Winning The Future!

[rb336]

He's going to "set the tone for months of campaigning" on the topic of the economy by announcing that he has no new ideas to boost the economy and create jobs!

That "tone" you hear sounds like a winner for Romney!

And what new idea have the republicans had over the last 10 years? none, except to go back to the policies that led directly to the great recession

[firstandten]

Thanks!

I see that President Obama has a major economic speech planned for today. According to this "analysis" article by Reuters, "In an economic speech on Thursday that could set the tone for months of campaigning, Obama is not likely to unveil new ideas to boost the economy and create new jobs, according to Democrats familiar with the preparations for the address."

He's going to "set the tone for months of campaigning" on the topic of the economy by announcing that he has no new ideas to boost the economy and create jobs!

That "tone" you hear sounds like a winner for Romney!

First of all the reason Romney attacks Obama so much on his economic plan is because Romney has no grand plan other than the same warmed over stuff that got us into this problem in the first place.

The reason his speech isn't going to lay out any new plans, is because he is going to compare and contrast his plan with Romney. So he is starting to force Romney to come up with something other than criticism.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,5737178.story

[oladub]

This article is a compliment to post #249 about the Obama administration "Winning the Future" for corporations. There is a very worthwhile video at the end of this link from Democracy Now explaining how the Obama promoted TPP bill will give corporations new and special privileges. Romney is really going to have a tough time coming up with anything more outrageous.
International Treaty Negotiated In Secret – Hidden Even from Congressmen Who Oversee Treaties – Threatens to Destroy National Sovereignty
Treaty Threatens Global Government … Run by Giant Corporations

[rb336]

the TPP was signed in 2005. The US is looking to join it, which I don't agree with.

guess what? MOST treaties in history are negotiated quietly out of necessity. Congress has no right to be informed at every step or to approve every step. If they did, no treaty would ever be made. Congress only has the right to approve or disapprove the treaty once it is agreed upon by the negotiating parties. once again you bring up something that is much ado about nothing. You would have been better off to start a new thread encouraging us to contact our senators and demand that they NOT approve it. Instead, you merely use it as another in your unending series of platforms to express your ill-founded hatred of our first Hawai'ian president. you are so predictable.

PS -- please call on your senators to oppose this monstrosity

[vetalalumni]

...

I see that President Obama has a major economic speech planned for today. According to this "analysis" article by Reuters, "In an economic speech on Thursday that could set the tone for months of campaigning, Obama is not likely to unveil new ideas to boost the economy and create new jobs, according to Democrats familiar with the preparations for the address."

He's going to "set the tone for months of campaigning" on the topic of the economy by announcing that he has no new ideas to boost the economy and create jobs!

That "tone" you hear sounds like a winner for Romney!

It is far too early to have already heard what the winning tone[[s) will be. There is still much more to learn, especially from shy Romney. Golly, gee, and gosh withstanding.

The varying tones that we will observe won't require new shiny objects. Political ideas, unlike people, are rarely new. Romney may embody a false sense of newness in tone simply by virtue of challenging an incumbent from another party. So far, however, Romney has shown little of anything really new.

We know all that glitters is not gold.

[oladub]

the TPP was signed in 2005. The US is looking to join it, which I don't agree with.

guess what? MOST treaties in history are negotiated quietly out of necessity. Congress has no right to be informed at every step or to approve every step. If they did, no treaty would ever be made. Congress only has the right to approve or disapprove the treaty once it is agreed upon by the negotiating parties. once again you bring up something that is much ado about nothing. You would have been better off to start a new thread encouraging us to contact our senators and demand that they NOT approve it. Instead, you merely use it as another in your unending series of platforms to express your ill-founded hatred of our first Hawai'ian president. you are so predictable.

PS -- please call on your senators to oppose this monstrosity

rb, I thought this would be right up your alley. You defended Obama bombing Libya and overthrowing its government on the flimsiest of interpretations of a UN treaty allowing a no fly zone. Imagine what President Obama will similarly be able to do with TPP which elevates foreign corporations' legal rights above those of individuals and even US corporations. I'm wondering what could be his motive for even supporting TPP.

I don't know why you claim Congress has no right to know what is going on. The Chair of the Senate trade commission has top security clearance. Why shouldn't he know? What do you think this is, the Federal Reserve or Libya? Lately, a couple of thousand plus page bills show up in Congress and Congress was told it had only one or two days to read them before the vote because of national security or Obama had to go to Colorado in the case of Obamacare.

I am agreeing with these liberals that this bill is poison for US workers. I disagree that with your opinion that that "this is much ado about nothing". NAFTA GATT and the rest of these free trade agreements have sucked the economic life out of this country but to you it is much ado about nothing. These liberals say TPP is worse and gave their reasons.

Again, I have no personal reason to dislike Obama. He is sort of cool, mildly humorous, a good father, and, unlike Bush, speaks in sentences. However, I consider him a lousy president on a par with W. Bush. That's why we have elections.

