Glenn Beck Unaware That Shi’ite Iran Is Fighting Sunni ISIS


Secular Talk

Glenn Beck posted a message on Facebook about the Iran deal and warned of dire consequences, including “a Holocaust, perhaps bigger than the last.”  Beck is currently on medical paid medical leave from his radio show.

Beck wrote how people “mocked him” for warning about the “rise of the caliphate,” but now he’s more convinced that the U.S. has done a deal with a nation that believes in the “end times,” writes MediaITE.

Keep in mind that Sunni ISIS and Shia Muslim Iran are mortal enemies in the Middle East.  They are not on the same side of the war.  Beck:

“For years I have warned the world against turning a blind eye to those who run Iran. They are beyond radical Islamists. They, like ISIS are psychotic Islamists.

“When I predicted the rise of the caliphate, those who had not done their homework on what was really happening in the Middle East spent their time mocking me. Once again, I warn the American people and the people of the world again. This particular strain of Islamists, like ISIS, believe they can “hasten the return of the promised one”, and usher in the literal end times.

“No one in their right mind would sign treaties with a Christian country that believed these things. Remember, it does NOT require you to believe it, just that you fully understand that THEY believe it.

“What this president has done will be remembered as something far worse than Neville Chamberlain. It will only be a matter of time before millions cry out his name in despair and contempt. A Holocaust, perhaps bigger than the last, where millions of Christians and even Muslims who are not Muslim enough will die at the hands of the Islamic State.

“Anyone who believes ‪#‎lovewins‬ must let their voice be heard. This is a nation that denies homosexuality even exists in their country and they whip or kill any that they find. This is a country that is holding Americans in prison now for political or faith crimes. This is a nation that kills those who leave Islam and stone women.

“This is a sad day for the right of conscience and the freedom and safety of not only us but the entire world. It is a tragic day for our ally Israel.

“‪#‎neveragainisnow‬. It is time for good, decent and God fearing Americans stand and be counted. This deal yet again proves that our governments are not the solution to our problems. For me, my family and my team we will serve the truth and against injustice no matter the price. We will serve The Lord.

“This must not stand but you must.”

NPR: Unions Remeber NAFTA; Hold Fast Against New Trade Deal

Thea Lee

Thea Lee, deputy chief of staff at the AFL-CIO labor union, has had a front-row seat to the current TPP trade negotiations on Capitol Hill, writes NPR.

She opposes many of the provisions in the new trade deal, though, and she can’t discuss the details.

“We are sworn to secrecy, so we can’t talk about it — not to our colleagues, not to our members, not to the press, and so that’s frustrating,” she says. “If I talked to you specifically about what I think the shortcomings of the labor chapter are, I could lose my security clearance. I don’t know if I’d go to jail, but …”

So she’s left talking in generalities, states NPR.

“These deals make it easier for multinational corporations to move jobs overseas,” Lee says.

She – as well as other union leaders – point first and foremost to the North American Free Trade Agreement that took effect 21 years ago, writes NPR.

Roland Zullo, a University of Michigan labor and employment policy researcher, says that for organized labor, NAFTA’s wounds are still there.

“Labor has enough of a institutional memory to know what happened with NAFTA,” he says. “There was a theory behind NAFTA; there was a theory that by integrating Canada, U.S. and Mexico, there would be a sort of overall net economic benefit.”

However, that didn’t happen for U.S. workers in sectors like manufacturing.  Michigan auto workers, for example, lost more than 100,000 jobs in the years that followed NAFTA’s passage, writes NPR.  Nationwide, sources claim that anywhere from 700,000 to 5 million jobs were lost due to NAFTA.

It’s not a clear case of cause and effect, though.

NPR writes that this is the period when Japanese automakers were setting up shop in the U.S. and taking market share away from General Motors, Ford and Chrysler (though this situation doesn’t exactly make the case for trade agreements, either.)

Matt Slaughter, associate dean of the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, points out some of the difficulties labor faces in opposing the TPP trade deal.

He says labor should stop trying to kill the new trade pact, and instead push for a more robust 21st century social safety net for dislocated workers.

Again, though, if the trade agreements were so good for the U.S., why would we need to push for a more robust social safety net for dislocated workers?  Why would there be dislocated workers?  Isn’t that admitting that there will be job loss due to the trade pacts?

