Gutknecht hints he'll vote against CAFTA

DuluthSuperior ^

[Dog Gone]

Nothing in CAFTA gives any bureaucrats the right to take or distribute my money.

You can keep posting this stuff, but repeating it doesn't make it true.

[hedgetrimmer]

Nothing in CAFTA gives any bureaucrats the right to take or distribute my money.

Yes it does! It creates a "free trade" council that is to distribute "trade capacity building" funds that is funded by US tax dollars! How can you say this and claim you have read the CAFTA?

[texastoo]

CAFTA removes the tariffs on our exports.,

It will take CAFTA 20 years to remove all the tariffs. I wonder how much of tax payer money will go to the sugar WELFARE QUEENS of the CAFTA countries in 20 years?

[Dog Gone]

OMG, it creates a COUNCIL!!!!!

[texastoo]

Side deals????????????Tell me more about "free trade".

[Dog Gone]

80% of the tariffs are removed immediately.

Some tariffs remain, but are phased out gradually, on our farm exports.

That's because our farm exports would crush them. In other words, our farmers will benefit, but it's not desirable to let them do so the point of disrupting those fragile democracies.

My feeling is that no welfare should go to welfare queen sugar farmers of any country, including our own.

[hedgetrimmer]

Bush is only offering to do that because of the whining American sugar farmers who are already protected from being competitive

As opposed to the whining transnational corporations who want the full force of the US government and the beneficence of the US taxpayer to subsidize their relocation in foreign countries that might not be conducive to business if they didn't have the help of the federal government and the US taxpayer to pay the way for them?

[Dog Gone]

Tell me more about farmers demanding welfare here in the US. That's what this is.

[Dog Gone]

Okay, explain how Cingular is going to get my tax money in order to enter the central american market which has previously been a government monopoly on telecommunications.

Explain the transfer payments, because you've been making this argument for months and I truly don't understand your reasons for doing so.

Spell it out and then we can talk about it.

[hedgetrimmer]

OMG, it creates a COUNCIL!!!!!

That acts with the authority of an elected government even thought it isn't one. If you can't see how this harms your authority as a soveriegn citizen of this country, maybe you should dust off an old civics book and read up. There are also plenty of new writings that show in detail how the proliferation of unelected councils is undermining our form of government.

[texastoo]

The farmers here are not getting this money.

Should subsidizing other countries with US taxpayer money be a part of CAFTA? Did Bush say that he is doing this because of whinning US farmers or are you reading something into this?

[hedgetrimmer]

Problem is, it is true. You can look up the GAO reports to see how much is being spent and see it with your own eyes, if you care to learn the truth.

I think you just want to make a buck and you don't care about this country or its citizens, or you would stand with us to defend our rights.

[hedgetrimmer]

In other words, our farmers will benefit, but it's not desirable to let them do so the point of disrupting those fragile democracies.

In other words, our farmers have a competitive edge over Central America, but they cannot exercise it to stay in business. On the other hand, the central American countries are not going to get their hands tied because they can underbid our labor and land costs, are they? Who is being advantaged by this treaty?

[Dog Gone]

That acts with the authority of an elected government even thought it isn't one.

No it doesn't. That is just BS. It acts within the framework of the agreement, one that we can withdraw from with six months notice, btw. You never seem to mention that.

[hedgetrimmer]

In globalese a "framework" is government regulation.

[Dog Gone]

I'm not reading anything into this. Opposition to CAFTA comes from the commies, the John Birchers and the domestic sugar producers.

Bush can't buy off the Birchers or the commies, but he can buy off the sugar farmers.

[atlanta67]

""Sounds like a guy waiting until CAFTA has enough votes to pass then he will cast an empty no vote.""



Bingo...the real story here is CAFTA likely has the votes to pass

[Dog Gone]

In your world, any agreement with another country is a surrender of sovereignty.

[swampfox98]

CFR's Plan to Integrate the U.S., Mexico and Canada by Phyllis Schlafly, July 13, 2005

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has just let the cat out of the bag about what's really behind our trade agreements and security partnerships with the other North American countries. A 59-page CFR document spells out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter."

"Community" means integrating the United States with the corruption, socialism, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada. "Community" is sometimes called "space" but the CFR goal is clear: "a common economic space ... for all people in the region, a space in which trade, capital, and people flow freely." The CFR's "integrated" strategy calls for "a more open border for the movement of goods and people." The CFR document lays "the groundwork for the freer flow of people within North America." The "common security perimeter" will require us to "harmonize visa and asylum regulations" with Mexico and Canada, "harmonize entry screening," and "fully share data about the exit and entry of foreign nationals."

This CFR document, called "Building a North American Community," asserts that George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin "committed their governments" to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" and assigned "working groups" to fill in the details.

It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet "vigilantes" on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona.

A follow-up meeting was held in Ottawa on June 27, where the U.S. representative, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, told a news conference that "we want to facilitate the flow of traffic across our borders." The White House issued a statement that the Ottawa report "represents an important first step in achieving the goals of the Security and Prosperity Partnership." The CFR document calls for creating a "North American preference" so that employers can recruit low-paid workers from anywhere in North America. No longer will illegal aliens have to be smuggled across the border; employers can openly recruit foreigners willing to work for a fraction of U.S. wages.

Just to make sure that bringing cheap labor from Mexico is an essential part of the plan, the CFR document calls for "a seamless North American market" and for "the extension of full labor mobility to Mexico."

The document's frequent references to "security" are just a cover for the real objectives. The document's "security cooperation" includes the registration of ballistics and explosives, while Canada specifically refused to cooperate with our Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).

To no one's surprise, the CFR plan calls for massive U.S. foreign aid to the other countries. The burden on the U.S. taxpayers will include so-called "multilateral development" from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, "long-term loans in pesos," and a North American Investment Fund to send U.S. private capital to Mexico.

The experience of the European Union and the World Trade Organization makes it clear that a common market requires a court system, so the CFR document calls for "a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution." Get ready for decisions from non-American judges who make up their rules ad hoc and probably hate the United States anyway.

The CFR document calls for allowing Mexican trucks "unlimited access" to the United States, including the hauling of local loads between U.S. cities. The CFR document calls for adopting a "tested once" principle for pharmaceuticals, by which a product tested in Mexico will automatically be considered to have met U.S. standards. The CFR document demands that we implement "the Social Security Totalization Agreement negotiated between the United States and Mexico." That's code language for putting illegal aliens into the U.S. Social Security system, which is bound to bankrupt the system. Here's another handout included in the plan. U.S. taxpayers are supposed to create a major fund to finance 60,000 Mexican students to study in U.S. colleges. To ensure that the U.S. government carries out this plan so that it is "achievable" within five years, the CFR calls for supervision by a North American Advisory Council of "eminent persons from outside government . . . along the lines of the Bilderberg" conferences.

The best known Americans who participated in the CFR Task Force that wrote this document are former Massachusetts Governor William Weld and Bill Clinton's immigration chief Doris Meissner. Another participant, American University Professor Robert Pastor, presented the CFR plan at a friendly hearing of Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee on June 9. ***************************************************

Just to refresh memories of what CAFTA will bring to America.

[texastoo]

I expected more out of you than this post of name calling.

Pathetic!!!!