Posted on 05/22/2007 8:03:14 PM PDT by Pencil
Why is it that the same Democrats who oppose deporting illegal immigration and support amnesty (i.e. John Edwards, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barack Obama) also oppose free trade and capitalism abroad with foreign countries?
I understand the Republicans who oppose both free trade and illegal immigration. But those who support illegal immigration, yet oppose free trade, seem to only support the concept of criminality.
Any answers to this question?
AFL-CIO. The unions hold the answers to all your questions, grasshopper.
With democrats it appears to be a matter of guilt. They want to give the world to the poor out of a desperate need to appear benevolent.
With republicans it more a matter of fairness. They realize that the illegals are taking something they have no right to take. Also with most the trade issue is more a matter of fair trade. We’re getting cheated on trade.
Fairness? A Republican virtue, or a Democrat buzzword? Think about it. Republicans believe in equal chances, not “fair” chances.
Those dems aren’t consistent about it though.Ted Kennedy has voted for some and against others. Depends on who’s got him in their pocket on a particular issue I suppose. I didn’t see it on this site, but didn’t he vote for NAFTA?
Ted Kennedy on Free Trade
http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Ted_Kennedy_Free_Trade.htm
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam.
Vote to grant annual normal trade relations status to Vietnam. The resolution would allow Vietnamese imports to receive the same tariffs as those of other U.S. trading partners.
Reference: Bill HJRES51 ; vote number 2001-291 on Oct 3, 2001
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules.
Vote to provide the president the authority to control the export of sensitive dual-use items for national security purposes. The bill would eliminate restrictions on the export of technology that is readily available in foreign markets.
Reference: Bill S149 ; vote number 2001-275 on Sep 6, 2001
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China.
"Without a real path to legalization, the program will exclude millions of workers and thus ensure that America will have two classes of workers, only one of which can exercise workplace rights," said John J. Sweeney, the AFL-CIO president.
With legalization - amnesty - the unions can swell their ranks, bring in more members to increase power and UNION DUES.
What the one special interest group that in the past, now and forever OWNS the Democrat Party?
It's not about the members they now represent, it's about the dues they're not yet receiving.
Just as elected politicians have sold out their voters, so has union leadership sold out the rank in file. Clinton betrayed union workers by signing NAFTA. I have often asked union members why they continued to support Clinton through impeachment after he sold them out on NAFTA, the answer was they felt they had no where else to go. I now appreciate the feeling, just as union members are trapped in the Democrat party, fiscal conservatives and nationalists are trapped in the big spending, internationalist amnesty party of Republicans run by Rockefeller Republicans calling themselves compassionate conservatives and pimping for the likes of Vincente Fox and Teddy Kennedy.
That’s one thing I cannot understand. If Big Labor feels it was sold down the river by the Dems on NAFTA, shouldn’t it fear it will be sold down the river on immigration? I just don’t get it . . . unless the unions are convinced they can unionize the immigrants. I just don’t see that as a certainty.
Probably because Big Labor bosses care about as much for their members as Republican overseers care about middle-class conservatives...mho.
Of course they are convinced they can. Go look at the AFL-CIO's website. Half of it is in spanish and they have an entire section devoted to immigration.
Follow the money on amnesty and it takes you to John Sweeney's wallet.
Probably because free trade between USA and Mexico, flooded Mexico with cheap produce from our factory farms.
Since that cheap USA produce put Mexican farmers out of work, they sneak in here or starve.
So ending free trade would solve the illegal immigrant problem because those Mexican farmers could go back to Mexico to raise crops again.
What I am saying is that the union members are as disconnected from their union leaders, as citizens are from their elected officeholders. I voted for Jorge Bush but we are NOT on the same page when it comes to education, balanced budgets, prescription drug benefits, and AMNESTY. So it is with the Unions, the leadership is disconnected and unrepresentative to those from who they collect the dues. One thing must be added, as you know when the American people are polled they are overwhelmingly against AMNESTY. That means there are a lot of Democrat voters who against amnesty. The stumbling block to Amnesty is not in the Senate or in the White House, it is in the Democratically controlled House of Representatives. There are at least 40 Democrat house members who understand voting for this sham of a Bill in any form means electoral suicide. Elites in this country are calling the shots, and there are elites in union leadership just as there are elites in government and every heavily funded special interest. The COMMON INTEREST in this nation is unrepresented but still somewhat feared by a few politicians in the House who cannot buy office as easily as the super rich Senators, and do not have the luxury of depending on voter amnesia taking place over a six year term.
That’s an interesting approach to foreign policy: we should hamstring the U.S. economy, and specifically the U.S. agricultural sector, so that Mexican peasant farmers might find work peasant farming in Mexico?
Free trade does not bring any extra dim votes, that’s why...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.