Muz:
Yes, McCain is more than likely going to follow Bush Sr’s footsteps in judges but I really wouldn’t sweat it because I don’t think we’ll be choosing a judge in the next 4 years. I’m also predicting we’ll be heavily “involved” with Iran during McCain’s tenure if he gets it.
Donald:
I respect your opinion, but I’m gonna throw my vote to McCain (or even Huckabee vs Clinton/Obama) for the simple reason that I will not suffer through another 4 years of a Clinton. The assumption (again, assumption) that we’ll see this theory of fired-up conservatives with Clinton in the White House come 2010/2012 is just that – an assumption. I’m not willing to take another chance. Sure, we saw it in 1994, but we saw Clinton again in 1996. McCain is not my ideal candidate (I haven’t had an ideal presidential candidate since I could vote), but I’m not willing to put a Clinton or Obama even more. He’s really not reaching out to conservatives, rather he’s seeking liberals and “independents” – problem is he’s alienating the conservative field which frankly is the biggest field out there. Bush Jr tried it since 2000, and I will say this again: bipartisanship does not work. Follow in the T Roosevelt/Reagan footsteps! Anyways, we did survive 8 years of Clinton, but if you think my emails are long now, I could write a book about how Clinton near-destroyed this nation in 8 years. Not as bad as Carter or LBJ, but nonetheless.
Tim:
I did say I agreed with you about voting McCain. We are in agreement here. But, the topic about free trade…call it protectionism, but essentially free trade you’re supporting is all the facts I’ve described in the past emails. Since you freely support this, then let the country continue to slide. I know, it’s tough cookies to be the CEO that’s willing to shelve quality just to increase his salary. It’s not as easy as you say with your recommendations previously. We simpletons can’t just simply “adjust.” Yes, I can freely choose to not buy, you’re right…but tell all this to the CFR that’ll sink this country for the essence of “free trade.” You’re asking how are we getting screwed? I already answered that, or maybe I just type too much. But anyways, okay, we’ll adjust. We’ll work for a dollar an hour and ship out crap products for the most part. That way we can compete with our competitors. In the meantime while making a dollar an hour, I’ll live like crap to compensate for free trade’s happiness.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Dude, when you begin the premise of your argument that free trade is killing us, then yes, of course you can prove yourself right every time.
Anyway, I don't know how many times I have to explain it to you that I support free trade in every possible way, meaning if it "screws" the lazy factory workers of America, then so be it. I make no bones about it, and yet you seem to imply that the trade policy I support has a hidden agenda or is something sinister that is ruining this country and that I'm a bad conservative for supporting it.
One reason I hate these freakin email and internet arguments is because half the time you end up arguing semantics, because most of the time, people are more interested in identifying themselves as part of a 'movement' rather than analyzing positions and formulating their own position. Let's get our definitions straight, k?
Qualifier - these are my definitions, not the definition of the wellspring of knowledge that is wikipedia.
Free trade: against any and all barriers to trade between countries, including tariffs, subsidies, and the like. In favor of agreements (like NAFTA, CAFTA) that support this.
Protectionism: favoring the institution of tariffs, subsidies, and other trade laws that insulate domestic industries from outside competition.
Fair trade: favoring international trade, but with a 'humanist' eye - that is, offering a fair price and wage for goods and services that go across borders, not trading with human rights violators, etc. Essentially, taking domestic socialist policy and applying it to international trade.
Anyway, your arguments place you in the protectionist camp. My arguments place me in the free trade camp. Can we agree on that? Is that a good starting point?
BTW - thanks for bringing this to the blog. Email wars are just a personal peeve of mine, as I try to use my email for work related things only, and massive emails just clutter things up.
Post a Comment