Tim Waters, the national political director for the United Steelworkers, disagrees with the idea that trade agreements cannot be stopped or changed.

“For us to just say, ‘Oh well, it’s inevitable, we shouldn’t try to stop it, we shouldn’t try to stand up, we should just try to get in there and cut some kind of deal that made it less sickening,’ doesn’t make any sense,” he says.

Waters says that unions aren’t anti-trade; they want fair trade. He says trade deals need to put the concerns of American workers first.

(Updated article)

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/16/414893279/as-nafta-memories-linger-unions-hold-fast-against-new-trade-deal

https://reasonablyliberal.wordpress.com/2015/05/29/difficult-to-pinpoint-number-of-u-s-jobs-lost-due-to-nafta/

Strange U.S. House of Representatives Procedure For Passing TPP Trade Agreement

On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives (the “lower” chamber of Congress) voted down a workers-aid bill called Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA).

It was a defeat for Obama that could be considered a win for Democrats.

Why did they vote it down? It was considered the only way to vote down “fast-track” trade authority for the TPP.

The TAA bill was rejected in a “lopsided” 126-302 vote, with only 40 Democrats and 86 Republicans voting yes, writes The Hill.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi voted against it.  Voting down TAA is the only way to “slow down the fast track,” Pelosi declared.

The way they were set up, the TAA and the TPA (Trade Promotion Authority) bills both had to pass in order to send a bill to the president.

The TPA is the “fast-track authority” bill.  Fast-track authority would make it easier to pass the TPP trade agreement (it would be passed on a yes/no vote as opposed to being changed and debated).

Pelosi’s support seemed pivotal.  According to The Guardian, “all of Obama’s efforts proved for naught after Pelosi took the floor and spoke out against the deal.”  She said: “While I’m a big supporter of TAA, if TAA slows down the fast track I am prepared to vote against TAA,” writes The Guardian.

So, it seems she was originally for the TAA and then turned against the deal.

The House then voted on and narrowly passed the fast-track bill (TPA), 219-211, with support from a large number of Republicans and 28 pro-trade Democrats.

This vote didn’t matter much, because, again, the package was structured in such as way that it couldn’t be sent to Obama’s desk without the TAA passing as well.

So, the TAA was shot down, and after that it doesn’t matter if the TPA bill was passed or not.

Interestingly, it’s not over. According to The Hill, House Republican leaders will put the TAA aid bill – traditionally favored by Democrats – on the floor again possibly Tuesday, hoping Obama can flip some “no” votes to “yes” over the weekend.

Obama’s press secretary tried to downplay the President’s loss (but the Democrats’ gain?).

According to The Hill, it’s unlikely the same bill (for the TAA) would produce a dramatically different result next week.

The Republican whip team said it had as many as 93 GOP votes at one point during the TAA roll call, but characterized it as close to the “high-water mark” for the party (in other words, they won’t get more than 93 Republicans to vote for the bill).

Ironically, on Friday morning, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his leadership team tried to encourage Republicans to vote for the “leftist” TAA. Again, if the TAA didn’t pass, then fast-track trade authority wouldn’t pass, either.

He made a surprise visit to the Congressional Baseball Game at Nationals Park on Thursday. The TAA was already limping along at that point. In the Democrats’ dugout along the third baseline, Obama, sporting sunglasses, cracked jokes and posed for photos with lawmakers.

He didn’t mention trade to the players, but the issue was unavoidable. Fans sitting in the stands behind the Democrats held homemade signs reading: “VOTE NO TAA. NO FAST TRACK.”

Why didn’t the bills get more support?

The Hill states that Democratic critics were unhappy with an amendment that barred climate change provisions in trade deals.

There was also reportedly wording in one of the bills that stated that Medicare cuts were to be used to pay for the TAA. Critics complained that the way the trade bills were structured meant Democrats would still have to vote for Medicare cuts, even though they were eliminated in a separate trade bill. Voting for Medicare cuts, opponents argued, was tantamount to political suicide.

(Updated article)

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/12/obama-trade-deals-congress-trans-pacific-partnership

WikiLeaks Releases Healthcare Annex Of The TPP Trade Agreement

On Wednesday June 10th, 2015, WikiLeaks published the Healthcare Annex to the secret draft “Transparency” Chapter of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP), along with each country’s negotiating position.

