[Theodore R.]

Though the word "economy" is not in the Constitution, the public expects the president to be "manager of the economy." If a president has a hemorrhage of job losses "on his watch," whether responsible or not, voters may retire him quickly from office.

[Euro-American Scum]

At a rally in Ohio, which has lost 160,000 manufacturing jobs since mid-2000, President Bush railed: "We've lost thousands of manufacturing jobs because production moved overseas. ... America must send a message overseas – say, look, we expect there to be a fair playing field when it comes to trade."

More tap dancing on the desks of the voting public. Bush is a globalist. Offshoring will back off a bit until after Bush is safely re-elected, then will pick up full steam until the only jobs available are those sweeping the basement floors of Enron on the graveyard shift. And those jobs will be filled by H1-Bs or illegals.

[Puddleglum]

ping to read later

[Willie Green]

Though the word "economy" is not in the Constitution, the public expects the president to be "manager of the economy." If a president has a hemorrhage of job losses "on his watch," whether responsible or not, voters may retire him quickly from office.

What's so special about inclusion of the specific word "economy"???
It is EXTREMELY clear in many Constitutional clauses that our Founders were well aware of Government's interaction with economic affairs. That's why they specificly empowered Congress with methods of economic intervention, with the expectation that those powers would be utilized to BENEFIT the American People, NOT to maliciously PLUNDER our Middle Class.

ARTICLE I, Section 8. The Congress shall have power to...
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

There are many, MANY more examples.
So the Founders didn't use the specific word "economy". So what?

[Willie Green]

Unfortunately for President Bush, while he has a good heart, he was horribly miseducated at Harvard. He simply cannot comprehend that it is free-trade globalism that is destroying U.S. manufacturing jobs, and may yet destroy his presidency.

Bwahahahahaha! Ain't that the truth?
By his own admission, he was barely able to maintain a "C" average.
And his undergraduate major was what? History?
Sheeesh, that MBA of his has "rubber stamp" written all over it.
About the only thing he learned how to do was schmoooze with Daddy's cronies.

Yeah, he'd be a nice guy to schmoooze with, alright. I wouldn't mind inviting him to a backyard Barbeque myself. It'd be fun. But it's also no secret as to why he's so frustratingly clueless most of the time, either.

[Phaedrus]

Buchanan gives us problems without solutions, his implication being that he would make a better President. The real problem is that Buchanan is also a Big Governement guy. He doesn't think that government itself is the problem. "Free Trade" is a mind-numb Republican mantra but the Republicans look good ONLY in comparison to the Democrats. Read Paul Craig Roberts.

[Penner]

U.S. manufacturing jobs are vanishing, and unless he turns it around, Bush's presidency may vanish along with them.

It's deja vu all over again. Domestic issues are a Bush family weakness.

[maui_hawaii]

Zoellick needs to hit the road. His visions of world trade etc are not good. He has too much influence in the administration.

[maui_hawaii]

Unfortunately for President Bush, while he has a good heart, he was horribly miseducated at Harvard.

Didn't GW go to Yale?

[Ciexyz]

I posted this before, but a family friend, age 50, Pittsburgh PA, just lost his machinist job when it was outsourced to China. The man is now eligible for retraining benefits. The wife is now the main support of the family. They're raising a granddaughter, they have custody.

The typical American family of today.

[ambrose]

bump for later

[AdamSelene235]

Though the word "economy" is not in the Constitution, the public expects the president to be "manager of the economy."

No, only fascists like FDR find this desirable. The government should stay as far away from the economy as possible. Of course, you can't there from here.

[y2k_free_radical]

I thought BUSH was a YALIE like his father

[RaceBannon]

2.1 million jobs lost in this recent downturn. Plus, "Over the past year and two months, we have seen the weakest manufacturing recovery from recession since the Federal Reserve started keeping tabs on such things back in 1919. The data show that since December 2001, manufacturing production has edged up only 1.6 percent, drastically slower than the first 14 months of the previous six recoveries when growth in manufacturing averaged 10.8 percent."

http://www.house.gov/smbiz/hearings/108th/2003/030409/jasinowski.html


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/959787/posts
Lawmaker predicts defeat for 'Buy American' language (Defense Department procurement update)

"But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade." ~ Karl Marx, On the Question of Free Trade, January 9, 1848 http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/01/09ft.htm#marx

"Communists and socialists feel sure that setting up international “free” trade systems which impose regulations chuck full of intrigues, redistribution plans, arbitrary law, and interdependence schemes, will win out against the conservative interests of every free nation. What could be better than to use “free” trade to reverse the advantage of the relatively free, moral, prosperous, and strong nations of the Earth, so that the tyrannical, amoral, poor, and weak nations of the socialist bloc might get the upper hand? What could be a more cunning approach than to market the idea that those who oppose “free” trade are enemies of freedom?" http://www.newsmax.com/commentarchive.shtml?a=2000/6/27/105655

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/954156/posts
Why FREE TRADE was never the answer.

[Ciexyz]

I can see the way the 2004 election will go in PA. My vote for Bush won't even matter...the state will go Democratic if the economy doesn't improve for blue-collar workers. Don't even talk to me about how the economy is supposedly improving. It may be for some sectors of the economy, but not here in PA and Ohio. Impressions are everything! Don't blame the media or the spinsters on the news channels.

People in this region believe that Bush has basically turned around the 9-11 terror threat, so now he can be bounced from office for a Democrat who can bring back prosperity to the common (blue collar) worker.

I don't agree with that scenario, I'm simply reporting what I see in this area. Please take note, RNC!

[Barnacle]

I could read only about half of this and had to stop before I puked.

How could anyone be so stupid to have practiced the trade policies we've had. It's suicide! It gives me no satisfaction to say, "I told you so." The ramifications of this disasterous and reckless excapade are too serious for that.

Why is it that no one and I mean no one talks about an obvious remedy - tarrifs?

[Alberta's Child]

Though the word "economy" is not in the Constitution, the public expects the president to be "manager of the economy."

Good point.

My major problem with Buchanan's views on this issue is that they don't take into account some very serious "institutional" factors that keep the U.S. at a great disadvantage when dealing with other nations in terms of trade. I would cite environmental regulations, a strong U.S. dollar, a cumbersome regulatory environment, etc.

In 15 minutes I could come up with a plan to reduce the U.S. unemployment rate to 0%, but nobody here would be very happy about it. For one thing, we wouldn't be able to post on FreeRepublic anymore, since we would no longer have personal computers and all electrical generating capacuty would be dedicated to industrial use.

When it comes to discussing any issues related to the U.S. economy, nothing bothers me more than simple, naive solutions.

For example, I wonder how many of those 160,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in Ohio as a result of steep cost increases in raw materials brought about by the tariff the Bush Administration imposed on foreign steel two years ago.

[MrLeRoy]

a $550 billion trade deficit kills 11 million production and manufacturing jobs.

He thinks there'd be ELEVEN MILLION more production and manufacturing jobs if we were thorough protectionists? What obvious nonsense.