Obama to amend NAFTA - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 08:09 AM

Obama plans on re-negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA. At one point during the primary he was criticized by the Clinton campaign regarding one of Obama's "aids" saying one thing to a Canadian representative behind closed doors and Obama saying the opposite during a campaign rally in Ohio. Obama often talks about corporations that move jobs overseas, but some of those companies have moved jobs to Canada and Mexico and have good reason to move jobs. Also, during the last debate Obama showed a lack of understanding regarding trade with Columbia. I am concerned about Obama's lack of clarity regarding NAFTA and free trade. I imagine Canadians are also.

Quote:

Canada and the European Union will move closer to freer trade on services today with a commitment to start formal talks next year on an "economic partnership" designed in part to ease Canadian trade dependence on the beleaguered U.S. economy.

reportonbusiness.com: Ottawa, EU seek new trade pact

Quote:

For one thing, Canadian exporters are learning -- again, and to their chagrin -- that there's a great cost in having too many eggs in one basket. Nearly 90 per cent of our trade is with the U.S., and when that market tanks, we suffer serious collateral damage.

Time for a trade deal with European Union

Quote:

Peru and Colombia, frustrated by slow region-to-region free trade talks between the EU and South America's four Andean countries, have formally asked Brussels to pursue swifter bilateral negotiations with them. The free-market presidents of Peru and Colombia made the proposal this month, trade officials told Reuters, underscoring their split with Bolivia and Ecuador, whose leftist leaders are more wary of liberalising trade with Europe.

So, as Obama talks about "protectionism" to save jobs, others are working on opening markets for trade. Where is Obama going to lead us? Are labor unions going to drive his agenda? Is his obsession with corporations moving jobs from one place or another due to business reasons going to cloud his judgment regarding the real issue of keeping American workers and business competitive in the world?

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 08:29 AM

ace...you need to change the title of your latest Obama policy critique.....Obama to Amend NAFTA?

Obama cant amend NAFTA on his own.

What he does want to do is strengthen the labor and environmental side agreements. Mexico wants to redo the agricultural components and Canada has issues with the timber.

So they may sit down and talk. Why is that so threatening to you?

In terms of Obama's "lack of understanding regarding trade with Columbia"....he understands that the right wing government of Colombia (not Columbia) has to stop the government-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in the country before he would consider a trade agreement.

Whats wrong with that?

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

ace...you need to change the title of your latest Obama policy critique.

Obama cant amend NAFTA on his own.

Acknowledged.

Quote:

What he does want to do is strengthen the labor and environmental side agreements. Mexico wants to redo the agricultural components and Canada has issues with the timber.

What is his goal?

Quote:

So they may sit down and talk. Why is that so threatening to you?

Obama has a bias against American business in my view. I think Obama will primarily do what unions want. I don't think Obama has thought the issues through.

Quote:

In terms of Obama's "lack of understanding regarding trade with Columbia"....he understands that the right wing government of Colombia (not Columbia) has to stop the government-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in the country before he would consider a trade agreement.

Whats wrong with that?

Nothing. However, I think we can use our "diplomacy" skills to move the issues forward. Why would Obama talk to the leaders of a country like Iran and not be willing to sit with Columbia.

Also, remember our nations history. We have been far from perfect regarding labor/union issues. To expect perfection from a country like Columbia seems unreasonable.

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

However, I think we can use our "diplomacy" skills to move the issues forward. Why would Obama talk to the leaders of a country like Iran and not be willing to sit with Columbia.

Thats what Obama wants to do...talk to Uribe, Colombia's (not Columbia) president about his workers rights abuses and state sanctioned violence before "fast tracking" a trade agreement.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 08:50 AM

Is the Obama plan the best course of action for American workers? I say it is not. I think the issue of trade with Columbia is worthy of "fast tracking". I guess we disagree.

guyy · 10-21-2008, 09:02 AM

First, it's not as if NAFTA is something sacred in Canada. Canadian capital was happy with NAFTA, but Canadians were not. And why should it have been? It allows for morefreedom of capital & commodities, but not for labour. As such, it has all the disadvantages of the EU with much fewer of the advantages. Yes, the Tories & Liberal representatives of Canadian business interests would be annoyed, but there are quite a few Canadians who would welcome re-negotiation. Look what passing NAFTA did for Brian Mulroney.

