[brbethke]

No offense, but now that you've got this off your chest, what exactly do you want President Bush to do about it?

P.S. President Clinton was the one who signed NAFTA.

[ARCADIA]

No offense, but now that you've got this off your chest, what exactly do you want President Bush to do about it? P.S. President Clinton was the one who signed NAFTA.

Perhaps President Bush should repeal it.

I am all for free trade; But, not at the expense of my country.

[Havoc]

Clinton signed Nafta, sure; but, it took Republicans to get it to his desk, didnt' it. And this president rather than pulling and scuttling it, has announced it is his policy to support it. What do you think I expect - to watch this policy scuttle our economy as momentum builds and jobs continue pouring out of this country. It's already screwed me. EDS isn't going to just wake up tomorrow and say, oops, we canned poor so and so over there because he's an American or not a mexican, maybe we should reconsider. I'm not a mexican and I can't work for the pittance they're paying Mexicans to take over my job servicing a business located in this country. And it wasn't merely the decision of EDS. Our client had a good deal to do with it from what they tell us - that's assuming they've been honest about it and I have no reason to believe they haven't.

I want President Bush to stop requiring Americans to be fish in a barrel over a non-existant competition that is forcing americans out of work in droves. I want the President to uphold our constitution like he took oath to do. I expect him to do his job - and that's serving and protecting the National interests of Americans - not those of the United Nations. This is about "globalism" and the urges of a handful of power mongers to make us a state in a global government. That ain't in my constitution. What is in my constitution is a phrase called "equal protection" which in my mind is being spat upon.

But there is definitely no ammendment to our constitution ANYWHERE which has been ratified by the houses of the required majority of states to give the congress or the president authority to subjugate this nation to any global government or economic system. And treaty authority doesn't give that power. It is a power not authorized to the government on behalf of the people no matter how you might handwring about it. And if you guys continue down that road, you may find yourselves with more trouble than you're bargaining for.

I expect the constitution to be upheld and I expect rights to be upheld. And I further expect this crap to end. I don't see it happening without a struggle but if that's what is pressed, I'll do my part.

[brownsfan]

No offense, but now that you've got this off your chest, what exactly do you want President Bush to do about it?

At least you aren't telling him to run to the DU and join the Democrats. Ok, how about this? How about penalties/tarriffs on businesses that do the endrun. Sure, I agree some 3rd world development is necessary, but wholesale offshoring isn't. Maybe the penalty/tarriff would be in proportion to the pollution/worker safety laws the company is trying to avoid. I'm sure that could be refined. The point is, if Mr. Bush continues to deal with this issue as he is now, he will look more and more like Bush Sr. That is what sunk Bush Sr. The economy. The heirarchy of needs comes into play. Sure we need to be safe, but we need to eat and have shelter more.