Posted on 05/09/2009 12:47:21 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
Yesterday I happened upon a post by a fellow FReeper. In retrospect, I am sorry for responding rudely to their post - and I hope they happen upon this apology.
The post was presenting their heartfelt opinion that American industry and our system itself must be allowed to come apart so that something better can replace it.
It was a Rand-ian position. The system is becoming oppressive, therefore we must weaken it.
It is no accident that this unmatched potential for progress and prosperity exists in three countries with such long-standing heritages of free government. A developing closeness among Canada, Mexico and the United States -- a North American accord -- would permit achievement of that potential in each country beyond that which I believe any of them -- strong as they are -- could accomplish in the absence of such cooperation. In fact, the key to our own future security may lie in both Mexico and Canada becoming much stronger countries than they are today.
No one can say at this point precisely what form future cooperation among our three countries will take. But if I am elected President, I would be willing to invite each of our neighbors to send a special representative to our government to sit in on high level planning sessions with us, as partners, mutually concerned about the future of our continent. First, I would immediately seek the views and ideas of Canadian and Mexican leaders on this issue, and work tirelessly with them to develop closer ties among our peoples. It is time we stopped thinking of our nearest neighbors as foreigners.
By developing methods of working closely together, we will lay the foundations for future cooperation on a broader and more significant scale. We will put to rest any doubts of those cynical enough to believe that the United States would seek to dominate any relationship among our three countries, or foolish enough to think that the governments and peoples of Canada and Mexico would ever permit such domination to occur. I, for one, am confident that we can show the world by example that the nations of North America are ready, within the context of an unswerving commitment to freedom, to see new forms of accommodation to meet a changing world. A developing closeness between the United States, Canada and Mexico would serve notice on friends and foe alike that we were prepared for a long haul, looking outward again and confident of our future; that together we are going to create jobs, to generate new fortunes of wealth for many and provide a legacy for the children of each of our countries. Two hundred years ago, we taught the world that a new form of government, created out of the genius of man to cope with his circumstances, could succeed in bringing a measure of quality to human life previously thought impossible.
Now let us work toward the goal of using the assets of this continent, its resources, technology, and foodstuffs in the most efficient ways possible for the common good of all its people. It may take the next 100 years, but we can dare to dream that at some future date a map of the world might show the North American continent as one in which the people's commerce of its three strong countries flow more freely across their present borders than they do today.
That's an excerpt from President Reagan's presidential announcement speech from 1979. In which he calls for Canada, the US, and Mexico to strengthen ties and to allow commerce to flow freely across the borders. And during his terms the foundations for NAFTA were created, and ultimately approved by the Canadian and Mexican governments during GHW Bush's term...
Please read that again. Not as foreigners but neighbors. Working together, asking what we can do to help, not dominating, opening borders and reducing barriers. All the stuff you isolationists love to get all riled up about.
Now, answer the question, you know how it is relevant. You and your type constantly shout "Buy American!" So tell me which is more American that I may buy as you demand?
You keep falsely asserting that the Clinton vision was Reagan's.
Pathetic.
Good luck. My Reagan quote was ignored. It was only from a mere State of the Union Address.
I believe it all stems from envy. That’s also the basis for Marxism in all its forms (communist, fascist, nationalist). They want what someone else has and will use any means necessary to take it.
Really, all those railing against NAFTA and free trade would be very enlightened to read Friedman’s book “Capitalism and Freedom” and see just how the two are tied together. You really cannot have one without the other. You end up with some form of Marxism if you try...
“That’s not the Reagan I knew”...
They like tossing Reagan under their bus when they’re shown his TRUE belief in capitalism and free trade!
You dishonestly gave Ronald Reagan "credit" for the the greenest trade agreement ever written, which was actually negotiated by Bill Clinton and algore. RINOs have no shame.
No. Just, no. You are asserting that Reagan would have repudiated the Clinton version. Based on what a unicorn told you, of course.
True or False: President Reagan negotiated a Free Trade Agreement with Canada, and called for it to be expanded to Mexico.
Simple question, can you answer it?
Hey, I don’t feel like looking it up, and I remember you have in the past: do you remember if Clinton signed NAFTA? Or was it Bush 41?
You RINOs can't help yourselves. The actual quote:
"It may take the next 100 years, but we can dare to dream that at some future date a map of the world might show the North American continent as one in which the people's commerce of its three strong countries flow more freely across their present borders than they do today."And still you have utterly failed to provide comparative language from the different Clinton and Reagan versions of NAFTA.
You dare not.
LOL
Invincible ignorance.
True or False: President Reagan negotiated a Free Trade Agreement with Canada, and called for it to be expanded to Mexico.
Simple question, can you answer it?
That wasn't NAFTA.
True or False: President Reagan negotiated a Free Trade Agreement with Canada, and called for it to be expanded to Mexico.
Simple question, can you answer it?
Asked and answered.
His agreement (which you can’t even bring yourself to name) with Canada to eliminate tariffs on bilateral goods trade over a ten year period was not NAFTA.
You’re desperate to change the subject.
Essentially, we can boil your position down to:
Is that a correct summation? Just want to make sure we get this solidly determined.
His agreement cut tariffs but denied the Canadian demand for free competition in American government procurement contracts.
And it was not NAFTA.
So fundamentally Ronald Reagan believed in free trade for private enterprise as a way to strengthen and grow the economy. Can we agree on that point? Let's see what common ground we have first...
Ronald Reagan wanted American access to Canadian energy. He largely got that. He largely didn't get American access to the Canadian education and health care sectors.
And it wasn't NAFTA.
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.