Corporations Win Again: Senate Passes Obamatrade Fast-Track Bill

Tyler Durden's picture

Ten days ago it seemed as if America's corporatism would finally be slowed in its tracks after the House unexpectedly killed the fast-tracking of Obamatrade, aka the fast-tracking of the Trade Promotion Authority. Alas, it was not to last, and moments ago, in a "nailbiting" 60-37 vote, the Senate advanced Obama's fast-track tarde bill.

From the Hill:

The Senate on Tuesday voted to advance President Obama’s trade agenda, approving a measure to end debate on fast-track authority. 


The 60-37 motion sets up a vote on final passage on Wednesday. If the Senate approves fast-track or trade promotion authority (TPA), it would then be sent to Obama’s desk to become law. Fast-track authority would allow Obama to send trade deals to Congress for up-or-down votes. The White House wants the authority to conclude negotiations on a sweeping trans-Pacific trade deal.


Thirteen Democrats backed fast-track in Tuesday’s vote, handing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) a major legislative victory.


They did so even though the trade package did not include a workers assistance program for people displaced by increased trade. The Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program was a part of the last fast-track package approved by the Senate in May, but became a key part of opposition to the package among Democrats in the House.


To move fast-track forward, the White House and GOP leaders in both chambers decided to break TAA away from fast-track, and to try to approve both in separate votes.


After the Senate votes Wednesday on final passage for fast-track, it will take a procedural vote on a package that includes TAA and trade preferences for African countries known as the African Growth and Opportunity Act.


McConnell has promised both bills, as well as a customs and enforcement bill favored by Democrats, will reach Obama’s desk by the end of the week.


“If we all keep working together and trusting each other, then by the end of the week the President will have TPA, TAA, and AGOA and Preferences on his desk — with Customs in the process of heading his way too,” he said on the floor.

And since the House has already passed fast-track, and now must only vote on the package including TAA, which faces token opposition from conservatives, expect the TPA and shortly thereafter, the TPP, to be enacted despite yet another round of dramatic theater by the best representatives US corporations can bribe.

Finally, as a reminder, "This Is How Little It Cost Goldman To Bribe America's Senators To Fast Track Obama's TPP Bill"

* * *


Today brings Round 2 in "the most transparent administration ever"'s attempt to pass the incredibly opaque Fast-Track Authority enabling Obama to negotiate the Trans-Pacific-Partnership corporate coup d'etat (and all the other trade deals currently floating around) without fear of irritation from any outsiders. However, it won't be easy-sledding as The Hill reports, labor groups led by the AFL-CIO are furiously lobbying Democrats to oppose fast-track authority when the Senate votes on a procedural motion Tuesday. Union leaders warn enabling Fast-Track prematurely would "compound its expected negative impacts, leaving U.S. workers in the lurch and depriving the U.S. manufacturing sector of vital tools necessary to combat unfair trade."

But once again - after more drama - the corporations win!


But, as The Hill reports, Obama may face some trouble ahead

The measure would help Obama negotiate the largest trade deal in history with 11 other countries along the Pacific Rim by limiting interference from Congress.


Obama’s trade bill needs 60 votes, and he can afford no more than two Democratic defections who previously backed fast-track. As of Monday evening, he had not yet secured public promises from all the Democrats he needs.


Backers of fast-track likely need a dozen Democratic votes because five of the Senate’s Republicans voted against the trade package last month and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is indicating in an op-ed on Breitbart News that he will change his vote from yes to no. Cruz, who is running for president, says he is wary of backroom negotiations, expressing concern that the Export-Import Bank reauthorization will be included in the horsetrading.




The Senate’s vote Tuesday to end debate on fast-track — if it gets 60 backers — will set up a final roll call on the measure later in the day or Wednesday.


The chamber would then vote on a package of trade preferences combined with the African Growth and Opportunity Act and TAA. That measure is expected to clear Wednesday or Thursday.

Senate Democratic leaders are not whipping against fast-track, leaving it to unions to do the heavy lifting to defeat it.

The AFL-CIO urged Democrats Monday to vote against fast-track and warned they had no guarantee that TAA will pass the House, where many Republicans oppose it.


