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 ...
Edit. The link is nothing. I hit paste by mistake.
100%
trade promotion authority is a huge issue, really... like abortion, illegal immigration and all that right... so when did this happen exactly
When has Trade Promotion Authority been talked about on FR before this month....
> “Ha! That’s exactly what you’ve done...with your R-E-P-E-A-T-E-D posts, asking the same (irrelevant) question about Sen Sessions...in ALL CAPS.”
Nothing wrobng with doing what I did. Readers are constantly entering and leaving the thread. The question was repeated in CAPS to help readers to know what the question was that the trolls kept avoiding.
> “Why did BOTH Cruz and Sessions vote FOR the S-E-C-R-E-T Iran deal? Why is Cruz the only C-O-N-S-E-R-V-A-T-I-V-E who *was* FOR the trade deal?”
I told you already my answer. Again my answer is “I don’t know, I don’t have ALL the facts”.
But I have obtained quite a few facts from the Ted Cruz campaign and from the Congressional Record. But I don’t have them ALL because they are secret.
> “You’re as guilty of S-P-A-M-M-I-N-G, as the guy you’re complaining about.”
SPAM is usually something not related to a subject like selling cosmetics or offering investment opportunities.
My posts were related because the issue is Ted Cruz’ integrity. So I challenged the anti-Cruz trolls about Jeff Sessions’ integrity on the Secret Iran vote. That’s fair game in my book because it shows you cannot judge a person by their decisions until you have ALL THE FACTS.
Now the question becomes:
WHY DO YOU SIDE WITH PEOPLE THAT DO NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS?
And a related question:
WHY DO YOU SIDE WITH PEOPLE THAT MAKE UP ABSURDITIES? For example, Ted Cruz is doing all this so that he and Heidi can collect a big bonus check from Goldman-Sachs. Is that kind of mindset what you want to be associated with?
I just hung on and waited, but it seemed my favorite candidate was wrong. I just didn’t understand the trade agreements enough to make an educated decision.
But here we have a good sign, actually: a leader who responds to sound reasoning from good people. That means Cruz is not a narcissist. That is one good sign.
Texans want TPA bad, but they want it for when a conservative is in the White House. And they also know they won’t get the votes later if a conservative is elected President.
From everything I know, Ted Cruz is in daily communication with his campaign and his most influential Texan constituents. I will seriously bet that he will not change his vote until he’s had a thorough conversation with his team, his advisers and his most influential constituents.
I have a call into his campaign to ask if his constituents are onboard with his changed vote. As I am a donor I usually receive callbacks or emails in a few days.
WE disagree about what a clean TPA Bill does and doesn’t do. Reasonable people can disagree on an issue. It’s what we do as Americans, sometimes.
It is best not to trust any politician. Cruz may be the best candidate in the field, but anyone who trusts him is a fool.
Thus says the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm, Jeremiah 17:5
Ahhh, so you’ve finally come out of the closet and endorsed someone.
But Ronald Reagan is dead, and won’t be running in 2016.
Instead of repeating one of your standard vapid posts, which we’ve all seen dozens of times, why don’t you tell us who you are supporting this time?
We know who you’re against. Who are you for?
I trust him. As far as I know the owner of this site who you just labeled as “stupid” still supports Cruz, as well.
No argument from me.
But applying the logic of that statement does not carry over to his foreign policy votes.
But it also does NOT condemn his foreign policy votes. Clearly, there is something in the SECRET Iran deal that Senator Jeff thought was worth voting YES on.
Would I condemn Senator Sessions for voting for a SECRET Iran deal that should have been a treaty?
No, I would not condemn him. Why? Because I don’t have ALL the facts.
So then why do you and others condemn Ted Cruz for something you don’t have ALL the facts on?
TPA was and is not secret. I read through it and I read the history of it. It’s been around for decades for good reason. It was killed by Harry Reid to keep GW Bush from using it. It was supposed to be reinstated but Boehner allowed liberal democrats to add amendments but prevented conservatives from adding amendments. So Ted Cruz changed his vote.
I trust Cruz. I also trust Sessions. But I am not going to condemn them on votes for which trolls try to create a frenzy and false narrative. I am going to wait for the facts.
One major problem with FReepers is the tendency to worship a human. Since many of us are religious, we should catch this in ourselves. Politicians (anyone running for office IS one, Donald) are fallible humans. We must revere PRINCIPLES and choose leadership from humans who get the closest to upstanding character and fight for (and explain to the laymen) PRINCIPLES, most of all for those enumerated in our Constitution.
Another thing politicians are not is our favorite sports team. We need to check our pennants and cheers outside the keyboard. We need, on FR, to agree on one thing: we want leadership the closest to a responsive, responsible constitutional conservative we can get. It’s not Joe FReeper against John FReeper. If you want a peeing contest, send John your home address and you can go into the woods and compare streams. We need discourse here: healthy arguments that are based on our mutual goal.
Neither Jesus, Moses, Elijah, nor the Almighty are running. It’s good we point out the good in a candidate, and it’s equally good to point out the bad. Like choosing a spouse, we can’t get all good. It’s how our candidate reacts to our seeing his bad sides that might help him overcome them.
Now you’re showing you’re not even qualified to be in the minor leagues. You may even have trouble in the little leagues. Best try for the pony leagues and start from there.
He read TPA. So did I. He voted against it because of the liberal amendments that were included in the House version.
I want EX IM bank renewal retired, too.
Just as I condemn Cruz for voting to give Obama power when he was elected to stop Obama!
This isn't that complicated.
The votes are the facts!
Unfortunately, when Obama is out, the Senate will likely be held by Dems. That was the main reason Cruz wanted TPA, because it was so close to Obama’s exit and would have been there for a Republican President.
Convenient don’t you think. He now knows it will pass without him so he changes his stance.
This has always been about backroom deals and if he didn’t see that from the beginning....
Bottom line is he can now vote the way the callers have demanded he vote. I’ve always said I want to know how they’ll vote if it’s a tie. I now know on this politician.
Flame away.
You and you other blind defenders of Cruz aren't helping his cause by digging in.
Cruz didn’t attack anyone. He disagreed with Sessions on a clean TPA Bill. He never spoke in any way a word against Senator Sessions. They just disagreed on their interpretation of the first TPA Bill.
It is a big issue when the GOP gives unlimited trading power to Obama when they were elected to stop Obama!
This is a treasonous vote by the GOP!
Watch Obama come out to speak to the media about his great victory with a big smile on his face.
Cruz was elected to stop that from happening!
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.