The TPP trade agreement has not been released to the public, and much of what we know about it comes through leaks.

The TPP is the world’s largest economic trade agreement that would cover more than 40 per cent of the world’s GDP.  Despite the wide-ranging impacts on the global population, the TPP and the two other mega-agreements that make up the “Great Treaty” – (the TiSA and the TTIP) – are being negotiated in secrecy. Together, those three trade agreements would cover two-thirds of global GDP, states WikiLeaks.

The Obama administration is trying to gain “Fast-Track” approval for all three from the US House of Representatives on Friday, according to The Bangor Daily news. The House of Representatives is the second (and “lower”) chamber that must approve of it. It has already obtained approval from the Senate.  It is something like the U.S. “House of Commons.”

According to WikiLeaks, the Healthcare Annex seeks to regulate state plans for medicine and medical devices. It forces healthcare authorities to give large pharmaceutical companies more information about national decisions on public access to medicine, and it grants corporations greater powers to challenge decisions they believe are harmful to their interests.

Expert policy analysis, published by WikiLeaks today, shows that the Annex appears to be designed to cripple New Zealand’s strong public healthcare programme and to inhibit the adoption of similar programmes in developing countries. The Annex will also tie the hands of the US Congress in its ability to pursue reforms of the Medicare programme.

The TPP Healthcare Annex can be found here:

https://www.wikileaks.org/tpp/healthcare/page-1.html

The free trade agreement is supported by an unusual coalition of President Obama and mostly right-wing Republican Congresspersons (and a few center-right Democrats). Oddly, the right-wing website Breitbart recently wrote an article against the agreement, calling the TPP “ObamaTrade.”

More here:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/10/wikileaks-releases-more-of-obamatrade-draft-altering-healthcare-halting-medicare-reform/

http://bangordailynews.com/2015/06/11/news/nation/house-democrats-round-up-votes-on-fast-track-trade-authority/?ref=latest

https://www.wikileaks.org/tpp/healthcare/press.html

Does The Congressional Black Caucus Support TPP Fast-Track Authority?

According to The Christian Science Monitor, several members of the Congressional Black Caucus are moving away from the TPP trade agreement.  They include Representatives Marcia Fudge, Keith Ellison, Barbara Lee, and Cedric Richmond.

The constituency of Democratic Representative Marcia Fudge of Ohio usually supports the president, writes the Monitor, but not on the bill to give him the authority to more easily negotiate the largest trade deal in United States history, the TPP.

The President says that the TPP is better than NAFTA (is he admitting that NAFTA is bad?).

He says the TPP includes “enforceable” labor, environmental, and human rights standards. He says it’s a job creator that will open new markets to the US, and that it will act as an economic and strategic counterbalance to China.

Perhaps, writes the Monitor, but Congresswoman Marcia Fudge’s constituents don’t believe it. Her district is in Ohio, an area arguably hard-hit by trade agreements. Fudge, who chaired the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) in 2014, is against President Obama’s trade agenda.

The issue may come to a vote as early as this week, and every vote could matter. No House members are more loyal to Mr. Obama than the black caucus, which makes up about a quarter of House Democrats.

However, the Monitor writes that in this case, many of Obama’s most loyal “foot soldiers” are expected to abandon him on the TPP trade agreement.

Partly, it’s due to the NAFTA effect from past trade deals and how they are perceived to have affected minorities, writes the C.S. Monitor.  Some members of the Congressional Black Caucus say labor unions are forcing the issue, taking away whatever advantage Obama might have.

Ultimately, black caucus members are politicians with a constituency, “and they’ve got to go back to their district and explain why we offshore people’s jobs,” said Rep. Keith Ellison (D) of Minnesota, in an interview last week.

“I like this president. But this thing here? We can’t roll together on this,” he told a TV crew earlier in the day.

So, Representatives Fudge and Ellison are coming out against the trade agreement.

Last month, 14 Senate Democrats joined most Republicans to pass a bipartisan, “fast track” trade package bill that also includes assistance for workers displaced by trade agreements.

But if workers are displaced by trade agreements, then why would the legislature vote for the agreement in the first place?

The “fast track” legislation would ease the president’s ability to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The deal, which the president would like to wrap up before his term ends, involves 12 nations and covers about 40 percent of the global economy. The agreement does not include China.

