Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Nation: TRADE FIGHT: EDWARDS IS RIGHT, OBAMA'S WRONG, CLINTON'S USELESS...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 08:53 AM
Original message
The Nation: TRADE FIGHT: EDWARDS IS RIGHT, OBAMA'S WRONG, CLINTON'S USELESS...
High praise from John Nichols at The Nation:

Posted by John Nichols at 11/07/2007 @ 10:35pm |
The Peru Free Trade Agreement fight that is coming to a head in Congress pits George Bush and Nancy Pelosi against the workers of the United States and Peru.

As such, it is a test of whether Democrats are satisfied with Pelosi's compromises -- on the war, presidential accountability and domestic policies -- or prefer to oppose the least popular president since Richard Nixon at the height of the Watergate scandal.

Illinois Senator Barack Obama is with Bush and Pelosi. He says he'll vote for the Peru FTA.

New York Senator Hillary Clinton is not sure where she stands. As the House prepares to vote, she could raise her voice to counter that of Pelosi. Instead, she says she's "undecided."

Fortunately, dozens of House Democrats -- including Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich -- know where they stand. They will break with Bush and Pelosi to oppose the trade deal. It won't be easy. Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer are whipping Democrats in the chamber to get on board with Bush's plan. And many are doing just that, claiming that the Peru FTA contains meaningful protections for the rights of workers.

The deal's backers are either confused or corrupted.

They are, as well, wrong.

As Illinois Congressman Phil Hare, a former textile union leader who has led the fight against the Bush-Pelosi line, notes: Peru is currently threatening striking miners with the loss of their jobs if they do not return to the mines. That's not protecting the rights of workers. Indeed, says Hare, "The striking miners were fighting for, among other things, an eight hour work day. In addition, we recently learned that there are 2 million children working in Peru, many in these very same mines."

"Is this the progress the supporters of the Peru FTA were referring to?" asks Hare, who adds, "Today's news should serve as yet another wakeup call that the best thing to do for workers both at home and in Peru is defeat this unfair trade deal."

Hare's right. But he needs some allies among the party's leading presidential contenders.

Obama's wrong and Clinton's of no use.

Thankfully, John Edwards is reading the issue right.

~Snip~

For those who suggest that there are not enough differences between the Democratic frontrunners, here's an example of where one leading contender -- John Edwards -- stands head and shoulders above the others.

More at Link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm disappointed in Obama, and getting tired of Clinton's indecision on
everything! She has to wait to see what's politically expedient for her; that's not a leader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I think it's disingenuous -
Does she not think we (the voters) are not smart enough to "get it"? I think that after the last seven years, voters are going to pay more attention to the issues and if she won't clue us in, I'm afraid we are in for another "Bush like" administration if she gets the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
3. If you trust Peru will obey its own laws, or that the treaty and side agreements will make
them do so, then Peru is an easy yes vote as the first "fair trade" agreement and a model for future agreements.

It is that lack of much treaty based enforcement - the major requirement for trust - that makes a no vote a possible response.

I expect Hillary to vote yes in the end so as to extablish the fair trade model - abeit we would want better enforcement provisions in future agreements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truth2Tell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
18. You mean establish this "fair" trade model?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2227016

I also expect Hillay to vote yes - in order to kowtow to her corporate masters.

It's not just about weak "enforcement" mechanisms. It's about real vs phony fair trade.

With Hillary it's the phony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. Poor Peru, poor Peruvians.
They're in for so much hell.

Free trade is so fucking evil!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zazzle Donating Member (220 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. The majority of Peruvians and Americans oppose the Peru FTA
and yet, on the House floor last night a Dem was implying the AFLCIO had endorsed it! Thankfully, another Dem followed and refuted her.
NO LABOR ORG HAS ENDORSED THE PERU FTA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultraist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Hillary's silence on how she will vote is telling
She's certainly not showing leadership.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. And this is different from every other time...how?
This is her standard M.O. -- find out which way the wind is blowing, quietly vote the "right" way and then use her voting record to crow about her progressive leadership.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
7. Edwards: That's my President - K & R (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bettync Donating Member (76 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. People need to know about this.
This issue shows clearly that there is a big difference among the candidates. I agree with Edwards on this, and hope that a lot of voters find out about this issue. I do not agree with Obama at all, but at least he can make a decision. It is incredible that Hillary "is unsure". Presidents cannot be "unsure" on major issues impacting American lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
9. Obama is beginning to sound like a Milton Friedman disciple
Someone needs to ask him if he's read The Shock Doctrine!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BridgeTheGap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
10. Anyone here actually read the act? Who in Congress has read it?
Edited on Thu Nov-08-07 10:28 AM by BridgeTheGap
We hear assurances that this one is very different from NAFTA & GATT, but I can't believe that unless I read it for myself or my congress person (who is very anti-free trade) has read it and can assure me that it's a good deal for American workers.
So much of the dirty work is done in the fine print.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Kucinich Votes To Keep Jobs In The United States --Peru Trade
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
13. Clinton is right to consider the consequences of her decisions carefully.
However, she needs to take a stand soon. Being percipitous is not necessarily noble; it is good to weigh the rights and wrongs of any policy. That said, I believe that taking the side opposite of W can hardly be dangerous for mankind. The idiot-in-chief is notably consistent when it comes to degrading the planet and its many creatures, great and small.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 08:55 PM
Response to Original message
14. In light of Senator Clinton's vote -
I'm kicking this myself.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
15. "Thankfully, John Edwards is reading the issue right. "
My favorite part. :hi:

JRE's reading all the issues right, what a qualifier for President :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I concur!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okamichan13 Donating Member (77 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-08-07 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
16. Edwards is right on this
and glad the Nation has noticed. The House voted for the deal today and both Clinton and Obama support it - not much change from them from politics as usual at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC