW: look at the CAFTA vote.


And since your so Proud of NAFTA/CAFTA, please do encourage your candidates to campaign in support of them ;)
 
Cypress said:
LOL

Oh, the Dems are getting the message. Far too many of them sold out working americans in 1994. On CAFTA we had an overwhelming majority of Dems vote against that. But, we need to get virtually all Dems on board with this.

You can see how SF desparately wants to share equal credit for NAFTA/CAFTA with Dems....just like bush fans try to share equal credit for the iraq war. And there's a reason they want to share equal credit. You can guess why that is ;)
Click to expand...


How is NAFTA, a measure signed in '93 by a Democrat President, going to be a huge selling tool for Democrats in 2008?

Unfortuantely, not all Republicans are free traders either. Look at idiots like Lindsey Grahmam who whatever the hell is name is from South Carolina joining up with Schumer trying to slap 30% tariffs on China. There are some stupid Republicans isolationist just like there are Democrats.
 
cawacko said:
How is NAFTA, a measure signed in '93 by a Democrat President, going to be a huge selling tool for Democrats in 2008?

Unfortuantely, not all Republicans are free traders either. Look at idiots like Lindsey Grahmam who whatever the hell is name is from South Carolina joining up with Schumer trying to slap 30% tariffs on China. There are some stupid Republicans isolationist just like there are Democrats.
Click to expand...

Jesus. Look at the CAFTA vote, and look at what the dems have been doing with trade agreements, you know, last week.
 
cawacko said:
How is NAFTA, a measure signed in '93 by a Democrat President, going to be a huge selling tool for Democrats in 2008?
Click to expand...

Pointing back to 1994, isn't going to help GOPers get elected:

2006 CAFTA vote:

"Only 15 of the House's 202 Democrats broke ranks to support it."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/28/house.cafta/


Unfortuantely, not all Republicans are free traders either. Look at idiots like Lindsey Grahmam who whatever the hell is name is from South Carolina joining up with Schumer trying to slap 30% tariffs on China. There are some stupid Republicans isolationist just like there are Democrats.
Click to expand...


I do wish you'd stop calling NAFTA/CAFTA "free" trade. They're not. They're a complex and lengthy series of rules and regulations to protect corporate interests, and to allow them to move capital to wherever there are low wages.
 
Darla said:
Jesus. Look at the CAFTA vote, and look at what the dems have been doing with trade agreements, you know, last week.
Click to expand...

Tax was bringing up NAFTA. I'm asking what NAFTA has to do with 2008 as far as a focusing issue?

As far as recent trade deals and CAFTA by all means they should be brought up.
 
Cypress said:
Pointing back to 1994, isn't going to help GOPers get elected:

2006 CAFTA vote:

"Only 15 of the House's 202 Democrats broke ranks to support it."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/28/house.cafta/





I do wish you'd stop calling NAFTA/CAFTA "free" trade. They're not. They're a complex and lengthy series of rules and regulations to protect corporate interests, and to allow them to move capital to wherever there are low wages.
Click to expand...

I'm not calling NAFTA free trade. In fact I didn't bring up NAFTA nor do I have any idea why we are discussing NAFTA. Nor in my post above did I reference NAFTA and free trade together.
 
cawacko said:
I'm not calling NAFTA free trade. In fact I didn't bring up NAFTA nor do I have any idea why we are discussing NAFTA. Nor in my post above did I reference NAFTA and free trade together.
Click to expand...


You have said repeatedly that anyone who criticizes NAFTA is against free trade.

Now, why would you say that, if you (now) don't think NAFTA is indeed, "free" trade?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top