She was right. There's NO reason that any American company should have to import this sort of thing, especially into our food supply! There are reports coming in from all over the world about people dying due to the use of Chinese glycerin in medicines that turned out to by ethylene glycol. And we all know about the contaminated wheat gluten that wound up in pet food, as well as food for animals in OUR food supply! It's sheer greed, but more importantly, it's greed AT THE EXPENSE of human decency. At what point do we say, "you know, I'm going to spend an extra $10 on this product, because they don't use slave labor." Or "I don't think that I want those imported vegetables, because they fertilize them with human waste, and that's just not a good thing."
We are fully capable of supplying ourselves with what we want and need, all we need is the will to do so. Or at least we were, until we began moving much of our manufacturing capabilities offshore. And I don't believe the people who say that the only important thing is the price: If people were told what's been going on, they'd demand change. I had no idea about this stuff until peoples' pets started dying, and then, all of a sudden, it was an issue? I'd be willing to bet that if anyone were informed that the Chinese were using an industrial chemical to fool testers into thinking that they were getting more protein then they actually were, and by the way, that chemicle is toxic, there would have been decisions to use a different supplier.
Mark
Good for Tammy! THis whole thing makes me so very angry.
I like Tammy Bruce! She cuts through the nonsense doesn’t she?
Some Duncan Hunter comments on China:
“We’re down to one-sies and two-sies on critical aspects of the defense industrial base. This is a security problem! I have two reasons for wanting to maintain a strong industrial base in this country. Number one, good high-paying jobs for our people and good profits for our businesses so they can continue to make capital investment and, secondly, national security. It could get to the point where it is primarily a national security problem.”
“Evidence of a transfer of ballistic missile technology to China during President Clinton’s Administration, by one of the President’s major campaign contributors, itself justifies inquiry into possible grounds for impeachment of the President”
AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF NONDISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT (NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TREATMENT) TO PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
(House of Representatives - May 24, 2000)
Mr. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, in March of 1941 our former colleague, Carl Anderson, a Representative from Minnesota, warned us about the danger of arming potential adversaries. He said then that the chances of war with Japan were 50-50, and, that if our fleet had to meet the Japanese fleet, we would meet a fleet which was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum.
A few months later at Pearl Harbor, 21 American ships were destroyed, 300 planes were destroyed, and 5,000 Americans were killed and wounded by a Japanese fleet that was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum.
Well, whichever side of this debate one is on, everyone here has to concede American dollars are arming Communist China today. Let us look at what they have done with the $350 billion that they have amassed in trade surplus over the last 8 years. The Sovrenny class missile destroyers, straight from the Russians, designed for one purpose, to kill American aircraft carriers, were purchased with American trade dollars. The SU-27 fighter aircraft, high performance aircraft, capable of effective warfare against America’s top line fighters, were purchased with American trade dollars. On top of that, kilo class submarines, AWACS aircraft, air-to-air refueling capability, sophisticated communications equipment, all purchased with American trade dollars, and compounding the danger, China’s own sales to nations like Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and North Korea of components for weapons of mass destruction.
Mr. Speaker, we have just left the bloodiest century in the history of the world. In a way it is a century of triumph for America. The story of the 20th century is the story of a great Democrat President, FDR, who stood with Winston Churchill against Germany’s Hitler. It is the story of a great Republican President, Ronald Reagan, who faced down the Soviet empire and disassembled Soviet Union.
But it is also a story of tragedy, because 617,000 Americans lie in cemeteries across this country and in the oceans of the world and the battlefields of the world as people who were killed in action saving the world for freedom in this last century.
Many of them fought in wars for which we were unprepared; that is a tragedy of the 20th century. But the greater tragedy, which could be the tragedy of the 21st century, could happen if this country, having fought and bled and sacrificed to dissolve the Soviet empire, through a massive infusion of cash produces, by our own hand, another military superpower, and if the cemeteries of this country one day hold the bodies of Americans in uniform killed with weapons purchased by American trade dollars. That will be the greatest tragedy of this new 21st century.
Mr. Speaker, let us avoid that tragedy. Vote no on PNTR.
http://www.house.gov/hunter/news_prior_2006/PNTR-flrspch.htm
You've touched on the core issue.. now, HOW to deal with it?
>We are fully capable of supplying ourselves with what we want and need, all we need is the will to do so.<
When you have a president who is a globaliist, demanding that we expand trade with China the will to do so isn’t there and won’t be. Bush is building a system to destroy America.