[rb336]

I don't know why you claim Congress has no right to know what is going on. The Chair of the Senate trade commission has top security clearance. Why shouldn't he know? What do you think this is, the Federal Reserve or Libya?

first off, show me where in the constitution it says that congress has to be kept informed of treaty negotiations. It doesn't. It gives ratification to the Senate by super-majority. all ya need to to do to block it is get a large minority to say "no."

you need to take a civics course

second, my interpretations aren't flimsy, they follow the letter of the law

[oladub]

first off, show me where in the constitution it says that congress has to be kept informed of treaty negotiations. It doesn't. It gives ratification to the Senate by super-majority. all ya need to to do to block it is get a large minority to say "no."

you need to take a civics course

second, my interpretations aren't flimsy, they follow the letter of the law

Perhaps you need a reading comprehension course. No where did I say " that congress has to be kept informed of treaty negotiations". I wrote, "Why shouldn't he know?" "Why shouldn't?" is not the same as "has to be". I questioned why you wrote that Congress has "NO right" and mentioned that Congress has recently been pressured into signing huge unread bills with short notice. I am concerned that Congress is similarly being railroaded into such action; perhaps willingly. I also notice that the media and right wingers have been silent about this TPP bill Obama is trying to stuff down our throats which you referred to as "mush ado about nothing".

Back to the Constitution. "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States" and only Congress "shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises" and "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations". Ultimately, it comes down to a supermajority of the Senate voting yes or no but your contention was that Congress has "NO right" not that it comes down to a vote. Maybe you can explain how Congress is supposed to make decisions if it has no right to know what is going on and therefore no input. Didn't Obama promise the most transparent administration? Yet you want to keep Congress in the dark on this one and insisted that they had no say when Obama far exceeded anything the UN authorized.

I could keep going on this. Every day something new from Obama. President Obama just legislated, without the consent of Congress and contrary to law, that up to 800,000 illegal aliens be allowed to stay here occupying US workers' jobs. More and more, he operates as a dictator. He conducts his own war, tries to railroad us into a corporatist free trade agreement detrimental to US workers, and decided to employ illegal aliens instead of Americans; all without the consent of Congress. I must have missed when Obama's Enabling Act was passed. Maybe he just decided to pass that too without Congress. Last week, you were claiming that treaties supercede the Constitution. This week, you are claiming that Congress has NO need to know what is being put into treaties.

My original two links for anyone getting into the TPP discussion late regarding what rb considers much ado about nothing:

US Trade Agreement Leak Reveals 'Radical New Powers' for Multinational Corporations
Obama administration agrees to deal that contradicts domestic agenda

International Treaty Negotiated In Secret – Hidden Even from Congressmen Who Oversee Treaties – Threatens to Destroy National Sovereignty See the Democracy Now video at the end of this.

[rb336]

First off, you said to ME "I don't know why you claim Congress has no right to know what is going on," which certainly sound like you are claiming that congress has a right to know -- it doesn't, constitutionally. The ONLY rights congress has are those.

Second, it is NOT the complaints about the treaty itself that I claimed was much ado about nothing, it was you carping about the process merely as a platform for your hatred of Obama.

let's put our differences aside and just tell our senators to say no.

[oladub]

First off, you said to ME "I don't know why you claim Congress has no right to know what is going on," which certainly sound like you are claiming that congress has a right to know -- it doesn't, constitutionally. The ONLY rights congress has are those.

Second, it is NOT the complaints about the treaty itself that I claimed was much ado about nothing, it was you carping about the process merely as a platform for your hatred of Obama.

let's put our differences aside and just tell our senators to say no.

The reason I wrote "I don't know why you claim Congress has no right to know what is going on" in post 256 was because you wrote "Congress has no right to be informed at every step" in your post 254. My question was in response.

I do not "hate' Obama. That is your potentially libelous and repeated characterization. I say 'libelous' because in this era of a stepped up police state, fingering someone and claiming they hate the President might be enough to stir up problems. I hope we aren't there yet. Five years from now these political discussion boards might be gone and we will have to argue about flowers or the best TV program. Again, Obama is personally an ok guy but a lousy president. Lousy presidents can be voted out of office as Bush was. No hate required. I wish I had reason to believe Romney will be a lot better. Getting caught writing a treaty adverse to US jobs and then allowing up to 800,000 foreigners to compete for remaining US jobs all in one week just doesn't hold a candle to Cal.

My original two links for anyone getting into the TPP discussion late :

US Trade Agreement Leak Reveals 'Radical New Powers' for Multinational Corporations
Obama administration agrees to deal that contradicts domestic agenda

International Treaty Negotiated In Secret – Hidden Even from Congressmen Who Oversee Treaties – Threatens to Destroy National Sovereignty See the Democracy Now video at the end of this.

I did write my senators about this days ago. I hope you have too. Neither Johnson nor Kohl have responded.

[rb336]

let's put our differences aside and just tell our senators to say no.

I'm not even bothering to read your post

[Papasito]

Saw the thread title "Winning The Future" and it reminded me of Education.

• This is the perception that a lot of folks on the left, schools, and the media want you to believe:

• This is reality:

The U.S. is the clear leader in total annual spending, but ranks 9th in Science performance and 10th in Math

http://mat.usc.edu/u-s-education-ver...d-infographic/

• Analysis: Plenty of money. Piss poor system.

[firstandten]

It looks like Obama got more of a bump from his convention than Romney did his. It also looks like the right wing pundits are starting to turn on him already. They are making statements like a real conservative given this economy would be ahead in the polls. These people are encouraging him to start giving specifics on what Romney would do to fix the economy.

If Romney does this the political box the Obama team is trying to put him in will competely cover him and he won't be able to escape out of.

[rb336]

considering Romney DROPPED after the RNC, doing better wouldn't be hard