Posted on 01/09/2007 8:27:45 AM PST by jmc813
Sorry if you weren't the instigator. I was responding to your post in #84.
You're just making to much sense.
Opposing Bush on anything, is not to be tolerated, no matter by whom, no matter how deserved. Bottom line, period.
Looks like the same goes for the former Pope.
No Pope has ever been "okay with boy buggering." Given your previous comment about "Vatican revenue streams," though, I don't suppose you have a very charitable view of the Roman Catholic Church.
Nonetheless, Corsi's statement was false, and if he is the Catholic he claims to be, he KNEW it was false. That makes him a liar.
No "practicing Catholic" would make that accusation. Especially not in those terms. Corsi sounds more like a lapsed Catholic to me. Someone who was raised a Catholic, and probably went to Catholic school, but doesn't go to church any more. That's not the same thing as a pro-abortion wife-sawpping CINO like John Kerry, but it's not the same thing as practicing Catholic.
Like chilling old claret or beating someone else's wife, it's just not done in the best circles.
"...does it really make any sense—any sense at all – to frighten the public into believing that there is a current, powerful mass movement on behalf of such plans?"
Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
You should note that I mentioned that Jefferson changed from that naive utopianist. Of course, Idealists are not always confined to the liberal ranks. However, it is generally expected that a conservative will be closer to reality...trying to conserve it..., rather than given to imaginations thereto.
I fondly remember one of the sayings that Reagan liked to repeat:
"A conservative is a liberal who got mugged the other day."
Jefferson got mugged.
The average Mexican spends more money on US imports than the average American spends on Mexican imports
Even if that were true, of what conceivable relevance?
And the actual trade deficits with Mexico, and Canada respectively set records that blow away the "record" export claims...and the implied "average" purchase comparison. As for those claimed averages, consider these numbers reported last year by the U.S. Census Bureau:
The 2005 deficit with Canada ($76.5 billion), exports to Canada ($211.3 billion), and imports from Canada ($287.9 billion) were records.The 2005 deficit with Mexico ($50.1 billion), exports to Mexico ($120.0 billion) and imports from Mexico ($170.2 billion) were records.
Who would want to join with or annex Mexico with all its problems? The place is starting to look like Columbia.
Um, it's you who is wrong. The trade deficit with Mexico look alarming until you realize that there are 300mm Americans, and only 100mm Mexicans.
Here's my own Reagan quote:
"Our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets. I recognize ... the inescapable conclusion that all of history has taught: The freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations." -Ronald Reagan
Empirically, it is precisely the reverse of this. Indeed, the problem all during the Republican protectionist era was an embarassment of tax revenue.
And once U.S. manufacturing is divested, that is when you really will see things become subsequently "more expensive".
As for driving exporters "out of business," that is ridiculous. U.S. companies always had the vast internal free market of the United States itself. The exports were merely gravy.
And the deficit facts make clear that the substitution of a domestic free market, to an almost completely unprotected one in exchange for the promises of fantastic "global markets" has proven to be a complete chimera. A false hope. And a sadly deluded one at that.
Phyllis Schafley)sp? Has written some of the same things about The TTC and the North American Union. I wonder why Medved hasn't criticized her?
False.
The trade deficit with Mexico look alarming until you realize that there are 300mm Americans, and only 100mm Mexicans.
It is actually more alarming still when you consider that we used to have an outright surplus. Your "diminution" by "proportion" doesn't change the facts, that on average, the U.S. citizen...as is his society... is now running in the red. And the impacts on affected groups, resulting in negatives for the "median" are still more pronounced.
It is good of you to quote Ronald Reagan, he was a crafty one. Nothing wrong with trying to open up foreign markets. Trade reciprocity with other high-paying countries is clearly a good deal. Adam Smith-approved.
But trade-war mercantilist states and governmentally-structured slave-wage nations are another story. Reagan often used Fair trade in the very same breath as he used free trade. Just what do you think it meant to him, h'mmmm?
But letting a foreign nation tilt the playing field without direct response was not his policy.
Note my tag-line quote of Ronald Reagan below.
True, but we had double digit unemployment when Reagan took office. Overall, he was a firm believer in free markets. The freeer the better. At this time, we are at record high employment figures.
It is infuriating to hear this 1960s liberal speak of Barry Goldwater. Back then he was screaming "Racist!" "Bigot!" "Warmonger!" at the Senator from Arizona. His bio says he entered Yale at the time of the Goldwater v. LBJ election; he even worked for Congressman Ron Dellums during his early years.
We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefiting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people. This is the one irrefutable lesson of the entire postwar period contradicting the notion that rigid government controls are essential to economic development.
--Ronald Reagan, September 29, 1981
Ridiculous. Medved invites him (Corsi) on the show if he's a gentleman. Instead he cowers and says Corsi must do this or that to get on the Medved show. Beyond pathetic
I am a professional mathematician.
If you can point to anything Corsi presents that in any way resembles a mathematical proof, I would like to see it.
That's an old trick. Covering the needle with the haystack. You put in a long argument, covering many different topics and obscuring the issue. When somebody points at one part of it, you just misdirect to somewhere else in the pile.
Actually, haystack isn't the best analogy, but I'll stay above the scatalogical.
It's clear to me who knows the subject Hawkins and Medved are emotionally reacting to Corsi's material. It's too foreign to their world view. It upsets them
It's pixies in the garden. If you're so deranged that you think there are pixies in the garden, there is no way to argue with you. There's no reason, no rationality.
I prefer the absurdist method and I've done it again and again. I say I'm going to be the Supreme Emperor of the NAU with my visage on the Amero. Well why not? Who is going to run this elaborate conspiracy?
Immigration is a strawman -- nothing to do with the conspiracy except to say that if anyone doesn't buy the conspiracy, then he must be for immigration and therefore be in favor of the conspiracy.
Medved is most famously anti-conspiracy. He devotes a lot of his showtime to ridiculing conspiracies. This is a textbook conspiracy, sponsored by one man in order to sell books.
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.