It's also interesting that you're using the "oh, but it will annoy the Canadians & the Peru & Colombia" argument. I thought RealAmericans did not care how people in other countries feel. "Country First", right?

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 09:05 AM

It appears he doesnt care much about state-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in Colombia. Bush and McCain certainly dont.

Uribe is a thug, but that doesnt matter either.

filtherton · 10-21-2008, 09:14 AM

I think Ace is working on some sort of spitball method of Obama criticism. You just have to keep tossing shit against the wall, and hope something sticks. The nice thing for him is that he has convinced himself that the fact that nothing is really sticking is proof that his criticisms are valid.

It's an interesting form of self validation, notable for its circular nature.

ratbastid · 10-21-2008, 09:23 AM

New rule: After the THIRD TIME IN ONE THREAD you misspell the name of a country, you're not allowed to say that anyone else doesn't understand foreign relations with that country.

Correlary: If you're unable to pronounce "Ahmedinejad" and don't understand that he's NOT the top leader of Iran, you're not allowed to be President.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guyy

It's also interesting that you're using the "oh, but it will annoy the Canadians & the Peru & Colombia" argument. I thought RealAmericans did not care how people in other countries feel. "Country First", right?

I don't care about their "feelings", I care about their actions. If I were in Canadian leadership, I would lessen my dependence on the US. That is not my point, my point is that Obama seems not to understand the broader issue or the consequences of his words and actions. It is not the US doing what it wants while other nations do nothing. Understanding and anticipating the moves of others is critically important to leadership. Like McCain said to Obama a few times, "you don't tip your hand".

It is also interesting how liberals fail to understand that in the war against terror that we fight against an enemy that employs a strategy and is willing to change that strategy to try to win while liberal will think you have to fight the war the way we originally planned, i.e. fight in Afghanistan while the enemy is fighting in Iraq.
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 02 : 01 : 07-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

It appears he doesnt care much about state-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in Colombia. Bush and McCain certainly dont.

Uribe is a thug, but that doesnt matter either.

Seems to be a bit of an extreme conclusion, given what has been written and said on this topic by me and others. Do you really think your conclusion is a reasonable one?
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 02 : 02 : 44-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

I think Ace is working on some sort of spitball method of Obama criticism. You just have to keep tossing shit against the wall, and hope something sticks. The nice thing for him is that he has convinced himself that the fact that nothing is really sticking is proof that his criticisms are valid.

It's an interesting form of self validation, notable for its circular nature.

Sorry, I did not add a P.S. here about how I am not concerned about what you folks think about me. I am more interested in what you think about the issue.

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Seems to be a bit of an extreme conclusion, given what has been written and said on this topic by me and others. Do you really think your conclusion is a reasonable one?

ace...I was simply responding to what was written....just my opinion.

But as far as Bush/McCain and Colombia free trade agreement...absolutely, my conclusion is reasonable...they do not support pre-conditions re: Colombia's state-sanctioned violence against trade unions and NGOs.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

But as far as Bush/McCain and Colombia free trade agreement...absolutely, my conclusion is reasonable...they do not support pre-conditions re: Colombia's state-sanctioned violence against trade unions and NGOs.

Perhaps I have not read the same information you have seen given your certainty. I have seen conflicting reports of violence against union members, including information like this:

Quote:

Deaths among Colombia's union members plummeted even farther – from a high of 275 in 1996 to only 39 last year. That's a drop of 86 percent in a decade.

And that's 39 killings (a figure the AFL-CIO itself cited last month) out of about 800,000 union workers – or about five murders per 100,000 union members. How does that constitute "a de facto death sentence" – when the murder rate for the population as a whole is about eight times higher?

In fact: "The Colombian government," notes Reuters, has "tripled spending on protection for unionists, human-rights activists and other at-risk individuals and established a special unit to prosecute crimes against trade unionists."

To make its case, the AFL-CIO cites data going back 22 years – but Uribe only took office in 2002.

Michael Fumento: Unions' Big Columbia Lie.

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Perhaps I have not read the same information you have seen given your certainty. I have seen conflicting reports of violence against union members.....

In the last few years, there have been more assassinations of trade union and NGO officials in Colombia than any country in the world...I think that comes from US State Department figures....even with the Bush/Rice "spin" on improvements in Colombia.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

In the last few years, there have been more assassinations of trade union and NGO officials in Colombia than any country in the world...I think that comes from US State Department figures.