“Without assurances that TAA will pass the House, or that the customs bill will ever see the president’s desk, considering Fast Track prematurely could compound its expected negative impacts, leaving U.S. workers in the lurch and depriving the U.S. manufacturing sector of vital tools necessary to combat unfair trade,” William Samuel, the union’s director of government affairs, wrote in a letter to senators.




Heritage Action for America urged Republican senators to vote against fast-track Tuesday.


The conservative advocacy group argued that passing fast-track would pave the way for later passage of what it called the “ineffective” TAA program, which is paid for with tax penalties.


“The new pay for — included in H.R. 1295 which the Senate will also consider this week — increases revenue by raising certain tax penalties.  New spending should not be offset by new revenues,” the group wrote in a legislative alert Monday.

But there are supporters, toe-ing Obama's tyrannical line...

“The trade package currently before the Senate is a blueprint for trade done right,” Wyden said in a statement. “It will make our country stronger by opening new markets to American products and creating new opportunities for good-paying American jobs.”


Supporters of fast-track argue that trade supports more than 4.7 million jobs in California.

But we leave it to Ellen Brown to sum up just what this "sentence first, verdict afterwards" bill is really all about... a corporate coup d'etat...

`Let the jury consider their verdict,’ the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

`No, no!’ said the Queen. `Sentence first–verdict afterwards.’

`Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. `The idea of having the sentence first!’

`Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.

`I won’t!’ said Alice.

`Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice.

                    — Lewis Carroll, “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland”

Fast-track authority is being sought in the Senate this week for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), along with the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) and any other such trade agreements coming down the pike in the next six years. The terms of the TPP and the TiSA are so secret that drafts of the negotiations are to remain classified for four years or five years, respectively, after the deals have been passed into law. How can laws be enforced against people and governments who are not allowed to know what was negotiated?

The TPP, TiSA and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (or TTIP, which covers Europe) will collectively encompass three-fourths of the world’s GDP; and they ultimately seek to encompass nearly 90 percent of GDP. Despite this enormous global impact, fast-track authority would allow the President to sign the deals before their terms have been made public, and send implementing legislation to Congress that cannot be amended or filibustered and is not subject to the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds treaty vote.

While the deals are being negotiated, lawmakers can see their terms only under the strictest secrecy, and they can be subjected to criminal prosecution for revealing those terms. What we know of them comes only through WikiLeaks. The agreements are being treated as if they were a matter of grave national security, yet they are not about troop movements or military strategy. Something else is obviously going on.

The bizarre, unconstitutional, blatantly illegal nature of this enforced secrecy was highlighted in a May 15th article by Jon Rappoport, titled “What Law Says the Text of the TPP Must Remain Secret?” He wrote:

It seems like a case of mass hypnosis. . . .


Members of Congress are scuttling around like weasels, claiming they can’t disclose what’s in this far-reaching, 12-nation trade treaty.


They can go into a sealed room and read a draft, but they can’t copy pages, and they can’t tell the public what they just read.


Why not?


If there is a US law forbidding disclosure, name the law.


Can you recall anything in the Constitution that establishes secret treaties?


Is there a prior treaty that states the text of all treaties can be hidden from the people?

To Congressmen who say they cannot reveal what is in a treaty that will adversely affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people, Rappoport says:

Wrong. You’re lying. You can reveal secret text. In fact, it’s your duty. Otherwise, you’re guilty of cooperating in a RICO criminal conspiracy.

A Corporate Coup d’État

What is going on was predicted by David Korten in his 1995 blockbuster, When Corporations Rule The World. Catherine Austin Fitts calls it a “corporate coup d’état.”

This corporate coup includes the privatization and offshoring of the judicial function delegated to the US court system in the Constitution, through Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions that strengthen existing ISDS  procedures.

As explained in The Economist, ISDS gives foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever the government passes a law to do things that hurt corporate profits — such things as discouraging smoking, protecting the environment or preventing a nuclear catastrophe. Arbitrators are paid $600-700 an hour, giving them little incentive to dismiss cases. The secretive nature of the arbitration process and the lack of any requirement to consider precedent give wide scope for creative judgments – the sort of arbitrary edicts satirized by Lewis Carroll in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

To date, the highest ISDS award has been for $2.3 billion to Occidental Oil Company against the government of Ecuador over its termination of an oil-concession contract, although the termination was apparently legal. Under the TPP, however, even larger and more unpredictable judgments can be anticipated, since the sort of “investment” it protects includes not just “the commitment of capital or other resources” but “the expectation of gain or profit.” That means the rights of corporations extend not merely to their factories and other “capital” but to the profits they expect to receive. Just the threat of a massive damage award for impairing “expected corporate profits” could be enough to discourage prospective legislation by lawmakers.

