Commiefornia Gov. Brown Defies Trump on World Stage ; Signs Deal with China

Facts. Those thinge's are called coherently presented facts.

I do understand it may be disconcerting encountering them for the first time, but once you get used to using them, you will find it to be a better way. I promise.

I see...so you're just an asshole with a superiority complex.

You and I are not going to get along, on account of you being completely delusional AND an asshole.

I don't mind the asshole part, but a delusional asshole with a superiority complex is fkg intolerable.



--

Exactly, this was simply a cover for Brown's free vacation to China and commiefornian's bought it hook, line and sinker.

I hope this "nothing burger" gets him tossed in the hoosegow!

Of course California's neocommies do not intend
to abide by the environmental standards they
impose - by - by swat-team raids on American
businesses. That's WHY they want the Chinese
slaves to build their products; not American.
So-o progressive, California.

We know why you hate Trump, Brown: you don't
like the minimum wage you yourself so vigorously
pushed for.

states rights? WHERE'S A VOTE FROM CALIFORNIA VOTERS?

Thanks!

Oh c'mon now. It's not a "superiority complex" if true and accurate.
Do you hear me saying I'm better as a person in some way? Or just pointing out that I'm far more knowledgeable and skilled in one specific field of study because I have spent years of life towards that end in a formal and dedicated sense.

You wouldn't disregard and belittle a plumbers opinion about plumbing issues, would you? Would you think you "knew better" than an engineer about how to construct a bridge...would you?

So why would dismiss out of hand the factual, trained, credentialed, and educated statements of a different field of expertise when it's clear and obvious that it's probably more valid than your own since it's not your wheelhouse?

There's no shame in that. It doesn't make you a bad person. I most likely don't have an equivalent knowledge about your chosen areas of expertise.

But why is this particular topic different for you?

That's a pretty solid reply.

OoO yes!

Cut all Federal payments to Cali, see how smart they act with

no food, no money, no SSI. Close all Federal offices

bye bye Cali

******************************

"things happen b4 15 may u stay china
brown cheat and go with putin and china
then brown putin china war against japan tiwan poeple with same eye shape"

******************************

I guess he is too stupid to realize how small and unintelligent it makes him look. Even the gooks revel in it.

Correct. Case in point. Even during the war there was little to interest in preserving the infrastructure for future use as armies do with things of strategic importance (think oil wells in Iraq).

...and after much (not ALL...but a lot) was salvaged for use to the west.

Very much the reason no professional historian I'm aware of considers the civil war to be about rail lines.
lol

Well thank you :)

I do what I can.

*sigh*
I swear my work here is never done.

#1. In real life the Constitution only prohibits states from enacting treaties with foreign powers. Although in fairness, it is customary that things like arms deals and large scale trade agreements also need a 2/3 majority at the Fed level, too.

#2. This neither, treaty, arms deal, nor trade agreement.

#3. States have always had the right to set their own environmental, laws, policies, rules, ordinances, etc so long as it was not LESS stringent than the federal stipulations which would supersede it in any court of law with a discussion about 30 seconds long.

#4. If you read more than just the headline...the very same article you are so outraged about takes great care to note that this wasn't binding in any way or can even be considered an agreement.

#5. By rule of law, even a county, municipality, private corporation, or single individual could have done the same with Chinese government without issue.

#6. Take away the irrational fear of the name "Jerry Brown" and you're left with a governor who had a conversation that resulted in at MOST a memorandum of understanding that his state and the Chinese counterpart should try and cooperate on environmental stuff but requiring or obligating neither party to do so.

#7. Even if it did...it still wouldn't supersede Federal agreements in place that might be more stringent.

So...what are you all bent out of shape about? That two guys from different countries sat in a room and said they should try and help one another if possible?

But you see...your knowledge of actual history in this case is inaccurate.

You are simply regurgitating what someone else taught you and what they taught you is incorrect.

I'll also add that you were the one that did type that you had a clearly superior knowledge base...no one else typed that. Just you. So please, take your wounded puppy dog act somewhere else. There is no sympathy for that play here.

It was after all, you that assumed you were the most educated person on this forum, while simultaneously insulting others with your assertions. This is an act of desperation for attention and reeks of youthful ignorance.



Perhaps, in between your ego stroking, you'd like to offer an actual opinion on the ORIGINAL topic of this thread, before you derailed it into a "I'm so smart because I typed it" mess.


--

You're misinformed on so many levels, it's astonishing.

-It's not possible to get a get a history degree by "regutlrgitating" knowledge. Your statement makes it painfully obvious that you imagine university level coursework is the same as high school level, thus further substantiating my point that this is plainly not your wheelhouse. Aside from the couple of watered down gen-ed history classes just about everybody has to take, you get an "F" on anything you do that "reflgurgitates" someone else's' analysis. You have to conduct your own research and rely heavily on primary documents.

-I'm assuming nothing. Simply reading through the posts will indicate that one of the posters is not like the others. That being said, I cannot say by any stretch that I'm "the most educated" here. There could very well be someone with a PhD in mathematics who happens to misunderstand the past greatly, as it is not their expertise. However, in terms of history at least, I feel like I'm on really, really solid ground here.

-check out my post a little earlier if you'd like something more on-topic where I correctly pointed out that the very article that has so many people screaming "civil war!!" cites that the end result was non-binding. This makes it an "agreement" with a lower case "a"...like agreeing upon where to go to dinner tonight. Not an "Agreement" like one would have in a contractual sense.

Hence, there was nothing at all in least bit controversial that occurred...much less unconstitutional as some on here are asserting.

All this fuss over two guys from different countries who think it'd be cool if they could help one another out so there's less toxic shit in their backyards.

Civil war!! The Constitution!! Commies!!
lol

Perhaps my username is pretty accurate, huh?

Yes I believe so

I've been waiting years to pin brown going with China.

When I was a kid I remember my dad coming home making a cocktail turning on news and telling Jerry Brown off calling him fukin fuk idiot......then switching the news to star trek.


and now I do the same. Fuking fuk idiot!