The data I cited said the rate was 5 per 1,000 union workers in 2007. Thirty-nine people total. The article also indicates that the Colombian has tripled spending on protecting union leaders. Perhaps this issue is not as clearly defined as you suggest.

dc_dux · 10-21-2008, 10:34 AM

IMO, more needs to be done as a pre-condition to a trade agreement....not only with violence against trade unions and NGOs, but with other basic rights, most notably voting rights free from government intimidation.

guyy · 10-21-2008, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I don't care about their "feelings", I care about their actions. If I were in Canadian leadership, I would lessen my dependence on the US. That is not my point, my point is that Obama seems not to understand the broader issue or the consequences of his words and actions.

You're a rather late convert to the cause of foresight in public decision-making. We could have used you back in 2003.

Sorry Ace, the stuff about linking up with the EU has been under discussion for a while, a couple of years at least. It has hit the news in the past few days because the pro-EU-Canada pact just released the report from their study. If anything, i'd say the motivation for this was more Fearless Leader's fuck you attitude to the rest of the world than Obama.

In any case, there is a lot of opposition to free trade in Canada, Mexico, and the US. In no way is it a done deal.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guyy

You're a rather late convert to the cause of foresight in public decision-making. We could have used you back in 2003.

Sorry Ace, the stuff about linking up with the EU has been under discussion for a while, a couple of years at least. It has hit the news in the past few days because the pro-EU-Canada pact just released the report from their study. If anything, i'd say the motivation for this was more Fearless Leader's fuck you attitude to the rest of the world than Obama.

In any case, there is a lot of opposition to free trade in Canada, Mexico, and the US. In no way is it a done deal.

I am concerned about the future not the past. I am concerned about being in the "worst economic crisis, sine the depression" (which I don't agree with) comments. I am concerned about Obama's rhetoric.

roachboy · 10-21-2008, 10:56 AM

i am tired to these information-free zones that surround these posts, the only logic of which is "i aceventura do not like obama"

that's nice ace----but as soon as you move off your subjective position, it becomes obvious that you haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about. let's take colombia for a moment---i looked around to find an overview---this one will do. it's from 2006, and outlines the conflicts that were triggered by the looming "free trade" agreement with the united states in colombia.

Quote:

Colombia's Indigenous Caught in the Conflict
Section: UPDATE

COLOMBIAN PRESIDENT ÁLVARO URIBE AND his many supporters in and out of government often point out that under his "Democratic Security" strategy implemented since 2002--with the unwavering support of the White House--the government has been able to regain control of over 500 municipalities, bringing a level of security to the Colombian people not felt in generations. Indeed, this was one of the clarion calls of Uribe's successful campaign to get legal approval of a re-election bid for an unprecedented second term in office.

But as is the case with most things in Colombia these days, the optimistic assertions about security resonate primarily with the urban middle and upper classes, which remain largely isolated from the daily reality of the conflict. For peasant and indigenous communities in the countryside, the security promised by Uribe is at best a mixed blessing, if not a step back for their communities. Such is the case in the southwestern department of Cauca.

Northern Cauca was recently dubbed by the Army as "Cagu´n II" in reference to the demilitarized safe haven of five municipalities former President Andrés Pastrana granted the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) during the 1999 peace talks. In a highly publicized special Security Council session of the Army in early July 2005, officials described in great detail how, over the last 20 years, the FARC had converted this region in the heart of indigenous territory into one of its most important strategic outposts. According to the military, the FARC has built a 350-kilometer network of clandestine roadways throughout the mountainous region to facilitate passage between rebel camps, as well as a training camp for new guerrilla recruits.

Last April, in one of the most dramatic manifestations of the current security situation, the FARC and state security forces clashed in an intense battle in the town of Toribío that lasted 11 days, resulting in the deaths of a 9-year-old boy and several police and soldiers. When it was over, local Army commanders proclaimed that the guerrillas had been "neutralized," and that security had arrived for the people of the region. Currently in Toribío, as is the case in other small towns of northern Cauca, the National Police maintains a massive presence. Highly fortified bunkers are scattered at different strategic points, and M16-bearing soldiers are stationed at just about every corner of the town. Although the guerrillas still maneuver relatively freely through the unpaved roads between the region's many small towns, the large police presence in places like Toribío presents at least a temporary deterrent to another attack from the FARC. Nevertheless, the mostly indigenous residents of the region uniformly express a greater sense of tension and insecurity.

"For us, both the guerrillas and the military are unwanted, because they directly interfere with the community process we have been working on here for more than 30 years," said one community leader who asked not to be identified, a Nasa Indian who works in the mayor's office in Toribío.

The indigenous leadership has been on edge since early July, when at the aforementioned Security Council session the Commander of the Army's Third Brigade, Gen. Hernando Pérez Molina, stationed in Cali, stated unequivocally that "in that area of northern Cauca, there existed a co-government where the FARC used resources from the European Union that were directed to the Nasa Project for the guerrillas' own benefit." Pérez Molina was referring to the Nasa Project, a multifaceted community development plan started by the Nasa people in 1980 in the municipality of Toribío that encompasses three indigenous reserves--San Francisco, Tacueyo and Toribío. The Nasa Project incorporates political consciousness-raising, community organizing, and economic development based on sustainable agriculture and conservation. It also includes traditional education, health and family assistance programs--all under the rubric of an unwavering demand for indigenous autonomy and respect for their collective rights.

The Nasa Project is recognized internationally as an important community development program that has had outstanding success in reducing poverty through the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. In 2004, it was awarded special recognition from the Equator Initiative of the United Nations Development Program.

According to representatives of the Nasa Project, by linking their organization with the FARC, Gen. Pérez Molina was unilaterally trying to discredit its autonomy, thus exposing its leaders to reprisals from the state, and eventually, as in other parts of Colombia, even paramilitary operations.

"First of all, we have never received any money from the European Union," said the mayor of Toribío, Arquímedes Vitonás. "But more importantly, we are completely independent of any of the actors in this conflict, and we have been extremely diligent about accounting for all the resources that come to the community. For the General to say there is a co-government with the FARC is very irresponsible."

The tone of the general's comments is consistent with President Uribe's position regarding the alternative social programs of indigenous communities throughout the country, which on more than one occasion the President has described as illegal in their claims of autonomy from the state. Since taking office over three years ago, Uribe has been irked by the indigenous movements' claims of autonomy--particularly as they relate to his national security programs.

Early on in his term, Uribe proposed a series of constitutional reforms that would have chipped away at some of the hard-fought guarantees that indigenous people won in the 1991 Constituent Assembly that rewrote the Constitution. The President charges that some of the guarantees threaten the authority of the central government. Among these constitutional provisions is the recognition of indigenous territorial entities as autonomous zones where indigenous councils, or cabildos, have ultimate jurisdiction. Uribe's counter-reforms would have limited the scope of what are currently recognized as indigenous territories.

ANOTHER SOURCE OF FRICTION between the government and the indigenous communities has been the ongoing negotiations of a Free Trade Agreement (its Spanish acronym being TLC, for Tratado de Libre Comercio) with the United States. These trade negotiations are seen as the main reason Uribe and his supporters in Congress have been pushing new forest management laws that would hand over control of resources on indigenous lands to major corporate interests that stand to benefit most from the trade accord. Indigenous, peasant and Afro-Colombian organizations, along with the trade union movement, have been actively mobilizing against the trade agreement. These groups argue the agreement will devastate local economies, while "handing over sovereignty to multinational corporations who do not recognize the authority of indigenous communities," as Héctor Mondragón, an activist who has worked for years with Colombia's peasant and indigenous communities, told me recently.

Last August, the second of a series of nonbinding public referenda, sponsored by indigenous and peasant organizations, was held in northern Cauca on the TLC. A similar consulta was held in March as a symbolic gesture to allow the communities to express their feelings about the trade accord. On both occasions, over 95% voted to reject the agreement. Nevertheless, the government gave it little weight. One minister described the outcome as the result of "dark forces" influencing the indigenous and peasant communities--a not-so-veiled reference to the guerrillas.

As this organizing against "free trade" agreements continues, the government finds itself struggling to implement its Democratic Security strategy in indigenous territory. Two controversial components of this strategy have been the creation of part-time "peasant armies" in rural areas and the establishment of a network of civilian informers who ostensibly collaborate directly with state forces in helping weed out guerrillas. The approach of involving civilians in local security has heightened tensions between the government and a growing number of "peace communities," which have declared their "active neutrality" in the conflict.

