Posted on 06/13/2015 6:58:07 AM PDT by TNMOUTH
Maybe some of you FREEPERS who bash Cruz for supporting TPA and who hold Jeff Sessions up as being a new hero for Americans....
Can you tell me WHY he supported CAFTA? Doesn't CAFTA give back door access to illegal immigration? Doesn't this hurt the American worker?
Inquiring minds want to know.
I support Cruz and will likely vote for him. My post history is pretty clear on it. However, his dalliance with TPA, TAA, TPP and all that is WRONG.
As far as I know, you are the first one that has brought up CAFTA. To me, Sessions (who in the past has also done some dumb $hit IMO) doesn’t enter into it. I can think for myself and I know that this whole TPA and pact thing is wrong, especially with the tyrant we have running this country.
Here you go. Full Trade Record here. Includes some goodies:
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Jeff_Sessions_Free_Trade.htm
I thought this one was interesting. I didn’t think TPP even included China.
Vote to give permanent Normal Trade Relations [NTR] status to China. Currently, NTR status for China is debated and voted on annually.
Good luck. The Cruz bashers are out in force this week. What I would like to hear is just who their preferred alternative is. They’ve very quiet on that subject.
They are cowards...they won’t say
Sessions does enter into it though...because so many are now hailing him as the savior.
My point is that even Sessions has had dalliances with bad trade deals...
Attacking Sessions doesn’t address the substance of TPA and TPP. These are bad bills that must be defeated.
They are cowards...they won’t say
++++
Well then I think it is time for the many Cruz (and Walker) supporters to start calling them on that.
So, Cruz Bashers: Who should be our next President?
Well, I’m not one of the “so many”. I can support Cruz and still condemn his actions on this at the same time.
The point at which I depart from him depends on how many instances of the these departures occur.
Their standard reply is that there is NO ONE good enough to vote for.
Unfortunately Cruz became the monster for the frightened mob on Maple street.
Obama got what he wanted and the democrats are lining up with outstretched hands to take payment to complete the transaction. He’ll lose most of the republicans but gain more of the democrats.
We would have been better served by dragging the process out and making it better or slowing it to a crawl.
Yeah, lets fast track normal relations with a country that just committed a huge act of war against the United States.
This might give Cruz an out. He can now claim to be against TPP because we didn't know about this act of war regarding the information hacking when he supposedly (no one knows for sure since revealing who went into the secret room is also a crime) went into the secret room to read it.
That might work.
But Cruz voted for TPA which puts TPP on a fast track where it is only subject to an up or down vote. That is essentially a vote for cloture on the TPP. Cruz has said dozens of times that the vote for cloture is the important vote. If you vote for cloture, then you are voting for the bill - even if you later vote against it.
Based on Cruz's prior statements, he can't claim to not have supported TPP when he voted to approve TPA. Well, he can "claim" it, but the fact of the matter is that he "owns" it.
So we are supposed to replicate the same mistake on TPP and TPA. CAFTA is based on the same failed neoliberal NAFTA model, which has displaced family farmers in trade partner countries, exacerbated the "race to the bottom" in labor and environmental standards and promoted privatization and deregulation of key public services.
CAFTA proponents promised that the deal would bring prosperity to Central America, causing violence and immigration to the United States to decline. The opposite has happened. Central America is facing unprecedented levels of gang and drug-related violence, and immigration from Central America to the United States has surged. Evidence suggests that CAFTA itself has contributed to the economic instability, feeding the region's increase in violence and forced migration.
Not attacking Sessions....but we can ask questions.
I know some of you are sensitive when people ASK questions. I am not attacking his character, so it wasn’t an attack. Surely, you understand the difference.
My point of the vanity was that so many on here, I am sure you included, we lauding St. Sessions for doing the “right thing here...even though he hasn’t made the bill public either...and yet, he has a past regarding BAD trade deals.
On this point I can completely agree. There is NOTHING about this whole TPA, TPP, TAA, TIA whatever that cannot wait for 18 months.
Was the anti-American OBAMA the president when Sessions voted for a bad trade deal?
TPA was there before now...was it not?
Cruz didn’t vote to make it happened. My understanding is that TPA was simply renewed with this vote? I could be wrong, though.
The people most upset by this are Cruz supporters, so attacking them isn’t helping. Who is the preferred alternative? There really isn’t one, Cruz was the big hope.
So the ball is in Ted’s court to explain himself. This is a bad bill and his support for it makes no sense. He really needs to get out front and speak to his supporters on this.
Does it matter? Regardless of who was President, it gave him FAST TRACK powers!
In January 2002 U.S. President George W. Bush declared CAFTA as a priority and received “fast track” authority from Congress to negotiate it. Negotiations began in January 2003, and agreement was reached with El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua on December 17, 2003, and with Costa Rica on January 25, 2004. That same month, negotiations began with the Dominican Republic to join CAFTA.
Perhaps you should just consult Obama or
Heidi Cruz, VP at Goldman Sachs for Trade Deals,
to improve your globalist “understanding”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.