The Trade in Services Agreement adds additional barriers to proposed legislation.  TiSA involves 51 countries, including every advanced economy except the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). The deal would liberalize global trade in services covering close to 80% of the US economy, including financial services, healthcare, education, engineering, telecommunications, and many more. It would restrict how governments can manage their public laws, and it could dismantle and privatize state-owned enterprises, turning those services over to the private sector. It would also block the emerging trend to return privatized services to the public sector, by limiting or prohibiting governments from creating or reestablishing public utilities and other “uncompetitive” forms of service delivery.

It seems that the TPP, TTIP and TiSA are not about the sort of “free trade” that would free local businesses to sell abroad. They are about freeing international corporations from the government regulation necessary to protect the economy, the people, and the environment. They are about preserving privatized monopolies and preventing competition from the public sector. And they are about moving litigation offshore into private arbitrary tribunals – the sort of tribunal that might have lost Alice her head, if she had not awakened from her bizarre dream.

*  *  *

Source: Cagle

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
InjectTheVenom's picture

some folks are gonna be outta jobs ....

MFL8240's picture

Cheaper to put them on the dole and let it run out.  A special thanks to the leader of the Democratic Party, John Bonier!

Shocker's picture

Another hit to this already weak economy... sad sad

Layoff / Closing List:



NoDebt's picture

"Obama's fast-track tarde bill"

I know that is a misspelling, but don't you dare change it, Tyler.  It's absolutely perfect the way it is.

Bumpo's picture

The Douchetatorship is complete

MonetaryApostate's picture

On the contrary, the douchebags sold America out, because they got nothing left to steal from us, and corporations are wanting their reign of power, like Greece, America is insolvent.


Prepare for Corporate Terrorism!!!

Oh regional Indian's picture

From what I understand from the very brilliant John Rapapapapapaport, it's the Ugly Huxlyans who win, the Pharma giants.

They want everyone medicated.

I want everyone meditated...  ;-)

MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

I think this bill is an encouraging step in the right direction. We can no longer deny that we live in a globalized economy, and our legislation needs to be updated accordingly. We must not succumb to protectionism and nationalism - global integration is vital in the globalized modern economy and if we fail to breach international trade barriers, we risk being left behind in the next wave of global economic growth.

angel_of_joy's picture

So long, America ! It was nice to know you...

PartysOver's picture

Yep, I fell as though I have no country anymore.  But hey, maybe one state will get a clue and secede from this cluster then I can relo.

whotookmyalias's picture

Say it with me - U! S! A! U! S! A! U! S! A!

THE 4th Quadrant's picture

Time for everyone to be rewarded with your very own medical marijuana card.

You're going to need it.

knukles's picture

Let me be the first to Welcome You to the New World Order

And it ain't nuffin but!
                                            Wake up!

BlowsAgainsttheEmpire's picture

Thank you, Republicans and Obama.  Two peas in a pod.

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

The betrayal of my country is now complete.

bigkahuna's picture

Rare time for all the politicians to show their true colors out in the open.

Meat Hammer's picture

What a coincidence that it happened while everyone is arguing about flags. Weird.

Son of Loki's picture

" We unemployed some folks. "



One of Barry's many dismal legacies.

macholatte's picture





Tell me about the bribes.

I want to know who got what from whom and how much. 

It had to be more than just campaign contrbutions.  

7 figure jobs when thrown out of office?

Hookers & unlimited blow?

C'mon. Tell me.


FEDbuster's picture

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.”

? Napoléon Bonaparte
pretty bird's picture

You guys complain and cry like a bunch of girls.  But who's voting for Bernie Sanders?  Not one of you.  You are slaves to the system you hate.

MonetaryApostate's picture

Pfft, they were promised a cell in the underground nuclear fallout shelter or not if they didn't comply....

The future is rising taxes because that's all the wealthy can do to FORCE payment....

Obomber already outlined in his SOU address that he was going to raise Import taxes...

