Stop The Trans Pacific Partnership

 

1. Yeah a darn lot of good its going to do trying to fight DC on this one. My GOP Senator is touting it for ‘workers’ - ie - he is a Union supporter. A damn lot of good it will do actual American hard working employed (or attempting to be employed).

   Any treaty or law or EO that this Administration puts out must be suspect from now until the Election and then all of them - must be immediately overturned.

   The EO Obama put out on ‘not’ selling military equipment to the police are to ‘stop’ selling tanks and rocket launchers. I have not seen a tank on the streets of America at all. Ever. But hidden away in it is a plan to form a Federal Dept to ‘oversee’ the local police.

   I just wish that more in DC would speak up - but Warren did and my DEM Senator is against this treaty - which makes one wonder - why are the most liberal against it - and so many others more moderate - for it?

   Scares the heck out of me.

   Posted by wardmama4       05/20/2015  at  09:50 AM  



2. This isn’t getting much coverage in Britain but people who are following it are quite alarmed by it. I have mixed feelings as most people seem to be worried about the effect on the NHS and frankly anything that is bad for socialised medicine cant be all bad

   Posted by LyndonB       05/20/2015  at  12:44 PM  



3. If O likes it then it goes without saying its a travesty to our nation and way of life. No more words needed.
              

   Posted by Rich K       05/20/2015  at  05:34 PM  



4. Good God, this claptrap........

   I can absolutely understand deepening relations with Canada, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand- hell, throw South Korea in to the mix.  But this is obviously not the right way to do it. And besides that, why the Hell are we cozying up to the likes of the PRC, the Hanoi Hackers, Malay’s Sharia chumps, and the rest?

   This is a profoundly bad idea. In 99% of the time poor scrutiny and analysis makes for poor law. So the fact that Obama and co are constantly resorting to this just underlines it.

   Hell, I’d say we should block every law he tries to pass on principle. He SHOULD be impeached and tried for at the very least Benghazi, so why do we keep recognizing him as the POTUS?

   I was the first to say that we have the obligation to recognize a legally elected and legally behaving President of the US, regardless of how we feel about him or even if he is Obama. But it’s now obvious that Obama no longer fits that description.

   Posted by Turtler       05/21/2015  at  06:36 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.