Posted on 06/23/2015 4:29:02 AM PDT by Leto
As a general matter, I agree (as did Ronald Reagan) that free trade is good for America; when we open up foreign markets, it helps American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers. But TPA in this Congress has become enmeshed in corrupt Washington backroom deal-making, along with serious concerns that it would open up the potential for sweeping changes in our laws that trade agreements typically do not include. Since the Senate first voted on TPA, there have been two material changes. First, WikiLeaks subsequently revealed new troubling information regarding the Trade in Services Agreement, or TiSA, one of the trade deals being negotiated by Obama. Despite the administration’s public assurances that it was not negotiating on immigration, several chapters of the TiSA draft posted online explicitly contained potential changes in federal immigration law. TPA would cover TiSA, and therefore these changes would presumably be subject to be fast-track. When TPA last came up for a vote, both Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)80% and I introduced amendments that would have barred fast-track treatment for any trade agreement that attempted to impact immigration law. Two other Republican senators objected, and we were both denied votes on our amendments. Instead, the House inserted substantially weaker language in related legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
No.
Conservatives DO NOT support Obama.
Conservatives DO NOT support SECRET ObamaTRADE.
Conservatives DO NOT support Giving Obama Power (GOP).
Conservatives DO NOT support faux, part-time,
or Obama-supporting two-faced "conservatives".
> “Constantly harping on some vote by Senator Sessions on an entirely different issue makes you look silly, if not incoherent.”
Ha ha ha ha ha! ‘Silly’, ‘incoherent’. The name calling begins! You’re done! You have nothing of substance or value to contribute.
And yet you refuse to answer the question:
WHY DID SENATOR SESSIONS VOTE ‘Y-E-S’ ON THE ‘S-E-C-R-E-T’ IRAN DEAL?
And anyone asking you this question will be called ‘silly’. ‘incoherent’. LMAO!
And you will not answer the question because you would then have to apply your worthless comments against Senator Sessions on the same basis.
BY NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION YOU HAVE DEFEATED YOUR OWN ARGUMENT!
I was quoting the OP....who brought up *laughing*.
None of this is funny, is it? At least not to me.
My defining issue? Not hardly. But, certainly one that’s gotten my (and, obviously many others) attention. I’ll question every candidates stance(s), on the ones that I don’t agree with...and wholeheartedly support them on the issues we DO agree on.
Once again troll, and I’m not going to quit on this thread or any thread, answer this question:
WHY DID SENATOR SESSIONS VOTE ‘Y-E-S’ ON THE ‘S-E-C-R-E-T’ IRAN DEAL?
And you will not answer the question because you would then have to apply your worthless comments against Senator Sessions on the same basis.
BY NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION YOU HAVE DEFEATED YOUR OWN ARGUMENT!
Q: Why did all but ONE Senator ~ and, no, it wasn’t Sen Cruz ~ vote YES on the S-E-C-R-E-T Iran deal?
http://therightscoop.com/ted-cruz-why-i-voted-yes-for-corker-iran-bill/
Learn to read. Saying a particular behavior makes you look silly or incoherent is not calling you a name, but characterizing specific behavior. It assumes you might be capable of rational behavior in other circumstances.
It's you calling those who don't buy your silliness a troll. That is name calling.
And I repeat myself:
Constantly harping on some vote by Senator Sessions on an entirely different issue makes you look silly, if not incoherent.
And, again, you are doing Cruz no favors. Good day.
The most alarming part is some people think he opposed it because he’s “Human”.
This is exactly how America got to where we’re at today.
And the spin spins on from the pro-TPA FReepers without even a pause now that Cruz says he opposes it.
No one is bullying me into who I will support....it is like 2008 all over again. I am sick of these pukes who think they can tell us who to vote for, who think they get to decide for everyone else what is conservative. Screw them!
I will support who I determine will be best for the country, the one who earns my vote.
Good question. And there are I am sure many answers.
But that question does not get Senator Sessions off the hot seat, the same hot seat that the anti-Cruz trolls are trying to put under Senator Cruz.
You can’t have it both ways.
BFL
Mine too. It's sad that it's such a horrible malware receptacle. Ironic because before he was a famous conservative pundit Breitbart was the guru who laid out the basic designs for several high traffice sites including Drudge and HuffPo.
Were he still alive I'm sure the site would work much better. They have hired some excellent reporters and personalities, but seem sorely lacking on technical chops. It's a mess.
> “Learn to read. Saying a particular behavior makes you look silly or incoherent is not calling you a name, but characterizing specific behavior. It assumes you might be capable of rational behavior in other circumstances.”
QUESTION FOR ANTI-CRUZ TROLLS: WHY DID SENATOR SESSIONS VOTE ‘Y-E-S’ ON THE ‘S-E-C-R-E-T’ IRAN DEAL?
You will never answer the question because you would then have to apply your worthless comments against Senator Sessions on the same basis.
BY NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION YOU HAVE DEFEATED YOUR OWN ANTI-CRUZ TROLL CAMPAIGN!
It’s the same question you’ve been posting, repeatedly, on this thread...about Sen Sessions...when, in fact, Sen Cruz ALSO voted YES.
Sen Sessions has been the LONE voice in the Senate....warning the likes of Sen Cruz about the inherent dangers of this trade debacle.
Apples to oranges, FRiend. YOU can’t have it both ways.
(And, fyi, your chiding and snark is wearing a thin. You come across as the final expert on a subject, and you’re not. None of us are. Ease up on the tone, please. Thanks.)
Can you add me to your Cruz ping list please? :)
That’s what I was thinking. Glad he’s finally on the right side of this one.
BOOM, ding ding ding we have a winner.
Why those three? As voters we get to compare Ted to the whole list of candidates. Jeb is reasonable to compare to, he's still in first place. Trump and Christie are behind Ted, so they are not a real factor in the race yet. Christie has not even announced, and may not.
Potential Cruz supporters are probably comparing him with the SIX people ahead of him in the polls: Bush, Walker, Rubio, Carson, Huckabee and Paul. Not the 8 behind him: Christie, Perry, Trump, Fiorina, Santorum, Kasich, Graham & Jindal.
Of those in front of him Paul has consistently and clearly spoken against TPA/TPP. So have Carson and Huckabee. Jeb is presumably for it, even if he says he's not, the Bush Brand and trade deals are synonymous. Rubio voted for TPA, like Cruz, but unlike Cruz appears to still be pro TPP.
Rubio's plan seems to be to wrest the GOP establishment baton away from Jeb, and run from that side, not from the right. To keep his establishment cred he has to support Free Trade. So, I don't find that puzzling at all.
Yes, and I'm sure you said the same thing about Kerry when he "reversed" himself and hillary when she "reversed" herself. And obama when he "reversed" himself. SMH on the hypocrisy.
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.