1. I have requested the author to provide sources for some of the wild claims he puts forth in this article. He has chosen to ignore my very civil requests for those sources.
2. This article was written for the sole purpose of inflaming the passions of many sock mill workers that live in the Fort Payne area who would be adversely affected by this legislations, with the selfish aim of this author to enhance his own image and boost readership. I truly do not think he cares one way or the other about the sock mill workers or how this legislation will affect them.
3. The author has absolutely no knowledge of foreign affairs, attempting to portray Reagan as a purveyor of bribes to certain Caribbean countries for their cooperation in the Grenada invasion, and accuses Reagan of using such "bribe" to covertly provide $75 million in additional combat funding for the war in San Salvador.
The article is rife with inaccuracies and inflammatory rhetoric. Take a close look at the first paragraph.
I've posted this so that Freepers can see for themselves that the liberal, biased press is not limited to the big city rags such as the NY Times and others.
I did not post this as an invitation for debate on the HR 1589 or the CBI. For the record, I do not particularly agree with the CBI or HR 1589, which seeks to amend the CBI, or for NAFTA, as far as that goes and I certainly do not want to see any sock mill employees lose jobs as a result of it. It just irritates me to no end to see this kind of sleaze tactics and crap journalism used for the purpose of readership enhancement. And it's not the first time this rag has done so.
The author knows he has an unquestioning audience since the single largest employer in this area is the sock mills.
Your comments and observations, please.