I suspect that's all they are really after, more taxes, becuase the government is broke & they have to pay for THEIR pensions, but to hell with yours, and I'm sick of talking about it all already, which is why I write my blog, cause it's a broken record really, steal, legislate, repeat...

Meat Hammer's picture

I think it was complete around the end of 1913, but hey, tomato tomahto.

Max Steel's picture

   The Myth of Global Free Trade  

 The key to TTIP is the so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanism that essentially gives corporations free reign to sue governments using a “failure to implement” provision, if state policies or legislation interfere with profits. But is this all about trade?

here was a direct, crucial "secret" agenda linking the G7 meeting in Germany and the Bilderberg meeting in Austria last week; the advancement of the virtually secret negotiations towards the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the massive free trade agreement between the US and the EU.

Even though the corporate powers behind TTIP are itching for a deal to be reached before the end of 2015, serious (negotiation) trouble remains.

And then there was last Friday's vote in the US Congress.

What happened were in fact two votes; one on giving the US government the "fast track" authority to conclude trade deals, mostly, in this case, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP); and another one on help for US workers struggling to compete with imports as a result of trade deals. 


"Fast track" passed, but not the adjustment assistance. So the US Senate will need to review "fast track". The corporate powers behind TPP — and TTIP for that matter — were not amused.

Yet the whole thing goes way beyond total presidential authority to negotiate shady deals such as the TTIP, the TPP and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA).

The Obama administration is obsessed with plugging a torrent of benefits for US workers once a Pacific deal is clinched. That's eminently debatable.

From the point of view of other nations, TPP is hardly a panacea. Washington offers no new, improved market access. TPP shuts out China completely — which is ridiculous; Beijing is the top trading partner of most of these nations. And the key to TPP is corporations laying down the law on intellectual property rights — which opens the door to all sorts of social Darwinist abuses.

On TTIP, Brussels is saturated with spin swearing trade deal negotiations are not that "secret". The European Commission (EC) brags they post negotiation texts on its website, unlike Washington. Some they do. But not all, including the most sensitive.


The key to TTIP is the so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS); that essentially gives corporations free reign to sue governments, any government, using a "failure to implement" provision, if state policies or legislation interfere with profits. In sum: corporate ethos wins; workers, small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and democracy, lose badly.

One can already foresee the proliferation of kangaroo courts labeled "arbitration tribunals" stuffed with pricey corporate lawyers. So much for social "justice".But is this all about trade? Of course not.

Welcome to NATO on trade

The giveaway is how the Obama administration is desperate to wrestle down Japanese resistance — going on two solid years now — against many of TPP's provisions. The proverbial "US officials" have been frantically spinning that TPP is crucial for the US "pivot to Asia".

Even Pentagon supremo Ash Carter went overboard two months ago, saying that TPP was "as important to me as another aircraft carrier."

And all this has happened as Washington was trying to force its allies — with no success — to shun the Chinese-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Can't blame the Obama administration for not being on message; China can't lead a development bank, and China can't have a say writing global rules and standards for trade and investment.


The heart of the matter is these three mega-deals — TTP, TTIP and TiSA — are the ultimate template of a Bilderberg group wet dream:  global corporate "governance".

And the Pentagon's own giveaway that TPP is the "strategic" economic arm of the "pivot to Asia" reveals how politicized "trade" has become. Under TPP, Chinese companies will have tremendous handicaps competing with US companies in both US and Asian markets. Call it yet another facet of "containment".

TTIP, TTP and TiSA are in fact a Hydra-like head; they follow the same geostrategic logic of NATO on trade — transatlantic and trans-Pacific; the "West against the Rest". Not accidentally, the BRICS are excluded. And no wonder the negotiations are secret; global corporate "governance" is not exactly a pop hit in any latitude.

Plastic ham, anybody?

Make no mistake; there's plenty of opposition to TTIP in Europe, at least among the few concerned — and horrified — EU citizens who took the trouble of trying to cut through the secrecy.  

In Germany, there have been serious demonstrations. The SPD — part of the coalition government under chancellor Merkel — is definitely against it. Italians learned TTIP would cost the country no less than 1.3 million jobs. It's useful to compare TTIP with NAFTA; in 12 years, the US actually lost 1 million jobs, as corporations and companies preferred to delocalize to Mexico, where costs are much lower.

