Senate republicans give Obama new powers, but they are still classified.
- Thread starter TenBears
- Start Date
Which was written by the dems and passed by them as well. The tpa is bipartisan and had mostly Republican backing, the dems seem to be trying to stop any and all bills that deal with trade (there are 3 or 4 of them)
Transmitted via Tactical Telecommunications Device.
Politics make for strange bedfellows and all that. It's a bad deal. We all know it, so I'm not sure why we're arguing the point.
So way back when NAFTA was up for vote they had a televised debate and I remember the exchange between Ross Perot and Al Gore.
Perot kept saying if you passed NAFTA the next sound you would hear would be a giant sucking sound as jobs left the US.
Gore stood up and voiced more reasons why NAFTA should be passed and then he said this, I remember it clear as day:
"Sure we will lose some manufacturing jobs but we'll gain new jobs, better jobs, hi-tech jobs".
What he didn't say was who would pay to retrain those displaced manufacturing workers to fill the new hi-tech jobs.
He also didn't say what they were going to do with the workers in their late 50's and early 60's were too old to make retraining costs break even.
I guess that's kind of why I figure this is just more of the same ol same ol.
Perot kept saying if you passed NAFTA the next sound you would hear would be a giant sucking sound as jobs left the US.
Gore stood up and voiced more reasons why NAFTA should be passed and then he said this, I remember it clear as day:
"Sure we will lose some manufacturing jobs but we'll gain new jobs, better jobs, hi-tech jobs".
What he didn't say was who would pay to retrain those displaced manufacturing workers to fill the new hi-tech jobs.
He also didn't say what they were going to do with the workers in their late 50's and early 60's were too old to make retraining costs break even.
I guess that's kind of why I figure this is just more of the same ol same ol.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/27/corporations-paid-us-senators-fast-track-tpp
This article has some good links, like how much a yes vote cost and the corporations behind the TPP.
The comments are great.
The vote on May 14th was merely for cloture. The vote last Thursday was the big one, and 5 Republican Senators voted against fast-tracking the TPP, please correct your story. They are Lee, Collins, Shelby, Sessions, and Paul. Why brand them all with the same broad brush? Why not give credit where credit is due?
This article has some good links, like how much a yes vote cost and the corporations behind the TPP.
The comments are great.
The vote on May 14th was merely for cloture. The vote last Thursday was the big one, and 5 Republican Senators voted against fast-tracking the TPP, please correct your story. They are Lee, Collins, Shelby, Sessions, and Paul. Why brand them all with the same broad brush? Why not give credit where credit is due?
Once again, a British news organization thoroughly embarrasses U.S. media outlets on reporting U.S. political intrigue.
Thought the same thing. There are no investigative reporters in the U.S. Press, only well trained lap dogs.
The last paragraph in the link says it all.
“How can we expect politicians who routinely receive campaign money, lucrative job offers, and lavish gifts from special interests to make impartial decisions that directly affect those same special interests?” Gidfar said. “As long as this kind of transparently corrupt behavior remains legal, we won’t have a government that truly represents the people.”
Therein lies the biggest problem with short term limits Dennis. If the politicians are in and out frequently, the most seasoned and knowledgeable people on capitol hill will be the lobbyists and their power and influence will be even greater. That scares the $%^# out of me(even though I know there are people like Thurmond, Feinstein, Hatch, Boxer, etc.). I think we definitely need some reform with regards to lobbying before we start term limiting our politicians.
Similar threads
