Global Backlash Against Globalization? (Hunter opposes the NAU agenda!)

The August Review ^ | 6-27-07 | Patrick Wood

[ovrtaxt]

For decades, global elitists have claimed special knowledge that they alone could solve the world’s problems if only we (the ignorant masses) would leave them alone to get on with it. It would create jobs and economic prosperity, they said. They promised peace and security. Truly, what’s not to like about their New World Order?

Imagine how shocked they were when Financial Times published the results of an FT/Harris poll (July 22, 2007) which showed almost universal disdain for the very policies that were supposed to save us. According to the FT article,

The depth of anti-globalization feeling in the FT/Harris poll, which surveyed more than 1,000 people online in each of the six countries, will dismay policy-makers and corporate executives. Their view that opening economies to freer trade is beneficial to poor and rich countries alike is not shared by the citizens of rich countries, regardless of how liberal their economic traditions.

Yet, their clever defense is already built into the FT title: “Globalization backlash in rich nations”.

That’s right, it’s only the selfish rich nations who are resisting globalization. And, we should slap more taxes on ourselves to teach ourselves a lesson.

But wait, does this mean that poor nations are embracing globalization?

Apparently, anti-globalization riots and protests in 3rd world countries aren’t taken into account. Nor does it seem to matter that communist and other brutal dictatorships don’t even allow dissent; remember that there are plenty of dictatorships involved with the global elite, including countries like communist China.

In the FT/Harris poll, the question was posed: “Do you think globalization is having a positive or negative effect in your country?”

Less than 20 percent of citizen respondents in the UK, France, Spain and the U.S. viewed it as having a positive effect. Germany and Italy were a bit higher.

Still, well over 50 percent of all respondents voted “No” to globalization.

Another shock to the pro-globalization elite is the overwhelming passage (362-63 on July 24, 2007) of the Duncan Hunter Amendment (H.R. 3074) to the Transportation Appropriations Act, “prohibiting the use of federal funds for participation in working groups under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (), including the creation of the Super Highway.”

“The proposed NAFTA Super Highway presents significant challenges to our nation’s security, the safety of vehicle motorists, and will likely drive down wages for American workers,” said Congressman Hunter.  “Much like NAFTA, the super highway is designed to serve the interests of our trading partners and will lead to neither security nor prosperity.”

Congressman Duncan Hunter, also a presidential candidate, told his fellow congressional colleagues,

“This 12 lane highway, which is already under construction in Texas, will fast-track thousands of cargo containers across the U.S. without adequate security.  These containers will move from Mexico, a country with a record of corruption and involvement in the drug trade, across a border that is already porous and insufficiently protected.

“Unfortunately, very little is known about the NAFTA Super Highway.  This amendment will provide Congress the opportunity to exercise oversight of the highway, which remains a subject of question and uncertainty, and ensure that our safety and security will not be comprised in order to promote the business interests of our neighbors.”

Obviously, criticism of globalization in the U.S. is certainly not limited to citizens only.

What end-run will the global elite devise to counter these negative sentiments? Will they simply stiffen their necks even more and barge ahead in defiance of citizens and Congress alike?

If history is a guide, they will most likely dismiss all such criticisms as coming from ignorant people who don’t know any better in the first place.

Related video:
     Call for more tax on rich

[ovrtaxt]

Hunter, Tancredo and Paul are the only anti-globalist candidates in this race. Thompson just hired Spencer Abraham, an illegal immigration proponent, yesterday.

Get a clue, you Fredheads. This is not a good sign.

[ovrtaxt]

This is important. Please read this carefully if you’re a Thompson supporter.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

I am a Hunter fan and I like Tancredo too.

Fred Thompson will be known by the company he keeps.

[ovrtaxt]

Hunter/NAU ping!

[WWTD]

Fred is a member of the CFR. That’s all I needed to know. But some others need more evidence, and the hiring of Spencer Abraham is certainly demonstrative of just who he is. Also, Fred is the fair-haired political child of Howard Baker, he who spearheaded the giving away of the Panama Canal.

And lest ye forget, he was also a driving force behind McCain-Feingold, a wonderful bill that made sure us peasents don’t rock the boat too much just before an election. He claims to have second thoughts now, but that doesn’t strike me as too honest. Most of us were adamantly opposed to it when it went down six years ago. Limbaugh sure knew it was a stinker from the get-go. Our fearless Republican leaders said that Bush would sign it, but, wink wink, the courts would fix it.

And yes, the only three candidates I like are Hunter, Tancredo, and Paul. I especially like Paul, since he seems to be the only politician left in Washington who believes in reducing the size of government (Reagan and Goldwater must be spinning in their graves right now), but the other two at least believe in American sovereignty and restoring the American culture that we used to believe in.

Kudos to Hunter for giving the finger to the SPP. And thank you to the House for backing it. You see, the CFR is pretty much invitation only, and they don’t waste their time with most House members. But there are a lot of CFR members in the Senate. Good old boy Fred (who drives his red pickup for a couple of blocks before he gets back in his limo and the truck is put back on a lift) was recruited only after he was already a senator.

