Posted on 05/09/2009 12:47:21 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
I must admit, the notion that we should ignore his public pronouncements about the value of economic liberty and getting the government off of our backs because his ideas came to fruition before he left office is a real hoot.
I buy American. What irritates me is that you want me to pay more for the American I buy.
Yeah I pay lots of attention to noobtards who say how stupid Michael Reagan is.
Of course I want you to pay more. After all, it says so right on that straw man you’re holding up.
Oh wait. You’re not holding it up! Who is that?
That’s an illegally low-paid undocumented laborer, you have holding it. Poor guy.
Looks like you don’t feed him.
As for Michael Reagan and Harley Davidson, so what? All presidents impose tariffs on one product or another, at one time or another. That doesn't make them advocates of Smoot-Hawley II.
How is your desire to raise my taxes a “strawman?” Seriously . . . you need to come up with a better response than “strawman.” In your language, does “strawman” mean “I can’t think of an intelligent response, so I’ll try to bluff my way out of it?”
OK how about this approach, since you seem stuck.
China’s market is not open.
China’s market is in fact quite closed - to everything China is capable of making. Only those things which they cannot (yet) make and exclude also.
America’s market is open.
Which country, owes a trillion dollars, to which?
Which country, is growing and has a massive world-class manufacturing base?
Hint: Better start learning to speak Mandarin.
Nice post.
He didn't sign it.
What did he say about the version of NAFTA finalized under Clinton?
[crickets]
RINOs are allergic to facts.
That's the argument you are constructing: you are arguing that we ignore the weight of historical evidence concerning Reagan's commitment to free markets and assume that he did not favor the result of a policy he created, promoted, and worked to establish. In other words, everything he worked for should be discounted because of who ultimately implemented it.
"What did he say" about Clinton's "version?" Tell us. Proceed with your argument.
[crickets]
That's the sound of you running for the tall grass.
Really? Was the version that Reagan supported full of the environmental crap that Clinton inserted?
Sounds like more RINO lies.
And what environmental crap would that be? Once you get a handle on the specifics, it should only take you a small amount of time to research who inserted what and when.
Reagan saw America as more than just an economy and the people are more than a commodity.
So Reagan foresaw and approved of the multiple environmental side agreements to NAFTA subsequently created by Al Gore and his Environmental Protection Commission at the behest of Bill Clinton?
RINOs are fascinating.
I know someone here on FR was making that argument to me just last week.
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.