Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has been busy selling the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), intended to fast-track the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and related deals, to Americans, along with others like Rubio, Boehner, and Ryan. Let’s do some due diligence on how he’s selling it and explore this incomprehensible explanation during an interview yesterday, . . . “Historically, since FDR virtually every president has had fast track authority. What fast track provides is simply if a free trade agreement is negotiated, that Congress will vote on it up or down without amendments, and history has demonstrated for the last 80 years that the only way to get free trade agreements adopted is to have fast track. That if there is no fast track, free trade agreements do not end up being negotiated.”
I’ve already noted why this Obama/Jarrett treaty cannot be supported, however, forget Obama, what do we learn here about Cruz and Ryan?
These two, and some of their Republican colleagues, may have been capable lawyers, however, they evidence a serious lack of intuitive verve. How can they possibly equate any preceding administration in America, with the one controlling the Oval Office today? No Administration has ever trampled the constitution, or disrespected the other branches of government more. Arousing historical precedents and the previous existence of “fast track authority,” does not and should not apply here. America has never been here. The national and global economic, political and social conditions that exist currently have no prior equivalent.
The above quotation indicates that Cruz and his small crowd assume that a free trade agreement is needed. The insanity of that assumption defies logic. Every nation on earth wishes it could trade with America. By handing an apologist community organizer and one with such a dismal track record, the power to negotiate a global deal, is guaranteeing a negotiation from a point of weakness. Cruz and Ryan would have no way to control, influence, minimize or circumvent any future action by this Administration on this treaty. They are “trusting” this President. How is that possible?
Cruz and Ryan demonstrate a complete lack of understanding when it comes to international trade, economics and business. They ideological and sweepingly affirm their support of “free trade,” which is a catch-all term of little significance here. The implications of such a blind support will be detrimental to America. They are very much mistaken if they think that they will be able to curtail future Obama belligerence with Congressional action — are they not aware that he holds VETO power?
The Cruz assertion that without fast track there can be no negotiated agreement, is further proof that he is right out of it and is simply repeating talking points. Fast tracking and secrecy are not fundamental underpinnings to negotiations of trade treaties that involve all major trading nations. America, the world leader, is negotiating against dictatorships and communist regimes. Is there good reason that it cannot dispatch whatever terms it wishes to the negotiating table? If there was any sign, or even a crumb of evidence that a deal was being negotiated that would be of benefit to America, it would not be kept under wraps from everyone including most of Congress.
CEOs of companies such as AT&T, IBM, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, eBay, Cisco, Intel and Xerox are supporting this intended treaty. Does that mean they know something? Or is it that they do what they’re told by this Administration in order to curry favour, similar to what we have endured for 6 years? Or perhaps they support the fact that this “deal” will surreptitiously include immigration carte blanche to Obama, and prevent Congress to effectively regulate immigration. Cheaper imported labor at home, and pretences of open internet markets abroad are no foundation for a strategy to build a strong America.
Whether it is a complete lack of intuitive capacities, or the lack of familiarity and understanding with the state of international trade, Cruz and Ryan are willing to surrender to narcissism and dictatorship, both abroad and at home. Sadly, we have to look to Pelosi for balance on this process. That in itself feels crazy.
A constituent of the vast baby boomer generation with a career which has been fortunate to know the ponderous corporate worlds, as well as the intimately pressurized, and invigorating entrepreneurial domains of high tech and venture capital, I have harvested my share of mistakes meandering through corridors of enterprise from Silicon Valley, to London and endless, colourful, sometimes praetorian points in between. The voyage has provided an abundance of fodder for a pen yielding to an inquisitive keyboard, a foraging mind, and a passionate spirit.
Whether political or business or social or economic or personal, is it not all political? It is a privilege to write, and an even greater privilege to be read by anyone, and sometimes with the wind at my back the writing may occasionally be legible. I do not write to invite scorn, nor to invite respect, but if I get really lucky the writing can stimulate thinking. I also write for the very selfish purpose of animating my own processes, and engaging the best of what life offers. Above all, whether biting fire or swatting shadows, I am grateful to be gifted the freedom to write and publish whatever flows down to the keyboard. To all those who enabled this freedom, and to all those standing guard to preserve it, I am indebted.
Two points (both in agreement that Cruz and Ryan seem ignorant of how this would work under Obama).
First, the UNIONS opposed this bill because they KNEW it would cost them jobs. The bill included re-training for union workers who lose their jobs (as if we don’t already have over 25 re-training jobs’ programs paid by the federal gov’t.). Unions had been pushing for non-union workers to be paid higher than union workers just so the unionizing of fast food would SAVE the bosses money. This trade agreement would level the playing field by simply allowing newly unemployed ex-union workers learn how to flip burgers for a few weeks.
Second, this secret agreement allows for the creation of a commission of international traders whose decisions could over-ride any and all opposition from Congress, even going so far as to fine the USA into compliance. Obama could act the innocent here while getting everything he wanted via bypassing Congress (and the Courts) if he has to.
