Embracing free trade is cowardice and surrender? I don't think so. And I am wondering what is victory? Insulation from competition? Liberal used to mean 'free to act' - it now means 'freedom from having to act'.
Frankly you need to define your terms. You may not excuse appeasement as free trade. Did you see this column Col. Pappas today? This is a good reminder to us all...
The Marketplace, the Price of Crude and Barbara Streisand
by Col. Bob Pappas, USMC, Ret.
When one speaks of the marketplace and the price of oil in the same sentence, they evidently mean "marketplace" within a very narrow definition. The so-called "marketplace" is the commodities market where traders bid on quantities of oil. Price is in proportion to the availability of oil, in this case crude oil in a variety of qualities. So far, so good.
Here's the kicker, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) with the tacit approval of non-OPEC counties controls the price of crude by the amount of oil it makes available to the marketplace. Although non-OPEC countries in the aggregate produce more crude that OPEC, OPEC is far and away the largest single factor in determining the market price of crude.
By withholding production, OPEC decreases supplies and prices go up; by increasing production, OPEC increases supplies and the price moves downward accordingly. Therefore, it is apparent that OPEC fixes, repeat, fixes the price, and non-OPEC countries and companies that drill for, pump, refine and distribute their own oil products benefit from such price fixing.
How else did oil companies reap obscene profits in the last quarter of 2005? Do they have a right to a profit? Of course. But let's not play the silly game that the price is "market driven," when it is absolutely manipulated.
In a 27 January 06 article posted on CNN's website, Soros, the billionaire investor forecasts that the price of a barrel of crude will likely reach $262.00 per barrel in the relatively near future. That would drive prices at the pump to the five dollar or higher per gallon. But consider this, most of the rest of the world already pays prices that high. Would it come as a surprise to learn that it probably would not substantially change most American's driving habits? That would only come were prices to reach 10-12 dollars a gallon, and for most "liberals" that wouldn't matter.
Changing gears for a moment. Has anyone heard whether or not Michael Moore, yes, Michael Moore of Fahrenheit 911, has given his wealth to the poor, that he has lowered his standard of living to the level of those he supposedly champions? How about Soros, the billionaire investor? Or insignificant players, like "B.S." (that's Barbara Streisand), or name any other personage on the political left. Of the so-called, "liberals" whose hearts are supposedly big, how many have distributed their wealth to the poor? One does not need government taxation to do that; there are hundreds of well-managed and deserving charities that depend on the good will of donors to minister to the needs of the financially less endowed. How many so-called, "liberals" have given it all away?
Back to oil. This writer, for one has about had it with the price at the pump, especially when he realizes that much of his hard earned "dough" goes to support opulent lifestyles of mid-east despots whose people live in squalor. Isn't the giving of alms one of the five pillars of Islam? The answer is, "yes," for "liberals" who haven't taken the time to learn. So, how much do they share with their underlings? Pathetic little, yet to the "liberal" way of thinking, squalor is the reason the Arab street is angry with the U.S.; "B.arbara S.treisand!"
If mid-east rulers where half as interested in helping their own people with the oil profits they reap, as they are in keeping things stirred up against the U.S. for liberating the people of Iraq, and for supporting the right of Israel to exist where it is, their people could have a good to excellent standard of living. But they are so selfish, so corrupt, so hypocritical that it stinks; and "liberals" have the temerity to blame Israel and the US for the problems? Again, "B.arbara S.treisand!"
However, the President is wrong when he talks about oil and the market place, and damn it he knows how it works! As noted in earlier essays on the subject of oil, the United States cannot abide other countries controlling its foreign policy, economy, and domestic affairs through the use of oil. Especially when there are significant resources that could be exploited; or is the political will to drive the price of gasoline up in some wrongheaded notion that it would reduce green house gas emissions through lowered consumption?
Hello, "liberals," who hurts most when the price of gasoline climbs? Then why the hell don't you loosen the noose around their necks and allow exploitation of domestic resources? Why not approve the President's recommendations for Energy Independence instead of mocking them?
Is it time to regulate oil companies like the public utilities that they really are? Let's see if the panderers in Congress have the interests of the country, or their own careerist objectives at heart?
Semper Fidelis
[ COMMENT: Just like OPEC controls the price of oil...the Chinese Communist Party is controlling the price of labor in their country. And by sheer weight of the force that represents, also their part of the Third World. They all have currency pegs...predominantly influenced by the Chinese Yuan's rate. If the Yuan went up against the dollar, they would also. ]