Incidentally, that nutball in Houston did one good thing the other day when she questioned Fred about the CFR. He claimed to have no idea that they are behind the NAU. Yeah....right! Then she went off the deep end and start screaming about WTC7, but still, she caught Fred in an obvious whopping lie, which was amusing.

[ovrtaxt]

On Thompson, some people are already doing backflips trying to dismiss this latest turn of events. It’s very significant to me. I’ve been waiting and waiting for some indication of Fred’s opinion on globalization, and the hiring of Abraham is apparently my answer.

[ovrtaxt]

I didn’t know about the Houston incident, lol sounds pretty hairy!

A shame that some people who recognize the NAU threat are also nutcases. The media blackout marginalizes it into conspiracy territory. I guess a conspiracy theory is any subject the MSM doesn’t cram down our throats.

[ovrtaxt]

AFIRE/ Congresscritters ping...

[Greg F]

No one with legal training could fail to see the problem with McCain-Fiengold. It restricts political speech. It is a big black mark to have voted for it or signed it. Something was felt to be more important than free speech and the Constitution when the vote was made. Does anyone know what F. Thompson thought was more important?

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

I agree - we have our answer.

I like Fred, he is a good actor and has accomplished much in his life.

[Nephi]

This is the primary process - it can only help to have Hunter, Tancredo and Paul participate in the Republican party debate in order to establish which direction the rank and file want to take the party and the nation.

[ovrtaxt]

Your thoughts?

[bcsco]

This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.

FReep This Poll! Federal judge strikes down the Illegal Immigration Relief Act in Hazelton, PA.

Alexander (TN Senate) Votes For Measure To Strengthen Border Security

Immigrant detention center lucrative for Willacy County[Texas]

Judge voids Pa. city’s illegal immigration law

(GA) Hiring officers get tips on new immigration rules

[South Texas:] McAllen mayor takes border wall protest to Monterrey

Study: Immigrants' progress is slowing

[Hostage]

Here’s my thoughts:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1871968/posts?page=221#221

Are we voting for Spencer Abraham or Fred Thompson?

Is FDT an Open Borders person? If you think yes, then why has he come out as a secure the borders first person? And why did he recently criticize a court decision that struck down an local illegal alien prevention policy?

Shall we go fishing through Hunter or Tancredo or (insert name here) staff rosters to unearth some inconsistent viewpoints? Think we can’t do it? Of course we can! Shall we do it? No. Why? Because these candidates are not attracting enough support to put them in play. I like Hunter’s positions but I also like some of Ron Paul’s positions. FDT’s position on borders is excellent and he let his supporters know what he thought of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill calling it ‘Incomprehensible Immigration reform’.

FDT hired two campaign managers.

When he is President he will meet and shake hands with some real whacked out politicos and he will smile before the cameras. Knowing this, is that a reason to sink him now? Afterall, FDR was photographed sitting next to Stalin and smiling.

I will wager Spencer Abraham will come out and declare that he has rethought his position on borders, if he is asked. But Randy Enright will answer for him if need be. Abraham is there for one reason, raise $$$.

If Conservatives can’t see what a golden opportunity they have in nominating a real conservative like Fred Thompson, then they deserve to lose. Hunter-Tancredo and the rest will not grab the American people like FDT can.

[nicmarlo]

when she questioned Fred about the CFR. He claimed to have no idea that they are behind the NAU. Yeah....right!

bttt!

[nicmarlo]

No one with legal training could fail to see the problem with McCain-Fiengold. It restricts political speech. It is a big black mark to have voted for it or signed it. Something was felt to be more important than free speech and the Constitution when the vote was made. Does anyone know what F. Thompson thought was more important?

Globalization? The NAU?

[nw_arizona_granny]

Ping...

Thanks to Ovrtaxt for posting this report.

[bcsco]

If Conservatives can’t see what a golden opportunity they have in nominating a real conservative like Fred Thompson, then they deserve to lose. Hunter-Tancredo and the rest will not grab the American people like FDT can.

I agree. Thompson has had little reason to come out on policy yet because he hasn't declared. He has spoken on some issues, mainly through his radio addresses and speeches, but these aren't policy statements. That time will come.

Meanwhile, there are many here on FR who are hell bent on dissing any candidate they don't support (and their supporters as well). This is especially true of Rudy and Paul bots. It's sad, because it's a tempest in a teapot. It accomplishes nothing except to alienate members within the FR community, and makes their own candidate seem ugly.

All this early campaign hysteria is just that; hysteria. And all these screaming meemies accomplish is a major distaste toward themselves for their personal attacks (which, yes, I have responded to in kind at times...but only in response), and a divisive wedge into what should be a political discussion.

A pox on all their houses!

[Borax Queen]

And yes, the only three candidates I like are Hunter, Tancredo, and Paul. I especially like Paul, since he seems to be the only politician left in Washington who believes in reducing the size of government (Reagan and Goldwater must be spinning in their graves right now), but the other two at least believe in American sovereignty and restoring the American culture that we used to believe in.

Thanks for the ping and bumping post.

[Calpernia]

Meet the Overlords:

>>>For decades, global elitists have claimed special knowledge that they alone could solve the world’s problems if only we (the ignorant masses) would leave them alone to get on with it.<<<

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1870462/posts
“The Elders”