Huffingtonpost? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-l-kearns/bill-clintons-trade-legac_b_8945180.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592 Here's an article from the Huffingtonpost that will...

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-l-kearns/bill-clintons-trade-legac_b_8945180.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

Here's an article from the Huffingtonpost that will cause more than one heart attack with liberals.

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

Dave wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-l-kearns/bill-clintons-trade-legac_b_8945180.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

Here's an article from the Huffingtonpost that will cause more than one heart attack with liberals.

They will not read it,...as it is t***h and they are allergic to that!

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

America Only wrote:

They will not read it,...as it is t***h and they are allergic to that!

Not so. I read it.

So let's see if I get this right.

Whenever liberals claim that the deficit was turned into a surplus during the Clinton Administration, conservatives claim it was the Republican House that was responsible....holding Clinton's feet to the budgetary fire.

When convenient, however, the same conservatives want to blame Clinton for the NAFTA deal and wash their own hands of the outcome of that agreement. A quick look at who supported the NAFTA agreement shows that Republicans supported it overwhelmingly. So why aren't they claiming that as a victory?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/1/1/1255736/-NAFTA-at-20-An-Unhappy-Birthday-and-a-Look-at-the-Roll-Call-V**es-on-Free-Trade-Deals

Republicans want to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted the NAFTA agreement and now want to blame Clinton for it's adverse effects.
That's a little disingenuous.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

working class stiff wrote:

Not so. I read it. br br So let's see if I get t... (show quote)

At the risk of having a heaping pile of feces land on my person, I am forced to agree with you.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

AuntiE wrote:

At the risk of having a heaping pile of feces land on my person, I am forced to agree with you.

I'm happy to have someone to share the fun with. :-P

Glaucon

Dave wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-l-kearns/bill-clintons-trade-legac_b_8945180.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

Here's an article from the Huffingtonpost that will cause more than one heart attack with liberals.

I am open minded. I read it. No heart attack and I think am as liberal and as conservative as most people. What was in the article that would cause heart attacks? Maybe you are seriously threatened by other people's opinions, I am not.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

working class stiff wrote:

Not so. I read it. br br So let's see if I get t... (show quote)

It isn't the Republicans who are complaining about the results of trade deals - it is the Democrats. Republicans supported Clinton on trade deals and supported Obama on trade deals - Democrats are the ones who opposed their own presidents - and Hillary can't run on and against Bill's record.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

Glaucon wrote:

I am open minded. I read it. No heart attack and I think am as liberal and as conservative as most people. What was in the article that would cause heart attacks? Maybe you are seriously threatened by other people's opinions, I am not.

"I think am as liberal and as conservative as most people" - seems you may not be threatened by the article but by yourself.

working class stiff Loc: N. Carolina

Dave wrote:

It isn't the Republicans who are complaining about the results of trade deals - it is the Democrats. Republicans supported Clinton on trade deals and supported Obama on trade deals - Democrats are the ones who opposed their own presidents - and Hillary can't run on and against Bill's record.

On that point I agree. I guess I misread the article and your point. Alternatively, one can argue that it was (is) the Presidents going against their own party.

But I don't think it hurts Mrs. Clinton that much. One can disagree with one's husband on some matters and agree on others. (Just ask my wife...she'll tell you :D )

Honestly, I think free trade is a good idea....I'm just not knowledgeable enough about the issue to decide if these deals are good or not. I suppose there are good points and bad to both of them.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

working class stiff wrote:

On that point I agree. I guess I misread the arti... (show quote)

What hurts Mrs. Clinton is how much she wants to run on her husband's record. Surely she will try to avoid running on her foreign policy record. She will, of course, try to maximize her feminist credentials but also has a problem given her husband's well known proclivities in that area. It will be interesting to see just what part of her husband's record she might run on - deregulation? welfare reform?

My opinion on trade is that it clearly has improved the standard of living for virtually all Americans. Instead of fearing competition, we might want to look at the reasons we are not as competitive as we maybe should be. There are those who would suggest wage rates are the entire problem - in my opinion such folks are sadly missing the point.