@Nanny G: #1
Obama has shown zero knowledge, interest or action in building and motivating entrepreneurial activity which is a building block in the foundation of our society.
What he sees in a trade treaty is a major step toward world governance. You’re quite right, Nanny G., that international traders and bankers will have capacity to submit the U.S. into compliance with rules we don’t yet know of, but can assume are not intended to strengthen America. America’s first presidential apologist is going full-tilt to make America suffer for his asinine percept that it has been a colonialist power.
And yet, insanely, people like Ryan, Rubio, and Cruz, support this ruination of the only society left with the potential to maintain any sign of human freedom.
I admit to being, if not alarmed, at least very anxious of this legislation. Any legislation that gives power to nations or groups that are not bound by the US Constitution should be viewed with the highest level of skepticism. Additionally, based on the disgusting results of previous legislastion passed before anyone knew what was in it, I find it extremely foolhardy for ANYONE to support legislation that has it’s provisions hidden from the public. The conjecture that this legislation would give supraconstitutional power on issues of immigration and the false AGW nonsense – with the ability to levy fines on US businesses for noncompliance – makes passage of such a law utterly insane.
I do not understand why candidates like Cruz, and politicians like Ryan are so supportive of this law, and it makes me very wary that I am apparently on the same side as the contemptibly untrustworthy Pelosi, as well as the reprehensible unions. It is simply mindboggling that after all the lawsuits over Obama’s repeated breeches of constitutional limits that anyone with conservative leanings would contemplate voting in favor of a treaty that would give this would be tyrant more power.
If I was of a conspiratorial mindset, I would seem hardpressed not to view the support of this bill by the likes of Cruz and Ryan as traitorus collusion. And I say that as an erstwhile Cruz supporter, up to this point.
I think the phrase, ”free trade” works like magic on some Republicans.
It doesn’t matter to them that this agreement is NOT really a ”free trade” agreement.
The commission’s ability to over-ride our laws and even fine us for not making adjustments to our laws is ignored.
The other fact, that so many small countries can ban together and over-ride us (like those 57 Islamic countries do in the U.N.) is also lost on the likes of Ryan and Cruz.
They need to wake up and read the thing with eyes to what it could do, not what they hope it will do.
@Pete: #3
Pete, . . . clearly one of the objectives by O/J is to ram the implementation of a “Treaty” that will be outside the purview of the American lawmakers and the Constitution. It still looks like they will succeed.
@Nanny G: #4
The U.N. is the perfect parallel — comprised of dictatorships and communist governments — it is the body from which O/J will launch their next global efforts — post the Presidency. . . . Whatever will put the U.S. in its place.
Ryan, Cruz, Rubio, Boehner and the rest of the supporters are now a write-off. It’s baffling and very disappointing, particularly the first 3. We knew long ago that O/J sold out to the Too-Big-To-Fails, but to see these 3 cave in out of ignorance, is pathetic and destructive.
There is a need to further shoutout for all to hear — this treaty is an assault on self-determination.
@James Raider:
What is O/J?
Never mind, I see it.
My reasons for opposing this legislation is that Obama is ‘for’ it. It is a ‘secret’ agreement. Negotiated agreements only have a yes or no vote. If the vote is not what the president wants, he can veto it. It will open the door to illegal immigration. It will displace many American workers. Extensive funding will be needed to handle increased unemployment. Jarrat is for it.
On the other hand, the Dimocrats are against it. I think that is a ‘union’ thing. Whatever, I think in this case the RINO’S including Cruz, are gonna sell us out. This President is totally in it to destroy America, this is but one step.
What is Scott Walker’s position? Whoa! he’s for it too. Does no Republicans have good sense? I won’t ask that about the Dims, I already know that.
@Redteam: #8,
Apologies for the O/J thing — those two are an inseparable and destructive duo. O is the figure head with too much air in his head, and J is the hateful, vindictive ideologue who is changing every government department through fear and intimidation.
Unbelievably, and as I noted in the article about Cruz, it seems that they are also ideologically stuck on Free Trade — stuck on the Concept of free trade.
But even worse is the fact that they obviously trust O/J. WTF? There is nothing else they can say that will make this alright.
Remember when Dems stopped GWBush from putting the United Arab Emirates in charge of major shipping operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia?
Well, Obama has done a go-around of Congress.
Jack Lew signed a 35-year contract allowing United Arab Emirates-based Gulftainer to run an intermodal container terminal in Port Canaveral, FLA.
The owner of Gulftainer, Badr Jafar, has been tied to donations to the Clinton Family Foundation — and Lew, who as U.S. Treasury Secretary, is a long-time Clinton associate arranged the whole thing for Obama.
See:
http://www.americanreport.org
http://www.stopqatarnow.com
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/members/port-insecurity-is-it-going-to-be-terminal-this-time/article_a8b13150-1226-11e5-ab08-8bf34c7014a6.html?mode=jqm
Can Obama be trusted with a larger trade agreement?
How often does he lie?