This confrontation has been especially acute in Cauca, where the indigenous leadership has been adamant about refusing to cooperate with any of the armed actors in their territories, citing the constitutional provision protecting indigenous autonomy The FARC's attempt to consolidate its control in the region has inevitably led to clashes with state forces, leaving the indigenous communities caught in the middle. The vicious attack in Toribío was seen as the most extreme example of this type of violent escalation.

"The attack of last April was no surprise for us. We saw it coming as the National Police began stepping up its presence in the municipality in the weeks prior to April 14th," said Toribío native Mauricio Casso, who is the administrative coordinator of the Association of Indigenous Councils of Northern Cauca (ACIN). "The FARC really messed things up with the attack on the town, alienating everybody in the community with their brutality But the state forces were just as much part of the problem. Their presence now opens the community up to even more reprisals from the guerrillas."

This is precisely why the indigenous leadership resented what they described as President Uribe's grandstanding in the immediate wake of the Toribío attacks: when he arrived to the town, Uribe openly challenged the FARC "cowards" to confront the state forces. The President and several members of his cabinet also used the incident to condemn the FARC for violating indigenous autonomy and threatening their rights.

"Those same people in the government who said the indigenous community's rejection of the free trade agreement was the manipulation of 'dark forces' suddenly became indigenous protectors," said José Domingo Caldon, a Kokonuco Indian and representative of the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC). "The same people who have opposed indigenous self-government denounced the FARC's violation of our autonomy and said we should bring in the Army to protect us, to bring us democratic security."

Indigenous leaders fear this may be the beginning of a much more intensified process of violence in the months to come. "In Urabá [in the 1990s] we saw something similar, where the military accused banana workers of collaborating with the guerrillas, leading to the introduction of paramilitaries who waged an all-out war against the people," said Carlos Andrés Betancourt, the indigenous governor of Jambaló, a town about an hour further up the mountain from Toribío. "You began to see targeted assassinations against the leadership, with complete impunity, followed by massacres and the forced displacement of entire communities. I hope it doesn't come to this in northern Cauca."

Betancourt adds that the indigenous community's high level of organization has up to now prevented a similar level of displacement, but how long they will be able to walk the security tightrope remains to be seen. "Will the people be able to withstand another battle like that in the future? This is another question entirely," he said.

The indigenous leadership in northern Cauca, through the ACIN and other indigenous organizations in the area, has consistently made three demands in order to stabilize the situation in their territories: a complete withdrawal of all armed actors from the municipalities and indigenous territories; an immediate cease-fire and end to hostilities; and a negotiated end to the conflict between the government and the FARC rebels.

It is unlikely that any of these community demands will be met anytime soon. President Uribe has made it clear that state security forces will remain anywhere he deems necessary in order to confront "illegal activity." In September, state security forces actually dashed directly with the indigenous communities in the town of Caloto, where Nasa leaders occupied a piece of land that was supposed to have been given over to the indigenous communities years ago as part of a settlement reached after the state was found complicit in a 1991 massacre of 20 Nasa Indians. A number of indigenous activists were wounded in the week-long assault, and despite a negotiated outcome to the land takeover acceptable to the indigenous communities, doubts remained about the government's intentions. (For example, one government official again hinted of "nefarious forces" behind the indigenous community's action.) Just a few weeks after the assault, President Uribe invited some indigenous activists to participate in one of his famous "community councils," or consejos comunitarios, in Bogotá. Most of the major regional organizations boycotted the session, accusing the President of trying to divide the community by not inviting representatives of the ONIC.

"The social organizations of the Nasa people in northern Cauca are the most important popular social movements in the entire country right now. They're the only social sector that to a certain extent has been able to defend its rights and maintain a certain level of recognition on the part of the state," said Mondragón. "And this will continue so long as there is an organization and a movement that makes sure these rights are recognized and respected. How will these rights be taken away? As in other recent examples in Colombia, through violence and attacks on the leadership."

