Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Ted Cruz is Right on TPA
Reclaim DC ^ | May 22, 2015 | David Serenda

Posted on 05/27/2015 8:26:59 AM PDT by SoConPubbie

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-209 next last
To: TNMOUTH

I think you’ve nailed it. Why are so many folks on this site siding with Dems on this issue?


161 posted on 05/27/2015 5:51:56 PM PDT by conservativejoy (We Can Elect Ted Cruz! Pray Hard, Work Hard, Trust God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: conservativejoy
Why are so many folks on this site siding with Dems on this issue?

One could just as easily ask why Republicans are siding with Obama.

The answer, of course, is because the Republicans are generally the first ones to be bought off by corporate lobbying. While I have never voted for a Democrat in my life I realize (regardless of my preferred presidential candidate) that free trade is not in my best interest.

162 posted on 05/27/2015 6:36:46 PM PDT by Roland (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Ok well explain to me how trade was different then compared to now?


163 posted on 05/28/2015 12:30:21 AM PDT by Lil Flower (American by birth. Southern by the Grace of God! ROLL TIDE!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
If Cruz is for this, then this is where he and I differ. It remains to be seen if this is a deal breaker for me. I am not in favor of any legislation, the details of which are unknown before enactment.

Enactment is not until the final agreement has been published for 60 days. And, then, only if Congress, having heard the reactions to the final agreement, votes to enact.

IOW, Cruz and the rest have voted to let Obama negotiate an agreement, subject to lengthy guidelines, in the hopes that he will somehow rise above being Obama and produce an agreement worthy of enactment. If not, then not!

The upside exceeds the downside.

164 posted on 05/28/2015 1:05:08 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

What you describe with the 60 day published period and congress voting to enact sounds somewhat reasonable. But the devil is in the details.

Just recently, I heard on the radio or read that the action by Congress following the 60 publish period is not a binding action on the President, but more like a resolution or statement. Do I have a way to verify this? Does anyone else have a way to verify to the contrary?

That’s what is so troubling about this process. Legislation locked up in the basement somewhere in a place a Senator is allowed to “go read” but not allowed to get a copy. It stinks, frankly. There’s a simple way to clear it all up. Publish it in its proposed entirety, and not just some early version without all the points that really matter.

That’s all I’m looking for. It was all anybody really wanted with ACA. But we never got it, and we are relegated to continual bad news about what Obama has decided on how we get our healthcare.


165 posted on 05/28/2015 2:02:30 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
There’s a simple way to clear it all up. Publish it in its proposed entirety, and not just some early version without all the points that really matter.

That's the problem. The agreement doesn't yet exist. You can't publish what doesn't exist.

What was voted upon was an authorization for the executive branch to negotiate an agreement, subject to a list of requirements.

Then, once the final agreement has been reached, Congress gets to vote it up or down after the final version has been aired out for 60 days.

Upside: If Obama plays it reasonably straight, we have an advantageous agreement, yielding net economic growth.

Downside: Obama lards the agreement with progressive nonsense, and Congress votes it down.

166 posted on 05/28/2015 2:23:07 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

I am NOT talking about publishing some future trade agreement. I am talking about publishing the legislation that precedes it. Just publish it and let us all read it is all I’m asking.

I guess one could paint and perfume it all with interpretations or intentions, but the clearest way to prove whether or not Congress’ judgment of any future trade agreement is BINDING on the President or not. I recall that it is not. You say differently. All I want is something in writing (the legislation that defines it).

How difficult is that? Just the words on paper. I just don’t trust anything those people say or do any more.


167 posted on 05/28/2015 2:33:45 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: astroaddict

Another manufacturing worker here. I’ve been working 60+ hours/week since the beginning of January. Don’t let anyone grind you down. They’re likely sitting on their asses and collecting SS checks.


168 posted on 05/28/2015 5:21:43 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"Then you are dooming our economy and killing off jobs."

What we are doing now isn't? LOL

169 posted on 05/28/2015 5:26:26 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Manufacturing is manufacturing whether it is a stone axe or a space shuttle.


170 posted on 05/28/2015 5:37:40 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: AlanGreenSpam
Study economics before you post.

Study history and politics before you post.

171 posted on 05/28/2015 5:41:56 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: conservativejoy
Cruz is proposing deregulation across the board. It is one of his major policy issues.

And it appears to have the paleos in a tizzy. They want the government to help them.

172 posted on 05/28/2015 5:51:28 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: central_va
What we are doing now isn't? LOL

And if you reverse course, specifically go protectionist, and do the opposite do you actually believe those jobs will come back?
173 posted on 05/28/2015 6:23:35 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I agree with free trade. The confusion I have on the issue as it stands today is WHY Republicans think Obama can be trusted with this power....they are about to hand him an almost blank check on this part of the economy.

He has proven himself SINGULARLY UNTRUSTWORTHY on every issue: domestic AND FOREIGN. This bill uniquely combines the two.

Somehow, I am certain, Valerie will instruct her charge to use this newfound power in an abusive manner.

Frankly, this is how I view the NSA and other government surveillance....like any weapon, in the hands of moral men it is useful. In the hands of immoral men, these weapons are used to oppress law abiding citizens.

So I would like to hear why BO can be trusted on free trade.


174 posted on 05/28/2015 7:36:58 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Why would Congress give give any power to Obama? Here comes lower wages more illegals and less for US Citizens. Citizens who work will give many more of there $$$ for those who will not work.


175 posted on 05/28/2015 8:06:06 AM PDT by ducks1944 (GOD Bless the USA .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

You know you’re really in trouble when someone says, “We are from the government and we are here to help you.”


176 posted on 05/28/2015 8:32:48 AM PDT by conservativejoy (We Can Elect Ted Cruz! Pray Hard, Work Hard, Trust God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: TNMOUTH; All
“Don't bother with these freepers..they are totally wacked out..calling Cruz a traitor and treasonous because they have an agenda. He voted his conscience. They can accept this vote or not, but since multiple posts and stories say the same thing, and these people still call BS, you know they never supported Cruz. Cruz is the only Conservative with a chance to win..these trolls know it.”

TNMOUTH, you and I are in complete agreement on Ted Cruz. Cruz believes in everything that is important to me, and I'm supporting him. I may NOT always agree with the candidate I'm supporting, but on the whole, Cruz speaks for me. If those of you out there are expecting perfection in your presidential candidate, remember that no one and nothing is perfect.
177 posted on 05/28/2015 9:59:10 AM PDT by itssme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Falls right in-line with his support for increasing the number of H1B Visas (the OUTSOURCING Visa) by 500% - which this treaty will help enable.

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2900126/ted-cruz-the-presidential-candidate-who-wants-to-increase-the-h-1b-cap-by-500.html

So he is doubling down on his obvious desire to cater to corporate donors by enabling them to import cheap labor to undercut American workers.

And if you think the H1B abuse is restricted to just Information technology and Computer jobs, you’ve got another thing coming...take a look at the list of H1B elligible occupations:

http://www.h1base.com/content/h1boccupations


178 posted on 05/28/2015 10:09:12 AM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

H1B Ping...


179 posted on 05/28/2015 10:09:23 AM PDT by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio; ColdOne; Yossarian; knittnmom; sf4dubya; Mr. Peabody; wally_bert; dowcaet; ...
H-1B ping. Let me know if you're not on the list and want to be added (or are and want to be removed).
180 posted on 05/28/2015 10:52:48 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-209 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson