Free Republic

Sounds like an oxymoron, doesn’t it? It’s the Left — liberals, left-wingers, socialists, commies, pinkos, the Noam Chomskys and Alec Baldwins and Barbra Streisands — that hates America. But the Right – good old flag-waving patriotic God Bless America conservatives? How could they possibly be anti-American? It sounds ridiculous. Yet whatever sense or nonsense it makes, anti-Americanism is seeping into the entire conservative movement and is threatening to splinter it into pieces. I’m not talking about the racist nuts, the white supremacists and militia types. I’m talking about mainstream heartland conservatives. Howard Phillips, head of the famed Conservative Caucus, is...

<p>"Trying to eliminate Saddam ... would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. ... [T]here was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."</p>

<p>"Trying to eliminate Saddam ... would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. ... [T]here was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."</p>

Wisdom of the Father, Folly of the Son Paul Craig Roberts Saturday, Oct. 11, 2003 Americans will regret that Bush II did not read his father's memoirs, "A World Transformed." Written five years ago, George Bush Senior explained why he didn't go after Saddam Hussein at the end of the Gulf War: "Trying to eliminate Saddam ... would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. ... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. ... [T]here was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore,...

So you think your government looks out for you? Not nearly as much as it does for aliens. On Sept. 24, Robert Pear reported in The New York Times that the Bush administration has quietly decided to stiff 6 million poor elderly and disabled Americans by denying them Medicare drug benefits. According to the Bush administration, these Americans are already covered under state Medicaid programs. President Bush should read the newspapers. On Sept. 23, Robert Pear reported in The New York Times that "rising costs prompt states to reduce Medicaid further." It seems that the jobless recovery has forced virtually...

Neo-Jacobins Push For World War IV by Paul Craig Roberts by Paul Craig Roberts "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." If neoconservatives have their way, Americans will soon be repeating this refrain. The identical lies used to deceive Americans about Iraq are now being recycled to justify invading Syria and Iran. Before exploring this fact, first understand that there is nothing conservative about neoconservatives. Neocons hide behind "conservative" but they are in fact Jacobins. Jacobins were the 18th century French revolutionaries whose intention to remake Europe in revolutionary France’s image launched the Napoleonic Wars....

<p>Do you remember the ridicule neocons heaped on critics who predicted a quagmire in Iraq? Now neocons William Kristol and Robert Kagen are calling for more troops and more money — two more Army divisions and an additional $60 billion, to be exact. "Next spring, if disaster looms," they write, "it may be too late."</p>

<p>For several years I have been tracking U.S. job losses and seeking to understand the causes. I have written enough columns about this subject to have caused angst among some inside-the-Beltway think-tankers.</p> <p>Two critics, Bruce Bartlett and Daniel T. Griswold, have yet to comprehend the argument they dispute. This is puzzling. Whereas international trade theory is very complex, my statement of the job loss problem, or more accurately, my posing of the question is very simple.</p>

<p>For several years I have been tracking U.S. job losses and seeking to understand the causes. I have written enough columns about this subject to have caused angst among some inside-the-Beltway think-tankers.</p> <p>Two critics, Bruce Bartlett and Daniel T. Griswold, have yet to comprehend the argument they dispute. This is puzzling. Whereas international trade theory is very complex, my statement of the job loss problem, or more accurately, my posing of the question is very simple.</p>

For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use. Sending me many suggestions, readers have beseeched me to revive the "nothink nation" theme that I developed in six columns during April and May of 2002. I doubt that editors have that big a stomach for the subject, but I will risk one more column. My target is Bruce Bartlett's syndicated column of Aug. 14, "Manufacturing is not in trouble " (duplicate thread) Like neocons who label people concerned with the facts of the case for the invasion of Iraq as "anti-American left-wing extremists," Bartlett labels me a protectionist "on the...