These attacks have already begun. In late October, after receiving a series of threats on their lives, a number of community activists from the ACIN were forced to take extra security precautions, including Alcibiades Ulcué, a Nasa leader who in 2004 was kidnapped by the FARC, Ezequiel Vitonás, the chief counsel of the ACIN, and Manuel Rozental, the co-coordinator of the ACIN's Communication Project, who actually left the country and is now in exile in Canada. The threats have come from pro-government paramilitaries, left-wing guerillas, and state security forces. Clearly, democratic security for the indigenous communities in northern Cauca has been far from what the government promised. "It's the calm of la Chicha," one community resident said, referring to the traditional corn-fermented drink popular in the region. "On the surface everything seems normal, but below it, things are bubbling over, ready to explode."

Colombia's Indigenous Caught in the Conflict. By: Murillo, Mario A., NACLA Report on the Americas, 10714839, Jan/Feb2006, Vol. 39, Issue 4

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

i am tired to these information-free zones that surround these posts, the only logic of which is "i aceventura do not like obama"

Correction - I, aceventura, do not like Obama, 2x.

Quote:

Colombia's Indigenous Caught in the Conflict. By: Murillo, Mario A., NACLA Report on the Americas, 10714839, Jan/Feb2006, Vol. 39, Issue 4

Is the fact that there is conflict in Colombia the primary point of the article?

filtherton · 10-21-2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

Sorry, I did not add a P.S. here about how I am not concerned about what you folks think about me. I am more interested in what you think about the issue.

Yes, except that when someone offers their thoughts about the issue and your thoughts happen to disagree with theirs you seem to be content to respond with some variation of either "Oh, woe is me, if only you poor liberals could stop being so smug you'd see how right I am," or "You're just saying that because I'm being critical of Obama," or "But I heard a liberal once say X and you're saying something that I can contort into seeming as though it disagrees with X, so you, as a spokesperson for all liberals, are clearly lying."

roachboy · 10-21-2008, 11:09 AM

just read it, ace.

there's every reason to renegociate any number of bush-period bilateral trade agreements, particularly with latin american countries. colombia is a particularly brutal situation, and gives a pretty good idea of *some* of the reasons this is the case.

you seem to rely on arbitrary infotainment patched together for dilletantes by dilletantes.
but there is no necessary connection between being conservative and not having accurate information.
it is a choice. you have made a choice to adopt a politics that does not require you know anything to speak of about a question before you take a position on it. populist conservatism even tries to make a virtue of not knowing what you're talking about and not caring about that but having positions anyway.
we've been subjected to 8 years of the consequences of this sort of "understanding."
it's turned out real well.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Yes, except that when someone offers their thoughts about the issue and your thoughts happen to disagree with theirs you seem to be content to respond with some variation of either "Oh, woe is me, if only you poor liberals could stop being so smug you'd see how right I am," or "You're just saying that because I'm being critical of Obama," or "But I heard a liberal once say X and you're saying something that I can contort into seeming as though it disagrees with X, so you, as a spokesperson for all liberals, are clearly lying."

I have just started doing that recently. My natural inclination is to respond in-kind. In a 12 step process, I am at step #2, responding with sarcasm. My goal is to get to a point were I can be attacked and turn the other cheek. DC has been most helpful.
-----Added 21/10/2008 at 03 : 21 : 26-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

just read it, ace.

there's every reason to renegociate any number of bush-period bilateral trade agreements, particularly with latin american countries. colombia is a particularly brutal situation, and gives a pretty good idea of *some* of the reasons this is the case.

you seem to rely on arbitrary infotainment patched together for dilletantes by dilletantes.
but there is no necessary connection between being conservative and not having accurate information.
it is a choice. you have made a choice to adopt a politics that does not require you know anything to speak of about a question before you take a position on it. populist conservatism even tries to make a virtue of not knowing what you're talking about and not caring about that but having positions anyway.
we've been subjected to 8 years of the consequences of this sort of "understanding."
it's turned out real well.

See, now here is an example. I am going to ignore it. Opps, sorry more sarcasm. Roach, I love your tough love. Keep up the good work, you are making me a better man.

filtherton · 10-21-2008, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I have just started doing that recently. My natural inclination is to respond in-kind. In a 12 step process, I am at step #2, responding with sarcasm. My goal is to get to a point were I can be attacked and turn the other cheek. DC has been most helpful.