Even Brussels was forced to admit TTIP will actually mean unemployment; a lot of jobs will definitely move Stateside, where labor standards and trade union rights are much lower.

TTIP will concern 850 million people between North America and Europe; that's roughly 45% of global GDP. Trade in question amounts as it stands to 500 billion euros a year. That could be arguably configured as "advanced globalization" — with not so much interference from emerging markets.

Enter the European idea that as a consequence of this leading role, the EU has the most advanced rules on health, consumer protection and quality of public services (it varies a lot from country to country; can't compare France with Romania, for instance). 

Thus no wonder high-quality agricultural producers in the Club Med countries  are terrified that TTIP will mean a de facto barbarian invasion. Italians are terrified about the onset of a monster, false made in Italy market, with US corporations calling any mongrel GMO concoction a "Parma" ham or a "gorgonzola" cheese. 

A good test is to hit your average US supermarket. Talk about a horror show; at least 70 per cent of all processed foods are GMO-infested. The EU allows virtually no GM foods. Not to mention the toxic front; in the EU a company must prove a substance is safe before it's commercialized. In the US, anything goes.

Under TTIP, public health, education and water services in the EU will be devastated, and taken over by US corporations. Food safety laws, key legislation over the environment, and banking regulations will be turned upside down.

The spin from TTIP peddlers is that Globalization 2.0 will lead to a "surge" of 0.5% of the EU's collective GDP. That's not exactly a Chinese rate.

But when you're austerity-ravaged, you drink any Kool aid you can get. And eat it with plastic Parma ham.

The Blank Stare's picture

Time for some Rollerball! James Caan syle

unicorn's picture

you make a little mistake, mister steel: european corporations are as interested in lowering standarts as US corporations. and EFSA is as corrupt as FDA or any other institution (you should study stuff about animal testing and then we talk about "most advanced rules" again... or just read this:

Pairadimes's picture

If there is anybody left after this vote who still believes there are two distinctly different political parties in DC, please report to detox.

James_Cole's picture

Dems voted against their own president on this. It's those who thought/ think obama is a liberal who need the detox, on all key issues except guns & abortion (the two biggest sideshow issues) he is almost totally aligned with republicans.

FL_Conservative's picture

Here's the roll if it matters.

Alphabetical by Senator Name

Alexander (R-TN), Yea 
Ayotte (R-NH), Yea 
Baldwin (D-WI), Nay 
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea 
Bennet (D-CO), Yea 
Blumenthal (D-CT), Nay 
Blunt (R-MO), Yea 
Booker (D-NJ), Nay 
Boozman (R-AR), Yea 
Boxer (D-CA), Nay 
Brown (D-OH), Nay 
Burr (R-NC), Yea 
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea 
Capito (R-WV), Yea 
Cardin (D-MD), Nay 
Carper (D-DE), Yea 
Casey (D-PA), Nay 
Cassidy (R-LA), Yea 
Coats (R-IN), Yea 
Cochran (R-MS), Yea 
Collins (R-ME), Nay 
Coons (D-DE), Yea 
Corker (R-TN), Not Voting 
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea 
Cotton (R-AR), Yea 
Crapo (R-ID), Yea 
Cruz (R-TX), Nay 
Daines (R-MT), Yea 
Donnelly (D-IN), Nay 
Durbin (D-IL), Nay 
Enzi (R-WY), Yea 
Ernst (R-IA), Yea 
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea 
Fischer (R-NE), Yea  Flake (R-AZ), Yea 
Franken (D-MN), Nay 
Gardner (R-CO), Yea 
Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay 
Graham (R-SC), Yea 
Grassley (R-IA), Yea 
Hatch (R-UT), Yea 
Heinrich (D-NM), Nay 
Heitkamp (D-ND), Yea 
Heller (R-NV), Yea 
Hirono (D-HI), Nay 
Hoeven (R-ND), Yea 
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea 
Isakson (R-GA), Yea 
Johnson (R-WI), Yea 
Kaine (D-VA), Yea 
King (I-ME), Nay 
Kirk (R-IL), Yea 
Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay 
Lankford (R-OK), Yea 
Leahy (D-VT), Nay 
Lee (R-UT), Not Voting 
Manchin (D-WV), Nay 
Markey (D-MA), Nay 
McCain (R-AZ), Yea 
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea 
McConnell (R-KY), Yea 
Menendez (D-NJ), Not Voting 
Merkley (D-OR), Nay 
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay 
Moran (R-KS), Yea 
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea 
Murphy (D-CT), Nay 
Murray (D-WA), Yea  Nelson (D-FL), Yea 
Paul (R-KY), Nay 
Perdue (R-GA), Yea 
Peters (D-MI), Nay 
Portman (R-OH), Yea 
Reed (D-RI), Nay 
Reid (D-NV), Nay 
Risch (R-ID), Yea 
Roberts (R-KS), Yea 
Rounds (R-SD), Yea 
Rubio (R-FL), Yea 
Sanders (I-VT), Nay 
Sasse (R-NE), Yea 
Schatz (D-HI), Nay 
Schumer (D-NY), Nay 
Scott (R-SC), Yea 
Sessions (R-AL), Nay 
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea 
Shelby (R-AL), Nay 
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay 
Sullivan (R-AK), Yea 
Tester (D-MT), Nay 
Thune (R-SD), Yea 
Tillis (R-NC), Yea 
Toomey (R-PA), Yea 
Udall (D-NM), Nay 
Vitter (R-LA), Yea 
Warner (D-VA), Yea 
Warren (D-MA), Nay 
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay 
Wicker (R-MS), Yea 
Wyden (D-OR), Yea 
Sages wife's picture