As a new Senator he either voted for/against or ”present” when the Dems defeated this via Bush in 2005.
@Nanny G: This is one of those ‘fast track’ negotiations which Congress has a yes or no up and down vote for. Do you think the Congress actually got a vote on this?
@Redteam: Obama did what he habitually does: bypassed Congress.
@Redteam: The Conservatives voted with Obama. The Liberals voted against Obama.
There is hope.
@rich wheeler: No there isn’t, when the rino’s all vote with someone whose main objective is to destroy the country, I see no hope in that.
@Redteam: Cruz and Walker RINOS?
Are there ANY Conservatives running for POTUS?
@rich wheeler:
In the case of Congress, any Republicans who take a pov without reading the thing are fools, not necessarily RINOs.
In the case of a non-congress pol, he/she has no way to READ the THING at all.
I have written about how often Republicans see the words, ”free trade” as a talisman even if the actual fine print destroys free trade.
Hillary actually took the position (I read this, anyway) that we should get to read it before we must debate or vote on it.
Good for her.
Good political cartoon in this week’s Sunday Funnies:
Showed both Dems and Reps looking at the closed box of Free Trade and the open box of poo labeled ObamaCare and being quite sceptical as Obama tries to get them to buy the unopened package.
Been there, done that.
@rich wheeler: Call them what they are ‘politicians’ if their lips are moving, they’re lying. Would you vote for an unopened package from Obama? It might be passports for Muslims. What ever it is, ain’t gonna be good for the USA.
@Redteam: You’re calling Walker a liar—thought he was your guy.
@rich wheeler: That’s not a disqualifier. If lying was a disqualifier, there would be no one to vote for. While Repubs are not nearly as blatant as Dims, they still tell fibs. Obama has set new standards for dishonesty for Dims, they are trying to catch up with him.
Has the ocean temp got up to 60 yet?
@Redteam: You say lying is a prerequisite to a presidential run–That certainly explains why the Republicans have so many more contenders..
@Redteam: Trump is in. Further confirmation of your #19.
@rich wheeler: Trump was always in, changes nothing. I know you’re not as ignorant as you are pretending to be. If politicians were disqualifed for lying, there would be none, especially Obozo’s party. You know that. Tell me why the Dims are against this trade bill that Obozo wants the Repubs to pass. He must be getting a payoff out of it of some kind. Has your ocean temp got up to 59 yet?
@Redteam: You seem very confused RT.
What’s the yearly temperature range of your local La. swamp?—er bayou.
@rich wheeler: bayous are small streams, not a swamp. totally different things. temp about 84. So you don’t know if your sea temp is up to 59 yet? too cold to get close enough to measure?
@Redteam: I’d rather swim in a 59 degree ocean than an 84 degree swamp.
BTW Trump–“i’ m very rich” in today.
Bush the younger in on Sat.
More to follow I love it.
Think Carson will take the lead if he gets in.
Think Santorum will win Iowa then disappear
@rich wheeler: I think you’re more concerned about the Repub candidate than you are the Dim? Is that because there are no moral Dims to run? No wait, that doesn’t matter…….
So you like swimming in a wet suit? I swim in my 84 degree swimming pool.
@Redteam: You’re the one that said all the Repub. candidates are liars. Not me- though I certainly agree with your supposition.
Does your pool have a net to keep out those swamp fleas?
@rich wheeler: You’re making things up RW. I didn’t say all Republicans are liars. give me the quote.
never heard of a swamp flea, must be something native to Southern Gayfornia.
@Redteam:#27 We were speaking of Repub. CANDIDATES #17 ” politicians if their lips are moving they are lying.” r
Therefor Repub candidates being pols must all be liars. We have no argument there RT.
Who do you like in MLB this season?
@rich wheeler: Shouldn’t you be focused on your own party? Is Hillary the best you can do? Will the left wing, which makes up the base of your party, go for someone like Webb over Hillary? Will Webb, if he decides to run which I think he will, move heavy to the left in order to pander to your party’s base or will he stick to his independent approach? You can mock the Republicans all you want, but if Hillary is the best the Dems can come up with, they are a party of little substance.
@another vet: I will not vote for HRC.
i’m hoping Webb will run—I’M LOOKING AT ALL Repubs.–Easy to pick out the one’s I won’t vote for.
@rich wheeler: Astros
@rich wheeler: Come on now, if HRC is your party’s nominee, you’ll support her. Remember how you gave “serious” thought about Romney? Just out of curiosity, when McCain ran in 2008, your party brought up his age saying he was too old to be POTUS. Given that Clinton and Webb will both be around the same age as McCain was in 2008, do you support that position?
@another vet: I’ve been saying for months I won’t vote for HRC–I’ve donated to, and offered my support to fellow Marine Webb. I don’t think age is a disqualifier if health is good.
I’ve liked Rubio for a long time.. With Ohio’s Kasich as Veep–tough to beat.
@Rich Wheeler: Gosh, if Trump picks Ooprah as a VP, he will be a shoo in. Right? He’d sure have your vote, right?