Perhaps you skipped the first step? The one where you recognize the role you play?

roachboy · 10-21-2008, 11:35 AM

ace--it's sometimes exasperating, this m.o....that's all.

in this little sandbox, it's all sentences and what you decide to impute to them.

in 3-d i'm sure that we're both pussycats.

aceventura3 · 10-21-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filtherton

Perhaps you skipped the first step? The one where you recognize the role you play?

I have done that. I have stated several times that I am an egotistical, unforgiving, black and white thinking, SOB. I understand and accept what I am. For those who can get past that, we can engage in some interesting exchanges.

smooth · 10-21-2008, 02:11 PM

they're not that interesting, dude.

10-21-2008, 08:29 AM	#2 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	ace...you need to change the title of your latest Obama policy critique.....Obama to Amend NAFTA? Obama cant amend NAFTA on his own. What he does want to do is strengthen the labor and environmental side agreements. Mexico wants to redo the agricultural components and Canada has issues with the timber. So they may sit down and talk. Why is that so threatening to you? In terms of Obama's "lack of understanding regarding trade with Columbia"....he understands that the right wing government of Colombia (not Columbia) has to stop the government-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in the country before he would consider a trade agreement. Whats wrong with that? __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

10-21-2008, 08:50 AM	#5 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	Is the Obama plan the best course of action for American workers? I say it is not. I think the issue of trade with Columbia is worthy of "fast tracking". I guess we disagree. __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

10-21-2008, 09:05 AM	#7 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	It appears he doesnt care much about state-sanctioned violence against trade unions and populists groups in Colombia. Bush and McCain certainly dont. Uribe is a thug, but that doesnt matter either. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-21-2008 at 09:07 AM..

10-21-2008, 10:34 AM	#15 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	IMO, more needs to be done as a pre-condition to a trade agreement....not only with violence against trade unions and NGOs, but with other basic rights, most notably voting rights free from government intimidation. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

10-21-2008, 11:09 AM	#21 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	just read it, ace. there's every reason to renegociate any number of bush-period bilateral trade agreements, particularly with latin american countries. colombia is a particularly brutal situation, and gives a pretty good idea of some of the reasons this is the case. you seem to rely on arbitrary infotainment patched together for dilletantes by dilletantes. but there is no necessary connection between being conservative and not having accurate information. it is a choice. you have made a choice to adopt a politics that does not require you know anything to speak of about a question before you take a position on it. populist conservatism even tries to make a virtue of not knowing what you're talking about and not caring about that but having positions anyway. we've been subjected to 8 years of the consequences of this sort of "understanding." it's turned out real well. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 10-21-2008 at 11:17 AM..

10-21-2008, 09:02 AM	#6 (permalink)
guyy Addict Location: Cottage Grove, Wisconsin	First, it's not as if NAFTA is something sacred in Canada. Canadian capital was happy with NAFTA, but Canadians were not. And why should it have been? It allows for morefreedom of capital & commodities, but not for labour. As such, it has all the disadvantages of the EU with much fewer of the advantages. Yes, the Tories & Liberal representatives of Canadian business interests would be annoyed, but there are quite a few Canadians who would welcome re-negotiation. Look what passing NAFTA did for Brian Mulroney. It's also interesting that you're using the "oh, but it will annoy the Canadians & the Peru & Colombia" argument. I thought RealAmericans did not care how people in other countries feel. "Country First", right?

10-21-2008, 09:14 AM	#8 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	I think Ace is working on some sort of spitball method of Obama criticism. You just have to keep tossing shit against the wall, and hope something sticks. The nice thing for him is that he has convinced himself that the fact that nothing is really sticking is proof that his criticisms are valid. It's an interesting form of self validation, notable for its circular nature.

10-21-2008, 09:23 AM	#9 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	New rule: After the THIRD TIME IN ONE THREAD you misspell the name of a country, you're not allowed to say that anyone else doesn't understand foreign relations with that country. Correlary: If you're unable to pronounce "Ahmedinejad" and don't understand that he's NOT the top leader of Iran, you're not allowed to be President.

10-21-2008, 11:35 AM	#24 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	ace--it's sometimes exasperating, this m.o....that's all. in this little sandbox, it's all sentences and what you decide to impute to them. in 3-d i'm sure that we're both pussycats. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-21-2008, 02:11 PM	#26 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	they're not that interesting, dude. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman