WTH!!
QuoteDespite staying largely silent on the issue—he's quietly supported it for weeks, but hasn't said anything at all in quite a long time—Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker crossed most conservatives by coming out in support of Obamatrade on Thursday evening in an interview with Bloomberg's Mark Halperin.
My take on Halperin is that he's a socialist prick, but Walker.....saying he supports Obamatrade?? Gag me.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/11/scott-walker-pushes-obamatrade-on-eve-of-vote/
Another nail in his coffin, he also supports superceding the grand jury in police shooting cases, definitely unconstitutional and right along the lines of Holders plan to install a federal ombudsman.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Sorry, but I find it funny, considering all the shit people gave Cruz for the same reason.
I just wish to Hell they'd release the damned thing at let the people decide.
But to keep it secret, is simply stupid in creating more suspicion of the govt, if that's even possible.
What really makes Walker look bad is that he didn't read it.
Walker's appearing less-and-less like TEA material. First, his softened stance on amnesty from outta nowhere. And now this.
He was fine last month:
http://www.teaparty.org/scott-walker-dazzles-capitol-hill-99679/
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 12, 2015, 08:24:42 PM
Walker's appearing less-and-less like TEA material. First, his softened stance on amnesty from outta nowhere. And now this.
He was fine last month:
http://www.teaparty.org/scott-walker-dazzles-capitol-hill-99679/
The "musical chairs" game is heating up among the GOP candidates. TEA is extracting a lot of chairs from the race this week because of the positional revelations coming out of this crazy trade bill. It has definitely been an eye opener!!!
Quote from: kit saginaw on June 12, 2015, 08:24:42 PM
Walker's appearing less-and-less like TEA material. First, his softened stance on amnesty from outta nowhere. And now this.
He was fine last month:
http://www.teaparty.org/scott-walker-dazzles-capitol-hill-99679/
I believe it was during the last mid-term elections that Walker voiced support for a candidate running for governor in another state. A candidate who was pro-amnesty. I can't remember who the candidate was, or in which state, but I've been wary of Walker ever since.
Quote from: Solar on June 12, 2015, 05:24:37 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Sorry, but I find it funny, considering all the shit people gave Cruz for the same reason.
I just wish to Hell they'd release the damned thing at let the people decide.
But to keep it secret, is simply stupid in creating more suspicion of the govt, if that's even possible.
This whole issue has had me perplexed. I usually am supportive of trade agreements as most open markets and the free market is best.
I think this is why it is so confusing. After listening to all the rhetoric and seeing who is for and who is against it I think I may have figured it out. The trade agreement part is probably OK, but it gives too much authority to the POTUS. A strong executive branch is not normally an issue, but this president has changed the landscape. The GOP supporters do not recognize the potential pitfalls and only see the benefits of the overall agreement.
Those opposed, liberal democrats and conservative pubs, do so for different reasons. Conservatives want no mo part of giving Obama free reign over agreements. Liberals are into their "protect the unions" mode and oppose it because of the unions.
Maybe that is a simplified answer.
Quote from: supsalemgr on June 13, 2015, 09:13:07 AM
This whole issue has had me perplexed. I usually am supportive of trade agreements as most open markets and the free market is best.
I think this is why it is so confusing. After listening to all the rhetoric and seeing who is for and who is against it I think I may have figured it out. The trade agreement part is probably OK, but it gives too much authority to the POTUS. A strong executive branch is not normally an issue, but this president has changed the landscape. The GOP supporters do not recognize the potential pitfalls and only see the benefits of the overall agreement.
Those opposed, liberal democrats and conservative pubs, do so for different reasons. Conservatives want no mo part of giving Obama free reign over agreements. Liberals are into their "protect the unions" mode and oppose it because of the unions.
Maybe that is a simplified answer.
I believe the reason for secrecy is an attempt to divide the country over the whole mess.
There very well may be nothing to it, that in truth, it's not much different from powers granted to other Presidents in the past, but the gain is in his need to create anger in the country, so he deepens suspicion in govt.
I don't think he realizes the strength he gives TEA in helping expose the illegitimacy of the GOPe in their quest in helping keep it secret prior to a vote.
I could be way off base, it may very well be a piece of shit
Leftistlation, (COING NEW WORD
TM but the damage is obvious.
http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/political-discussion-and-debate/cruz-tpa-doesnt-give-obama-more-power-jeff-sessions-not-accurate/msg245832/#new
Quote from: MACMan on June 12, 2015, 03:29:29 PM
WTH!!
My take on Halperin is that he's a socialist prick, but Walker.....saying he supports Obamatrade?? Gag me.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/11/scott-walker-pushes-obamatrade-on-eve-of-vote/
Has Walker been to the secret room and read the bill? I think not!
Since Walker is not a member of Congress, there is no way he could have read the text of the deal before making these comments. He's just for Free Trade - as any small government Constitutional Conservative should be. I think that if he were to actually be able to read the bill and analyze the text, he would quickly change his position.
I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 13, 2015, 11:02:51 AM
Has Walker been to the secret room and read the bill? I think not!
Since Walker is not a member of Congress, there is no way he could have read the text of the deal before making these comments.
He's just for Free Trade - as any small government Constitutional Conservative should be. I think that if he were to actually be able to read the bill and analyze the text, he would quickly change his position.
I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
I tend to agree with you. Most conservatives favor agreements that expand free trade.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 10:18:32 AM
I believe the reason for secrecy is an attempt to divide the country over the whole mess.
I think it is much more sinister than that.
There is much trash hidden in that bill.... much like Obamacare.... and they cannot risk us finding out their dirty little subversive additions to it.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 13, 2015, 11:02:51 AM
Has Walker been to the secret room and read the bill? I think not!
Since Walker is not a member of Congress, there is no way he could have read the text of the deal before making these comments.
He's just for Free Trade - as any small government Constitutional Conservative should be. I think that if he were to actually be able to read the bill and analyze the text, he would quickly change his position.
I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Then why even speak on something he hasn't read? That's not what a President would do.
No, this doesn't bode well for him.
Quote from: kroz on June 13, 2015, 11:20:54 AM
I think it is much more sinister than that.
There is much trash hidden in that bill.... much like Obamacare.... and they cannot risk us finding out their dirty little subversive additions to it.
Difference being, they're allowed to read this one, unlike Commiecare, where they had to sign it to see what was in it.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:31:28 AM
Difference being, they're allowed to read this one, unlike Commiecare, where they had to sign it to see what was in it.
"We the People" cannot read this one! That is my point.
It is sinister and in total opposition to the way our government was designed to work. The people should be able to participate at every level.
Quote from: kroz on June 13, 2015, 11:34:34 AM
"We the People" cannot read this one! That is my point.
It is sinister and in total opposition to the way our government was designed to work. The people should be able to participate at every level.
But TEA Reps are able too, and have yet to disclose any serious problems.
Sessions, a RINO appears to have started the conspiracies, yet Ted claims they're unfounded.
Quote from: Solar on June 13, 2015, 11:30:23 AM
Then why even speak on something he hasn't read? That's not what a President would do.
No, this doesn't bode well for him.
I agree. He should have kept mum.
However, I also believe this is kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't issue.
IF he gets elected president...
and
IF the prospect of fast track authority being given to him as president comes up, then he wouldn't be well served to have been actively opposing it for Obama - especially when the bill is largely supported by Republicans. The MSM would have a field day with it and that could cause him to lose getting Fast Track when he needs it to do something good for the country.
This way he is on the record as being pro-Free Trade.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 13, 2015, 12:10:25 PM
I agree. He should have kept mum.
However, I also believe this is kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't issue.
IF he gets elected president...
and
IF the prospect of fast track authority being given to him as president comes up, then he wouldn't be well served to have been actively opposing it for Obama - especially when the bill is largely supported by Republicans. The MSM would have a field day with it and that could cause him to lose getting Fast Track when he needs it to do something good for the country.
This way he is on the record as being pro-Free Trade.
BINGO!!
Personally I am against giving Obama any more power then he has already stolen for himself! I don't trust this president so I am against fast track authority! Better to push these negotiations off for awhile. Is there really any reason it can't be done in the next administration?
Where dos all this rhetoric come from about "secrecy" and not knowing what is in the bill(s) and or amendments being discussed?
It is all right here:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1314
You want to know what is in the bill, go read it yourselves. If you want to know what is in each amendment, go read it. If the MSM is too fracking lazy (or deceitful) to find this information and disseminate it, maybe that is a read on what the MSM is pushing us to believe, and not what is actually happening. The MSM wants us to fear free trade, so they claim it's all hush-hush and we have no idea what the bill says.
Well, yes we do, if we take the time and effort to do a few mouse clicks, and then spend several hours reading time.
Conservative politicians we normally trust are in favor. So either we stop trusting otherwise good conservatives due to one issue which we are (voluntarily? Ignorantly?) in the dark on, OR the other hubris surrounding the issue, to include items like unprecedented executive authority (false) and the whole "it's being kept secret from us" claims (false), is, shall we say, not entirely accurate?
Quote from: zewazir on June 14, 2015, 07:37:24 AM
Where dos all this rhetoric come from about "secrecy" and not knowing what is in the bill(s) and or amendments being discussed?
It is all right here:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1314
You want to know what is in the bill, go read it yourselves. If you want to know what is in each amendment, go read it. If the MSM is too fracking lazy (or deceitful) to find this information and disseminate it, maybe that is a read on what the MSM is pushing us to believe, and not what is actually happening. The MSM wants us to fear free trade, so they claim it's all hush-hush and we have no idea what the bill says.
Well, yes we do, if we take the time and effort to do a few mouse clicks, and then spend several hours reading time.
Conservative politicians we normally trust are in favor. So either we stop trusting otherwise good conservatives due to one issue which we are (voluntarily? Ignorantly?) in the dark on, OR the other hubris surrounding the issue, to include items like unprecedented executive authority (false) and the whole "it's being kept secret from us" claims (false), is, shall we say, not entirely accurate?
Did you read it?
Quote from: Solar on June 14, 2015, 07:39:21 AM
Did you read it?
I have read parts of it, to include the summaries and large portions of some of the more controversial amendments. No, I have not read all of it, not by a long shot. Take a look and you'll see why.
But my point is, the information IS available to the People. Claims otherwise are simply not true, and IMO, such claims are being used to turn conservatives against it who would otherwise support it.
Quote from: zewazir on June 14, 2015, 07:37:24 AM
Where dos all this rhetoric come from about "secrecy" and not knowing what is in the bill(s) and or amendments being discussed?
It is all right here:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1314
You want to know what is in the bill, go read it yourselves. If you want to know what is in each amendment, go read it. If the MSM is too fracking lazy (or deceitful) to find this information and disseminate it, maybe that is a read on what the MSM is pushing us to believe, and not what is actually happening. The MSM wants us to fear free trade, so they claim it's all hush-hush and we have no idea what the bill says.
Well, yes we do, if we take the time and effort to do a few mouse clicks, and then spend several hours reading time.
Conservative politicians we normally trust are in favor. So either we stop trusting otherwise good conservatives due to one issue which we are (voluntarily? Ignorantly?) in the dark on, OR the other hubris surrounding the issue, to include items like unprecedented executive authority (false) and the whole "it's being kept secret from us" claims (false), is, shall we say, not entirely accurate?
This is a common ms-conception. It is not the "bill" per-se, but how the Obama Administration intends to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - that is the information which is being kept tightly under wraps.
The Fast Track authority is a relatively simple bill, as I understand it, it is just
what Obama will do with it that is the problem.
Those details are what is causing the big stink in D.C.
Quote from: Darth Fife on June 14, 2015, 09:57:14 AM
This is a common ms-conception. It is not the "bill" per-se, but how the Obama Administration intends to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - that is the information which is being kept tightly under wraps.
The Fast Track authority is a relatively simple bill, as I understand it, it is just what Obama will do with it that is the problem.
Those details are what is causing the big stink in D.C.
And well it should. We know this crowd in the WH after 6 plus years. The fact they are keeping it secret immediately tells us there are some sinister things in for the American people.
Quote from: zewazir on June 14, 2015, 07:48:32 AM
I have read parts of it, to include the summaries and large portions of some of the more controversial amendments. No, I have not read all of it, not by a long shot. Take a look and you'll see why.
But my point is, the information IS available to the People. Claims otherwise are simply not true, and IMO, such claims are being used to turn conservatives against it who would otherwise support it.
Yeah, that's why I asked if you read it, because the language is always lawyers speak and tends to be convoluted to the point, you need an attorney to translate it.
And you are exactly correct, it was by design a tool to divide the right, I posted that exact claim nearly a month ago.
Thanks for posting the link, I'll post the entire Bill in a stand alone thread.