Jason Riley at Fox News, skews truth about Fast Track Trade Authority’s opposition

[Skylar]

Fast Track has nothing to do with free trade

without Fast Track there would be no TPP. It makes TPP possible which is why we have it.

It makes the TPP possible...as there's no way the TPP could pass the constittuional standard of 2/3rds in the Senate. So they've ignored the constitution to get the treaty passed.

 

[Tehon]

yes but since no one is considering it seriously.

I'm glad you finally admit that TPA violates the constitution but are you seriously suggesting that since our corporate media and bought out politicians aren't raising awareness about their constitutional end around that we should just accept it.

 

[johnwk]

yes but since no one is considering it seriously.

I'm glad you finally admit that TPA violates the constitution but are you seriously suggesting that since our corporate media and bought out politicians aren't raising awareness about their constitutional end around that we should just accept it.

They don't give two twits so long as they are paid for prostituting their vote.

JWK



America will not regain her honor and splendor until the blood of tyrants is made to flow in her streets.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

TPA violates the constitution

1) of course if it violated Constitutional its passionate opponents would have taken it to court 50 years ago and won.

2) the best way to make a nation second rate is to protect its goods and services from international competition which is exactly what treasonous liberals want to do.

 

[johnwk]

TPA violates the constitution

1) of course if it violated Constitutional its passionate opponents would have taken it to court 50 years ago and won.

2) the best way to make a nation second rate is to protect its goods and services from international competition which is exactly what treasonous liberals want to do.

Thank you for your comment. Now, under what wording in our Constitution can a treaty become enforceable law without a two thirds approval vote in the Senate?


JWK

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

TPA violates the constitution

1) of course if it violated Constitutional its passionate opponents would have taken it to court 50 years ago and won.

2) the best way to make a nation second rate is to protect its goods and services from international competition which is exactly what treasonous liberals want to do.

Thank you for your comment. Now, under what wording in our Constitution can a treaty become enforceable law without a two thirds approval vote in the Senate?


JWK

dear, the Constitution is followed by 200 years of case law so your question should be, where in the case law that is based in the Constitution does it permit this.

 

[Tehon]

TPA violates the constitution

2) the best way to make a nation second rate is to protect its goods and services from international competition which is exactly what treasonous liberals want to do.

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist. We made things in this country, people had jobs. Admitting China into the WTO and giving them permanent normal trade relations status killed our manufacturing base. We are party to numerous free trade agreements since 1985, what has it gotten us?
Treasonous, aren't you being a drama queen?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

 

[Tehon]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

 

[johnwk]

TPA violates the constitution

1) of course if it violated Constitutional its passionate opponents would have taken it to court 50 years ago and won.

2) the best way to make a nation second rate is to protect its goods and services from international competition which is exactly what treasonous liberals want to do.

Thank you for your comment. Now, under what wording in our Constitution can a treaty become enforceable law without a two thirds approval vote in the Senate?


JWK

dear, the Constitution is followed by 200 years of case law so your question should be, where in the case law that is based in the Constitution does it permit this.

Case law is not superior to our Constitution, and only those laws made in pursuance thereof.

Now, the question was, "under what wording in our Constitution can a treaty become enforceable law without a two thirds approval vote in the Senate"?


JWK





"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law (1858)

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Case law is not superior to our Constitution,

well dear it in effect is superior if the judges are following the case law

 

[johnwk]

Case law is not superior to our Constitution,

well dear it in effect is superior if the judges are following the case law

Well, dearie , case law is not superior if the case law defies the text and legislative intent of our Constitution.

JWK

 

[Tehon]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

100% stupid and liberal. Ok dear let's try another way. If you protect our industry so it does not have to compete internationally, our industry won't produce international class goods and services.

Do you understand now??

 

[Tehon]

We were a more prosperous nation as a whole when we were more protectionist.

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

100% stupid and liberal. Ok dear let's try another way. If you protect our industry so it does not have to compete internationally, our industry won't produce international class goods and services.

Do you understand now??

No. It is still rhetoric, you didn't even try to explain it any differently. The quality of our goods and services has actually deteriorated over the years coinciding with the numerous free trade agreements we have signed. Do you have any facts to put forth to back up your claims..........anecdotal evidence?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

try to listen dear, if we are protected from competition our goods and services will be second or 3rd rate and then so will our country be. Please print and read 100 times and then ask your Mom to explain what it means.

Do you understand?

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

100% stupid and liberal. Ok dear let's try another way. If you protect our industry so it does not have to compete internationally, our industry won't produce international class goods and services.

Do you understand now??

No. It is still rhetoric, you didn't even try to explain it any differently. The quality of our goods and services has actually deteriorated over the years coinciding with the numerous free trade agreements we have signed. Do you have any facts to put forth to back up your claims..........anecdotal evidence?

dear, American autos have gotten far better thanks to Japanese competition. Do you understand that competition makes you better??

Imagine someone who jogs for fun and someone who races in life and death competition? Who would be a faster runner? Now you understand competion and how it makes us better. Not so hard was it?

 

[Tehon]

No, sounds like rhetoric to me.

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

100% stupid and liberal. Ok dear let's try another way. If you protect our industry so it does not have to compete internationally, our industry won't produce international class goods and services.

Do you understand now??

No. It is still rhetoric, you didn't even try to explain it any differently. The quality of our goods and services has actually deteriorated over the years coinciding with the numerous free trade agreements we have signed. Do you have any facts to put forth to back up your claims..........anecdotal evidence?

dear, American autos have gotten far better thanks to Japanese competition. Do you understand that competition makes you better??

Have they? I will take your word for it. Do you credit that relationship to the free trade agreement we have with Japan?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

translation: I lack the IQ to understand free trade

What it actually means is that you have presented no substantial facts to back up your words and are poor at communicating your position.

100% stupid and liberal. Ok dear let's try another way. If you protect our industry so it does not have to compete internationally, our industry won't produce international class goods and services.

Do you understand now??

No. It is still rhetoric, you didn't even try to explain it any differently. The quality of our goods and services has actually deteriorated over the years coinciding with the numerous free trade agreements we have signed. Do you have any facts to put forth to back up your claims..........anecdotal evidence?

dear, American autos have gotten far better thanks to Japanese competition. Do you understand that competition makes you better??

Have they? I will take your word for it. Do you credit that relationship to the free trade agreement we have with Japan?

dear of course competition makes our cars better. The more competition the better. We don't really have a free trade agreement with Japan as their markets are generally closed but TPP is supposed to fix that.

Now do you feel you understand the Republican arguments for free trade?

The USSR, and East Germany, for example, did not produce one single consumer innovation during its existence! Do you know why?


In 1980 you paid 10 years salary in Hungary for a car without a gas gage (dip stick instead) that had to be backed up a hill because of a gravity fed carburetor. They employed engineers by the 1000's all of whom swore that was the best they could do.

It is not until you have had years and years of free Republican capitalist competition that you have any idea how many engineers are needed, at what salary, to produce what quality.

Can you understand the analogy?

 

[Tehon]

dear of course competition makes our cars better. The more competition the better. We don't really have a free trade agreement with Japan as their markets are generally closed but TPP is supposed to fix that.

We don't have a free trade agreement with Japan you say, do tell. That means competition is not dependent on it. That means all that mumbo jumbo about being a third rate country without free trade was just what I said, rhetoric. Isn't thinking fun?
Free trade isn't about breaking down barriers it's about building them up, to fortify against competition, and the only thing they are breaking down is the sovereignty of nations.