[Designer]

Allow me to be the first to congratulate you on taking the same side as these openly Communist organizations. Bravo!!

You fellows are wrong on two counts:

1.The conservatives are not on the "far right wing" as the dopes in the MSM would have you believe.

2.The communists object to trade agreements for different reasons than do patriots. Do not confuse the coincidental appearance of "agreement" between leftists and conservatives with fundamental differences.

When you have sufficiently digested these two facts, you are then ready to examine the rest of the issue, namely; why is it, exactly, are the conservatives against those so-called "trade" agreements?

[1rudeboy]

If you are willing to stipulate (as am I) that certain conservatives object to trade agreements for different reasons than do communists, then an examination of why some of those conservatives rely upon "communist" (for lack of a better term) sources to make their arguments is well in-bounds, since at best it indicates intellectual laziness. Moreover, not all such behavior is "coincidental." Some posters, after being informed that their source is "less than persuasive" (again, for lack of a better term), acknowledge the objection and find other more reputable sources. Others, unfortunately, ignore these concerns and continue to rely upon sources such as Public Citizen, E.P.I., Common Dreams, etc., that only serve to weaken their own arguments.

Once a pattern is established, the "coincidence" excuse fails . . . and in my opinion, repeated reliance on such sources creates a permissible inference that the person citing to them is a Leftist as well.

[hedgetrimmer]

One more fact that is missing, is that the "free traders" embrace communists. Their policies have allowd China MFN, and they are making the communist oppressors in many countries very very wealthy with their phony "free trade" policies.

So who takes the same side as the openly communist? Clearly the "free traders".

[Mase]

The conservatives are not on the "far right wing" as the dopes in the MSM would have you believe.

I've always considered Pat Buchanan and his minions to be on the far right fringe of the political spectrum. What these folks miss is that free trade takes place between individuals and not governments unless of course, government has complete control of the economy. When people think of trade as between governments they also think of trade as having winners and losers. Hence, the misunderstanding and hand-wringing associated with trade deficits.

The next step for these folks is to claim that, within a market economy that creates winners and losers, there will undoubtedly be conflict between the varying interests of social classes as well as between nations. If you follow these threads you will witness numerous claims that the working class is suffering greatly and that the middle class is being decimated. They can never offer proof of this from any reputable sources. Instead, they rely on left wing websites to support their dubious claims. This activity, IMO, is very leftist in nature.

Free trade is simply based on freedom. The freedom of any citizen of one country to trade with a citizen from another. If both parties didn't benefit, they wouldn't trade.

The alternative to free trade is protectionism. Conservatives who support protectionist measures such as tariffs and quotas, are arguing for allowing the government to take more of our money, increased prices for American citizens and for additional governmental control of our economy. Criticizing the freedom to trade while advocating for more government control of our money and economy strikes me as very socialistic in nature.

The thought that the state can appropriately determine what industry is in need of protection, what quotas or tariffs should apply, and for how long, is laughable. Protectionists must believe that the government is responsible, capable and reliable. To me, this sounds very familiar to those on the left.

Conservatives have, in the past, been in favor of political isolationism. they have never been, like Pat Buchanan, in favor of economic isolationism. Far right conservatives believe that through protectionist policies, we can protect jobs and create domestic strength and prosperity. History however, has taught us otherwise.

[Toddsterpatriot]

When you have sufficiently digested these two facts, you are then ready to examine the rest of the issue, namely; why is it, exactly, are the conservatives against those so-called "trade" agreements?

I suspect the so-called conservatives who are against freer trade are economically ignorant.

[Toddsterpatriot]

2.The communists object to trade agreements for different reasons than do patriots. Do not confuse the coincidental appearance of "agreement" between leftists and conservatives with fundamental differences.

Please explain why each group objects and then we'll discuss how much they agree.