Fast track to 3rd world status. Check.

James_Cole's picture

Yeas: 47 repubs + 13 dems = supermajority. Dem president at total odds with his party:

Nays: 5 repubs. 31 Dems (including sanders), one I.

Funny thing it's being called 'bipartisan'

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praised his colleagues. "We demonstrated we can work together on a bipartisan basis" to achieve a goal, he said.

FL_Conservative's picture

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praised his colleagues. "We demonstrated we can work together on a bipartisan basis" to achieve a goal, he said.


When the goal is selling out our freedom.

MonetaryApostate's picture

I hate to tell you this, but Detox is likely going to be forced, and soon, so say goodbye to your alcohol....

Money Boo Boo's picture

FL ???


your link to the role call was for this measure;


Measure Number:  H.R. 2146 (Defending Public Safety Employees' Retirement Act ) Measure Title: 

A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal law enforcement officers, firefighters, and air traffic controllers to make penalty-free withdrawals from governmental plans after age 50, and for other purposes.



SERReal1's picture

Cruz and Paul both voted nay. Some sense in a couple candidates for the GOP at least.

razorthin's picture

yabut so did crazy bernie

r0mulus's picture

No, the dems only turn-coated enough to just barely get the bill passed, and not a single one more, as evidenced by Pelosi's dedicated whipping of "yea" votes and her own personal "no" vote. This is and has been the general strategy for some time now. There may be some genuine opposition amongst the Democrat ranks, but, it is for all intents and purposes, statistically insignificant insofar as it applies to the act of governance.

conscious being's picture

Nancy, whipping Yes, voting No. In short, they're putting on a show.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

ORI, I think your thinking of Jon Rappappaport (Rappaport)

Evil Peanut's picture

so is it time to feed the tree of liberty with the blood of traitors yet or are we waiting until we are all in chains and have nothing left to give these scum?

Alvin Fernald's picture

Definitely time to fight. You can start on a local level. As an example my family unit and I are moving to NH as part of the Free State Project. That move will occur next month.
There is no way for me to make a difference in western Wa since it was overrun by bastards and whores a long time ago.

Evil Peanut's picture

I was thinking Texas myself however I have a bad feeling the fed's will try to make an example of it to the other states to keep them in line

Almost Solvent's picture

The thing about Texas is that it has the most miliary bases and military troops of any state in the union.


If the Feds really are going to declare martial law someday, Texas will be on the front lines.

Meat Hammer's picture

How about Maine?  It's 90% rural.

Arnold's picture

We don't need any more southerners creeping up here.

We're full up.

11b40's picture

Now that is funny.  I guess the entire population of the U.S. could be considered Southerners if you live in Maine.  As a real, below the Mason-Dixon Line Southerner, I can honestly say I have never known anyone who moved to Maine.  Never even heard of anyone moving there.