“Fast track” allows Congress an up-or-down vote on a trade deal but not the ability to amend or change it, and it seems like it is more difficult to pass in the House than the Senate, according to The Christian Science Monitor.

Fewer than 20 Democrats have publicly sided with Obama. Fast track will need 218 votes to pass. While Republicans, who generally favor trade deals, hold 245 seats – their largest majority since before the Great Depression – a sizable portion also oppose fast track, writes the C.S. Monitor.

Holdouts from both sides are seeking deals, but the Republican leadership doesn’t want to change the carefully crafted package. Changes would necessitate going back to the Senate – a sure deal-killer.

President Obama is coordinating closely with Republicans on the deal, and applying a full-court press to conservative “Blue Dog” Democrats, members from safe districts, and Democrats from port cities or big transport hubs, writes The Christian Science Monitor. He has also been discussing the trade agreement with members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

The White House lobbying of the black caucus has been going on for months: personal phone calls from the president; face-to-face discussions with him or his trade representative; a group invite to the White House in February. Plus multiple Democratic briefings on the Hill. The message: This is not NAFTA.

For Fudge, that argument carries little weight, even for a president she trusts as much as Obama.

“I’m from an area that was a huge manufacturing mecca before NAFTA,” she says in an interview. “Now I understand this may not be the same deal. But the people in my district do not believe these kinds of deals are things that we should be supportive of.”

Likewise, Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee, who represents Oakland, Calif. – a port city and heavily African American – adamantly opposes fast track and the TPP.  At an anti-fast track rally at the foot of the Capitol steps last week, she said that trade deals disproportionately affect communities of color.

Her example: the “US-China trade deal,” in which 35 percent of jobs lost were in communities of color, according to the Communications Workers of America.

Technically, there never was a US-China free trade agreement. Congresswoman Lee is referring to China joining the World Trade Organization in 2001. This is “the kind of apples-to-oranges comparison that frustrates people like Rep. Gregory Meeks (D) of New York, who supports fast track and is busily lobbying his fellow black caucus members, as well as other Democrats,” writes The Christian Science Monitor.

“What I’m trying to do is see if we can talk about the actual facts,” said Congressman Meeks in an interview.

He believes that if members are worried about China, then they ought to support the deal. Is he worried about high African-American unemployment? “You betcha, that’s why we have to do this deal,” he says.

Meeks believes that union jobs are disappearing not because of trade agreements, but because of technology – like the auto-pay parking machines. His district includes John F. Kennedy Airport, so a boost in US exports would be a plus for some of his constituents, writes the Christian Science Monitor.

Meeks lays the blame for the president’s difficult fight at the feet of organized labor and the “heavy, heavy lobbying” by the AFL-CIO. Some members, he says, committed to labor to oppose fast track last year, and now that they’ve seen the facts, they wish they had not made that commitment. Others, he said, are still weighing the politics versus the facts. “They’re agonized,” he says.

Members are complaining about labor threats to fund primary campaigns against those who side with the president on trade – or, at least, to withhold campaign funds and support.  African Americans, many representing low-income districts, are particularly dependent on labor contributions, and the president has promised to help supporters who may face a primary challenge.

Rep. Cedric Richmond (D) of Louisiana has said that labor is going overboard and may face a backlash among House members. And yet, he seems to agree with their argument, citing stagnant wages, high unemployment, and income inequality as reasons he may vote against fast track.

Representing the port city of New Orleans, Congressman Richmond, also a member of the black caucus, has been heavily lobbied by both labor and the administration. During the past six to seven months, he’s talked with the US trade representative and twice with the president – once face-to-face and recently on the phone.

The president’s done everything except let me fly Air Force One,” he chuckled. Still, he said last week, “I’m leaning no.”

(Updated article)

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2015/0608/On-trade-Obama-s-most-loyal-allies-are-abandoning-him-video

What Countries Does The U.S. Have Free Trade Agreements With?

As we try to examine what we can about the TPP trade agreement, it is good to be aware of what other trade deals the U.S.  has.  The U.S. has two other “bloc” trade agreements.  According to the Department of Commerce website, the U.S. has the following free trade agreements:

The U.S. has two main “bloc” trade agreements:

  • NAFTA: Canada & Mexico
  • DR-CAFTA: Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, & Nicaragua

In addition, the U.S. has one-to-one free trade agreements with the following countries:

Is The TPP Trade Agreement Freely Available To Read?

