Patrick J. Buchanan Examines "The Slow Awakening of George W."

Washington Times ^ | 09-17-03 | Buchanan, Patrick J.

[DoughtyOne]

I think you and I have agreed most of the time over the years. We are just butting heads right now, even though we both want the same thing. As for your thoughts here, I agree. It's sad.

[Texas_Dawg]

Why is it that you insist you have a college degree when it is so obvious that you lied about it?

Because I do. Now can you answer my question: UGA or LSU this weekend? Who do you want to win?

[Theodore R.]

unless the veto was a clear constitutional violation.


Unless the veto was to prevent a clear constitutional violation, I should have said.

[Texas_Dawg]

The whole point of "trickle-down" is job creation and domestic growth, moron. Reagan was about creating jobs and growing the economy by increasing investment in the local economy. Something you don't believe in.

Sure I do. That's why I support companies being allowed to outsource. That way they will be around to hire Americans when the market has corrected. Under your plan, they wouldn't be around at all.

[ninenot]

This is about doing what is best for our National Security and Sovereignty because it is what's best for our National Security and Sovereignty.

You trying to tell TxDg that selling out his neighbors should be worth a bit more than thirty pieces of silver? Good luck

[TomB]

Great homepage - thanks for the laugh.

;-)

Just doin' my job.

[billbears]

As someone in a state that has been seriously affected by this very issue (NC), thank you for your well reasoned response. These past two years have allowed me to see what 'free-trade' has done to my state's economy. We've lost over ten thousand jobs in this state alone and frankly I'm tired of it.

[steve50]

You think the Founders just wasted all that ink?

Yes, I think it was a waste of ink. If it's a living document it means nothing. Our politicans do as they wish, not what they are empowered to do.

[TomB]

That is the best you can do?

No. But considering it's Pat Buchanan, it really isn't worth much effort.

[bimbo]

Revision: "While President Bush has a good heart, he was obviously horribly miseducated at Harvard."

Your revision does not reflect Pat's declarative statement that Bush was unfortunate to have been miseducated at Harvard.

Besides that, the nuns who educated Pat would not have taken kindly to those double adverbs of yours.

[FITZ]

opposed to free trade without also becoming more and more sympathetic to subsidies and various social welfare programs

What you write doesn't make sense --- we have subsidies for US farmers which is making farmers in Mexico lose their farms and immigrate to the USA. Going back to a time when there were tariffs, and each country worked within it's own economic frame would not lead to more welfare programs. We've got more welfare programs than ever, 35% of the Mexican immigrants end up on welfare programs and this is well into the free-trade era. What free trade is doing is destroying the Mexican people, who then must come here to survive and because they lack skills they either end up on welfare or take jobs from low-skilled Americans ---- welfare is needed to provide for the NAFTA displaced workers. We've got thousands of them here in this one town.

[RockyMtnMan]

Ohhh, so this is about correcting the market? Perhaps if they invest some of the capital domestically the market won't need to "correct".

Consumers/investors would have more money if the multinationals would actually invest in America. If they provide a good product the capital will come right back to them in the form of investment and those who produce a crappy product will be out of business because the new mom and pop are kicking their ass. Kinda what capitalism is all about, better products at a lower price right? Or is this about billion dollar corporations keeping their capital so they can continue to invest overseas?

[Tokhtamish]

You are clearly losing your grip.

Every working American who stares at the ceiling at 3am wondering what in God's name is going to happen to his life understands what free trade is doing to this country. The man on the street is right and the starry eyed libertarian is dead wrong.

If you are going to use free trade to disposses whole waves of American workers, don't be surprised when the dispossesed demand a European level social safety net. There are no atheists in the trenches. There are no libertarian free traders on the unemployment line.

[Lazamataz]

Because I do. Now can you answer my question: UGA or LSU this weekend? Who do you want to win?

I want strawberry pie.

[A. Pole]

[You free traders just love to hide behind Al Qaeda.] 9/11 came in awfully handy, haven't it?

You can say that again.

Yes, I guess, I meant "didn't it".

[Lazamataz]

Because I do.

You lie because you do.

Great.

Your banning sure wouldn't get me to be posting protests to the moderators.

[EternalVigilance]

LOL...should have stayed away from this one. ;-)

Pat's initial phrase sounded stilted to me in written form, especially for a sentence that was a dig at the President's level of education.

If I was wrong, I was wrong. I'm not an English teacher by any means.

[per loin]

My reply was also on the fly, and came off more harsh than I'd intended. Not likely that I'll give up the day job either.

[RinaseaofDs]

You didn't read the article, did you?

If we mandate a $5/hr minimum wage in the US, and the Chinese, who have no mandate, pay their skilled labor $1/hr, then how - without using a tariff, can a US company compete?

If OSHA demands fire extinguishers be made available every 40 feet of wall space, and the Chinese do not, then how do you reconcile the cost of the regulation per produced unit?

Are you impervious to math? The government, at the point of a lawyers pen, is forcing me to pay people above minimum wage, and forcing me to supply fire extinguishers, so I can't extract that expense from the cost of producing my widget.

Free trade was always a stupid idea. Always. Perot wasn't the best messenger, but he was right.

Fair trade puts either one of two types of responsibilities on government regulation:

1. Either you adopt the same regulations as the country you are trading with

OR

2. Erect a tariff on the imports of that country equal to AT LEAST the cost of mandated regulation at the city, county, state, national, and EU level.

Otherwise, the Chinese win every time. So do the Indians.

It really isn't that hard to grasp.