<p>Sending me many suggestions, readers have beseeched me to revive the "nothink nation" theme I developed in six columns during April and May 2002. I doubt editors have that big a stomach for the subject, but I will risk one more column.</p>

August 05, 2003 Jobless in the USA By Paul Craig Roberts Throughout history peoples have been overcome by trends and forces that they were unable to recognize. Could the US be losing its economy to forces economists mistake for benevolent free trade? Traditionally, free trade has required a country’s work force to compete indirectly against the work forces of other countries in the markets for traded goods and services. Fears in the post-WW II era that U.S. wages and living standards would be undermined by imports made with cheap foreign labor proved to be wrong. U.S. labor was better educated...

<p>Throughout history, peoples have been overcome by trends and forces that they were unable to recognize. Could the United States be losing its economy to forces economists mistake for benevolent free trade?</p> <p>Traditionally, free trade has required a country's work force to compete indirectly against the work forces of other countries in the markets for traded goods and services. Fears in the post-World War II era that U.S. wages and living standards would be undermined by imports made with cheap foreign labor proved to be wrong, since U.S. labor was better educated and worked with more and better capital and technology, which made American labor much more productive. Higher productivity protected U.S. wages and employment from cheap foreign labor.</p>

<p>America has turned its back on Americans. Even illegal aliens count higher with the American government than native-born, taxpaying, loyal U.S. citizens, who are regarded by their government as nothing but resources to be exploited.</p> <p>American taxpayers now are expected to shoulder the burden of paying for university educations for illegal aliens. When U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, said recently that illegal aliens should be deported, not given in-state tuition, Karl Rove, the Power Behind the Bush, told Mr. Tancredo never again to darken the steps of the White House.</p>

Columnists have had a field day with Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s Supreme Court decision (Grutter). In effect, O’Connor declared diversity to be a "compelling state interest" that trumps the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Thomas Sowell described the five-member majority as "vacancies without resignations." Shelby Steele declared the ruling "a victory for white guilt." Michael Kinsley wrote that O’Connor was "splitting a difference that can’t be split." The most striking feature of the decision is the absence of legal argument. The ruling rests on sociological babble about "critical mass diversity." The substitution of sociology for law is the...

The Jobbing of Americans Posted July 3, 2003 By Paul Craig Roberts The United States continues to lose jobs. Since President George W. Bush has been in office, 2.5 million manufacturing jobs and nearly 600,000 service jobs have been lost for a total decline in private-sector employment of 3.1 million. The unemployment rate has risen to 6.1 percent. If this is recovery, what is going on? Pundits call it "the jobless recovery." The economy is growing, but jobs are not. Why? One economist recently blamed the absence of job growth on high U.S. productivity. Those who are working are so...

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against the racial quota system used in the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions program (Gratz case) and for the racial quota system used in the Michigan Law School's admission program (Grutter case). The difference is that "the procedures employed by the University of Michigan's Office of Undergraduate Admissions do not provide for a meaningful individualized review of applicants," whereas the law school admission policy does. The ruling means that racial quotas past muster if they are subjectively managed as "individualized consideration." Quotas do not pass muster if they rely on objective criteria designed to...

<p>Without Donald Regan's strength and loyalty, Ronald Reagan would have been a less successful president.</p> <p>After Mr. Regan was nominated as Treasury secretary by President-elect Reagan, he asked me to stop by to see him. He would need a strong supply-side team, he said, if he was to succeed in his task of getting Mr. Reagan's controversial new economic policy out of the administration and through Congress.</p>

<p>Sometime this month, perhaps before this column is published, the Supreme Court will rule on the University of Michigan's racial quotas. Both in law school and undergraduate admissions, the university intentionally discriminates against white applicants in favor of "preferred minorities."</p>

The BBC reports that British Prime Minister Tony Blair is about to be charged as a war criminal by the Greek Bar Association before the International Criminal Court. Dimitris Paxinos, president of the lawyers' association, told the BBC that Blair will be charged with "crimes against humanity and war crimes." President George Bush escapes being charged, as the United States is not a signatory to the ICC. The Greeks claim that the U.S.-U.K. invasion of Iraq violates the United Nations Charter, the Geneva Convention, the Hague Convention and the International Criminal Court's statute. Paxinos, who was elected by a conservative...