Regarding the TPP, Wikipedia states,

“Although the text of the treaty has not been made public, Wikileaks has published several documents since 2013. A number of global health professionals, internet freedom activists, environmentalists, organised labour, advocacy groups, and elected officials have criticised and protested against the treaty, in large part because of the secrecy of negotiations, the agreement’s expansive scope, and controversial clauses in drafts leaked to the public.”

The WikiLeaks website says that “Over the last two years WikiLeaks has published three chapters of this super-secret global deal, despite unprecedented efforts by negotiating governments to keep it under wraps.”

United States Senator Elizabeth Warren has said, “[They] can’t make this deal public because if the American people saw what was in it, they would be opposed to it,” according to WikiLeaks.

The remaining 26 chapters of the TPP trade deal are closely held by negotiators and the big corporations that have been given privileged access. Today, WikiLeaks is taking steps to bring about the public’s access to the missing chapters of the trade agreement.

The TPP is the largest agreement of its kind in history.  It is a multi-trillion dollar international treaty being negotiated in secret by the US, Japan, Mexico, Canada, Australia and 7 other countries. The treaty aims to create a new international legal regime that will allow transnational corporations to bypass domestic courts, evade environmental protections, police the internet on behalf of the content industry, limit the availability of affordable generic medicines, and drastically curtail each country’s legislative sovereignty.

Sources claim that anywhere from 700,000 to 5 million jobs were lost in the U.S. due to the NAFTA trade agreement.

Wikileaks is also crowd-sourcing $100,000 as a reward for the rest of the agreement (26 chapters) that has not been brought to light.

The TPP bounty also heralds the launch of WikiLeaks new competition system, which allows the public to pledge amounts towards each of the world’s most wanted leaks. For example, members of the public can now pledge money on the missing chapters of the TPP.

(Updated article)

Tech Firms Sign Letter Of Opposition To TPP Trade Agreement

According to fastcoexist.com, the President’s broad trade agreement (reportedly bigger than NAFTA) in the Asia-Pacific region, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, has hit a number of roadblocks. “It has stumbled in the Senate and received opposition from medical professionals, environmental groups, and labor unions,” they write.

According to the British newspaper The Guardian, more than 250 tech companies have signed a letter demanding greater transparency from Congress and pointed out the broad regulatory language in leaked parts of the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade bill.

The TPP would create an environment hostile to journalists and whistleblowers, said policy directors for the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Fight for the Future, co-authors of the letter. “TPP’s trade secrets provisions could make it a crime for people to reveal corporate wrongdoing ‘through a computer system’,” says the letter.

The group claims that the TPP “…enables signatory countries to enact rules that would ban reporting on timely, critical issues affecting the public.”

Among the signatories are activist, sci-fi author and Guardian tech columnist Cory Doctorow.

“Democracies make their laws in public, not in smoke-filled rooms,” Doctorow wrote. “If TPP’s backers truly believed that they were doing the people’s work, they’d have invited the people into the room. The fact that they went to extreme, unprecedented measures to stop anyone from finding out what was going on – even going so far as to threaten Congress with jail if they spoke about it – tells you that this is something being done *to* Americans, not *for* Americans.”

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3046505/more-than-250-tech-companies-release-letter-to-congress-opposing-trans-pacific-partnership

http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/hundreds-tech-firms-rail-against/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/20/hundreds-tech-companies-oppose-tpp-trade-agreement

TPP Fast-Track Authority Approved By The Senate

Licentiathe8th

In an unusual coalition between President Obama and Senate Republicans, sweeping legislation to strengthen the Presidents’ administration’s authority in global trade talks – called “fast-track authority” – moved towards Senate passage Thursday after a contentious debate.

The vote was not on the actual TPP trade agreement, but rather “fast-track authority” for it.

The TPP trade agreement has been called “secretive” and even “unconstitutional” by some critics.

Thursday’s vote kept alive Obama’s efforts to secure the broad trade deal by advancing legislation that would give him expanded authority to complete the accord.

“Fast-track” legislation would allow the President to make trade deals that Congress could either support or reject but not amend or change.

