Why won't Obama unseal the TPP?

Webb wasn't in the Senate at the time. Originally Posted by Ex-CEO
You are correct, Jim Webb was not elected to the U.S. Senate until 2006.

During his Senate campaign Webb was often critical of Shrubya. Shortly after he was elected, the following exchange occurred between the President and the Senator elect.

From Wiki:

On November 28, 2006, at a White House reception for those newly elected to Congress, Webb did not choose to wait in the line to have his picture taken with the president, whom Webb often criticized during the campaign. The president approached Webb later and asked him, "How's your boy?", referring to Webb's son, a Marine serving in Iraq. Webb replied "I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President." Bush responded, "That's not what I asked you. How's your boy?" Webb responded, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President." The Hill cited an anonymous source who claimed that Webb was so angered by the exchange that he confessed he was tempted to "slug" the president. Webb later remarked in an interview, "I'm not particularly interested in having a picture of me and George W. Bush on my wall."

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb
It should be noted, that our very own LLIdiot, was "all in" with the ill fated and ill advised, Spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Both then and now!

Indeed, his silence is deafening!
  • shanm
  • 06-09-2015, 10:03 AM
Actually, no. The Democrats all knew what was going on and fell all over each other to show their support. No one wanted to appear "soft on terror" no matter how stupid the plan was. There was one lone voice opposing our involvement. Ron Paul. I think Dennis Kucinich joined him. Maybe a handful of others, but Hillary was all for it. I don't recall if Jim Webb signed on or not. He may have had more sense than that. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
I hardly call this "fell all over"

United States House of Representatives[edit]

215 (96.4%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted for the resolution.
82 (39.2%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution.
6 (<2.7%) of 223 Republican Representatives voted against the resolution: Reps. Duncan (R-TN), Hostettler (R-IN), Houghton (R-NY), Leach (R-IA), Morella (R-MD), Paul (R-TX).
126 (~60.3%) of 209 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.


The only Independent Representative voted against the resolution: Rep. Sanders (I-VT)



United States Senate[edit]



58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting for the resolution are: 42% of Democratic senators (21 of 50) voted against the resolution. Those voting against the resolution are: 1 (2%) of 49 Republican senators voted against the resolution: Sen. Chafee (R-RI).
The only independent senator voted against the resolution: Sen. Jeffords (I-VT)



Those that would still vote for it LexusLover, JD and our resident Tranny, LustyLadyBoy Originally Posted by WTF
Looks like CoG was wrong again. He must be used to that by now.
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
You are correct, Jim Webb was not elected to the U.S. Senate until 2006.

During his Senate campaign Webb was often critical of Shrubya. Shortly after he was elected, the following exchange occurred between the President and the Senator elect.

From Wiki:

On November 28, 2006, at a White House reception for those newly elected to Congress, Webb did not choose to wait in the line to have his picture taken with the president, whom Webb often criticized during the campaign. The president approached Webb later and asked him, "How's your boy?", referring to Webb's son, a Marine serving in Iraq. Webb replied "I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President." Bush responded, "That's not what I asked you. How's your boy?" Webb responded, "That's between me and my boy, Mr. President." The Hill cited an anonymous source who claimed that Webb was so angered by the exchange that he confessed he was tempted to "slug" the president. Webb later remarked in an interview, "I'm not particularly interested in having a picture of me and George W. Bush on my wall."

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb Originally Posted by bigtex
Well, he's not all bad. Certainly has more sense than Clinton.
I hardly call this "fell all over" Originally Posted by shanm
Looks like CoG was wrong again. He must be used to that by now. Originally Posted by WombRaider
COIdiot never lets the facts get in the way of the lies he wants to tell.
LexusLover's Avatar
COIdiot never lets the facts get in the way of the lies he wants to tell. Originally Posted by bigtex
Sounds like you.

You "projecting" again to deflect from your fundamental dishonesty.
Sounds like you.

You "projecting" again to deflect from your fundamental dishonesty. Originally Posted by LexusLover
Was this before or after you would still invade, knowing what you know now?
Sounds like you.

You "projecting" again to deflect from your fundamental dishonesty. Originally Posted by LexusLover
I will be more than happy to answer your question, once you answer the question that you have been running away from for the past few weeks.

That being, knowing what we know now, was the Spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq worth it?

One of your heroes, Rummy, admitted today that expecting a democracy in Iraq was "unrealistic."

I would call that a really big Oops Moment for all of you Shrub Apologists, wouldn't you?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/donald...QDBHNlYwNzcg--
The Trade Bill isn't about trade (for Obama); historically he has opposed free trade....The bill is about Obama trying to backdoor his agenda and continue with his transformation of America.

- More executive power to open border policies and legalization.
- Furtherance of his climate change agenda and tax on carbon.
- Reduced American power in global affairs; the trade commission created under TPP will give emerging economies equal power in determining key global issues.
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
The Trade Bill isn't about trade (for Obama); historically he has opposed free trade....The bill is about Obama trying to backdoor his agenda and continue with his transformation of America.

- More executive power to open border policies and legalization.
- Furtherance of his climate change agenda and tax on carbon.
- Reduced American power in global affairs; the trade commission created under TPP will give emerging economies equal power in determining key global issues. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
And many Republicans are supporting him. When it comes to limiting freedom and giving up sovereignty, there is no difference between the parties. As far as I can tell, the only major party candidates opposed to the TPP are Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders. They, of course, are "unelectable".
I think Perry, Huckabee and Fiorina have said that not knowing what is in it makes it impossible for them to support approval of the TPP.

So, I think that would be a "No" vote from those 3 candidates.

Cruz's support for the TPP is a big disappointment.

And as usual, Clinton refuses to tell us her position on the TPP; but she does affirm her total support for "trade agreements."






And many Republicans are supporting him. When it comes to limiting freedom and giving up sovereignty, there is no difference between the parties. As far as I can tell, the only major party candidates opposed to the TPP are Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders. They, of course, are "unelectable". Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
Not looking good for the TPP. We will see.
Not looking good for the TPP. We will see. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
Here is hoping that TPP fails!
It did.