you’ll make a fine President by 2067

AHA! So you’re incurable optimist, huh?

Major partners, including the European Union and Canada, say the legislation favoring U.S. steel, iron and manufactured goods for government projects could undermine pledges by the leaders of major economies not to resort to perfectionism during the world economic downturn.

WASHINGTON – Congress approved protectionist measures in a $789 billion stimulus bill Friday that U.S. trading partners have warned could spark a trade war.

Badger40 on February 13, 2009 at 2:11 PM

I’m referring to the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

To repeat an earlier point I cited:

Caterpillar, based in Peoria, Illinois, supports a proposed free-trade agreement with Colombia, which Oberhelman said unfairly imposes tariffs on U.S.-made goods entering the country. “They’re already exporting everything free, and we have to pay to export there,’’ he said.

You’ll forgive me for not taking the side of the AFL-CIO.

Is the hire American (e-verify) provision in the final bill?

MayBee on February 13, 2009 at 12:44 PM

I had heard that E-verify had been stripped from the final bill, but I can’t find confirmation of that now.

Badger40 on February 13, 2009 at 2:11 PM

Do you think our trade with China is drowning that country in poverty? After all, the Chinese workers don’t make the same kind of wages that we have here.

CFTA too.

Buy Danish on February 13, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Do you mean CAFTA-Central American Free Trade Agreement?
If so, remember that the ‘free trade’ these people are talking about will only probably drown them in more poverty & they certainly will not be buying any of OUR stuff. The avg citizen there doesn’t have the $$ to do it.
So basically we are just going to do another NAFTA where we can get cheap stuff at the expense of other country’s citizens & in the meantime, stiff our own industries bcs those other country’s citizens are either incapable or refusing to buy any of our stuff.

This is why Obama will be a one-term president. Make no mistake, he’s smart enough to try to avoid the mistakes of the Clinton administration that cost them a Democratic Congress. But he’s saddled with a Congress that is far more out of control than Clinton’s Congress was, and they’re going to keep pushing their legislation too far to the left for the American public to accept.

End result: over-reach. And ironically, we may well have one of the most liberal presidents EVER trying to restrain the über-liberal Congress, in hope of getting re-elected.

tom on February 13, 2009 at 1:44 PM

I tend to disagree. I think Obama is letting them run with this. Other than the ‘buy American” issue that China back-handed him on, what has he tried to hold them back on?

genso on February 13, 2009 at 1:48 PM

I’m frankly not even sure that Obama is trying to hold Congress back on this particular issue, at least until it became obvious he had no choice. But the point remains, on the few issues where Obama is smart enough to know a particular action would be over-reaching, the far-left Democratic Congress is still going to force an over-reach.

I think Obama will try to hold them back when he perceives a possible threat to his re-election. I don’t think he’ll be able to, and he won’t want to be seen failing to, so his efforts will not be visible. I’m still betting that he’s going to be ready to kill Pelosi before it’s all over.

Of course, given Obama’s likely connections to the mob, that may not be so theoretical I’m sure nothing will actually happen.

This is why Obama will be a one-term president. Make no mistake, he’s smart enough to try to avoid the mistakes of the Clinton administration that cost them a Democratic Congress. But he’s saddled with a Congress that is far more out of control than Clinton’s Congress was, and they’re going to keep pushing their legislation too far to the left for the American public to accept.

End result: over-reach. And ironically, we may well have one of the most liberal presidents EVER trying to restrain the über-liberal Congress, in hope of getting re-elected.

tom on February 13, 2009 at 1:44 PM

I tend to disagree. I think Obama is letting them run with this. Other than the ‘buy American” issue that China back-handed him on, what has he tried to hold them back on?

End result: over-reach. And ironically, we may well have one of the most liberal presidents EVER trying to restrain the über-liberal Congress, in hope of getting re-elected.

Not so sure that your first entry was that far off.

thomasaur on February 13, 2009 at 1:03 PM

Ha. The scary part of this is that if our economy drags along like Japan’s did for too long, the Chinese will have few reasons to continue to support us. We’re no good to them unless we consume. For many reasons, the rise of the Chinese economy was helped by the decline of the Japanese economy.

That would be “begs”….sorry, emotions and all.

genso on February 13, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Not so sure that your first entry was that far off.

Please would you folks stop trying to make it sound like Obama lied or something.

This is just another example of, what did he call it, “heated rhetoric of the campaign”. We all should have know it was just for show, he told us so.

OBQuiet on February 13, 2009 at 12:57 PM

You’re not serious….are you?

This is just another example of, what did he call it, “heated rhetoric of the campaign”. We all should have know it was just for show, he told us so.

Sell Out America: Vote Obama

Were getting played by choosing these low hanging fruits, akin to being baited into looking for spelling errors and ignoring the writing. Meanwhile, the new, really big, long term, never-to-be eliminated cultural/social/governmental programs that are in no way stimulus and should be considered independently and individually by Congress are still in there and if, or when we get to lambasting them, they can and will say we’re never satisfied and constantly obstructionist.

…but I came in late on his rant, and didn’t hear it all. Can someone else confirm (or not) his statements.

Sorry, but I haven’t had a chance to read the entire bill yet, but its encouraging to note that Fancy Nancy has said just yesterday, while promising a 48-hour public review period, that it was vital to see the language of a bill before making decisions.

“With all of this you have to see the language…Around here language means a lot…And not only just I had to see it, I had to show it to my colleagues and my caucus. We wanted to take all the time that was necessary to make sure it was right.”

So surely she’ll allow plenty of time to digest the bill, right? RIGHT?

That logo is too goatse-ish.

Dave Rywall on February 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM

ROFL

First post of yours that I’ve liked.

That logo is too goatse-ish.

Dave Rywall on February 13, 2009 at 12:19 PM

Considering what Dear Leader and Empress Pelosi and Reid want to do to us (and the next generation), it’s appropriate.

Bend over. Grab ankles.