Previous presidents have had similar authority for agreements such as NAFTA. Administration officials argue that Japan and other Pacific-region countries in the current round of TPP talks will be unwilling to present offers for the deal if they know lawmakers can seek more concessions.

The 62-38 vote, just two more than the 60 needed, came from a strong group of Republicans and a group of roughly a dozen Democrats who “changed sides” for the vote.

A decisive “thumbs-up” came from Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington after she and a few others seized the moment as leverage to demand a vote next month on legislation to renew the Export-Import Bank.

“It was a nice victory. We’re going to continue and finish up the bill this week,” said Majority leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, apparently basking in the glory.

He is – ironically – Obama’s most important Senate ally on the trade bill, according to the Associated Press.

The Senate passage clears the way for a fierce struggle in the House, according to the AP.  The fate of “fast-track” in the House remains a tossup because Obama faces entrenched opposition from his own party, according to The Washington Post.

The president was up late Wednesday night placing telephone calls to lawmakers, and he spoke with Cantwell again shortly before the vote.

“…(T)he real political divide is over the value of international trade agreements themselves, and the result has been a blurring of traditional political lines,” writes the Associated Press.

Supporters say such agreements benefit the American economy by lowering barriers overseas and expanding markets for U.S. services and goods.  Labor unions and Democratic allies in Congress argue the deals cost jobs at home and send them to nations with lax environmental and safety standards and low wages.

The trade measure is one of three major bills pending in the Senate, and lawmakers will have a weeklong Memorial Day recess at week’s end.

The measure for fast-track authority received just enough Democratic support to keep it moving, following a last-ditch lobbying effort by Obama and his top advisers. The fate of the legislation, also known as trade promotion authority, hung in the balance for more than 30 minutes during the vote, writes The Washington Post.

The AFL-CIO labor union denounced the vote as “shameful” in a graphic that featured the names and photos of each of the 13 Democratic senators who voted for the bill. The AFL-CIO is clear on its position against the agreement.

Senator Bernie Sanders – a Democratic candidate for President who is running against Hillary Clinton for that party’s nomination – hammered the Senate for siding with corporations while harming American workers.

Sanders said:

“If this disastrous trade agreement is approved, it will throw Americans out of work while companies continue moving operations and good-paying jobs to low-wage countries overseas.

“Bad trade deals like the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership are a major reason for the collapse of the American middle class and the increase in wealth and income inequality in the United States…”

Sanders also said, “We must defeat fast track and develop a new policy on trade,” writes Politicususa.

Hillary Clinton has been indifferent on her position on the trade agreement.

Jeb Bush, who is presumably the Republican frontrunner in the race for president, supports the trade deal.  He wrote in April “I haven’t changed in my view even though Hillary Clinton has. It is time to move forward as even recent Democratic presidents have recognized — and Sec. Clinton shouldn’t stand in the way for political gain.”

The unions fighting Obama on trade were hoping for much more from Clinton.

AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka told Politico last month that Clinton coming out forcefully against the fast-track authority would “put some wind in her sails” with organized labor that is still furious at her husband for NAFTA.

When asked by Politico in April where Clinton would differ from Obama on trade policy, and what she would do differently from what Obama is proposing, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill did not respond directly to the question.

“She has laid out the bar that needs to be met, to protect American workers, raise wages, and create more good jobs at home,” said Merrill.

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who’s trying to start up a candidacy on Clinton’s left, is against the trade deal, as he and his aides have eagerly pointed out, writes Politico.

Oddly, there is a Republican presidential candidate who does not support the trade deal:  Mike Huckabee.

Bayoubuzz writes:

“Huckabee believes that the United States has been losing its’ economic base for years and that the supposed free trade deals we have entered into in the past have not been fair to this country. In his announcement speech, Huckabee said he will focus on average working Americans who ‘don’t feel like anybody understands or knows who they are, much less cares what’s happening to them.'”

(Updated article)

http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-trade-allies-scramble-line-60-senate-votes-073012992–finance.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/white-house-on-trade-deal-clinton-is-with-us-117305.html#ixzz3asnKdCKZ

Majority Report: The TPP Trade Deal


Sam Seder

The TPP is a subject where many on the left clash with the President of the U.S. Most of the support of the trade deal doesn’t come from the President’s own party.

Here is another look at the TPP by Majority Report, who calls it “a horrible trade deal.”

(Updated article)