Last for a couple days

Don't have a lot of time (going to VT in about an hour, and won't be back till Sunday) but since you've answered my question, I think I should respond.

First off, don't get the idea that NJ is a hyperliberal state. It's pretty moderate with a diverse range of viewpoints - South Jersey has some hicks that seriously put Clovis to shame. The problem is being in a hellhole like Princeton, where everyone is either an academic, an elitist, and usually both. There are a lot more conservatives out here than you would think. One thing that warms my heart is seeing young 1st generation immigrant kids at my church who are conservative. That's why I have a soft spot for Latin American immigrants (among other ethnicities, of course) - they come here to succeed the right way, for the most part.

I'm glad because you answered my question. Basically, you say you are a pro-free-trade guy, except when it comes to someone who can be viewed as "competition", meaning a potential enemy - you specifically call out China, Japan, and the EU.

First off, I'm a little flummoxed as to why you still view Japan as a potential enemy - I thought the Japanese were supposed to be running things here 10 years ago! Sorry, but the fearmongering about Japan was really big when I was in junior high, and right now it's looking a little silly. Also, why do you think Japan, the EU, and China are suddenly this "one big union"? What the heck is that supposed to mean? Since when do those three have this super-secret treaty that nobody's heard of? Do you honestly think they ganged up together and said "let's pick on the Americans"?

So to the meat of the response - you implied that trading with (specifically) China is somehow enriching them at our expense, and that we were bound to pay for it down the line. One problem here - you failed to cite examples. Just saying "these guys will do anything to be #1" isn't enough. The essence of free trade is the essence of the free market - that human wants and needs can be satisfied through the free exchange of goods and services. That means both parties benefit! It's all about opportunity cost - relatively speaking, the Chinese can produce some goods at lower cost than we can. If that means that we "lose jobs" to them, so be it - the job you lost should be replaced with a better one (not necessarily for you, but for the economy and everyone else in it) because your time is better spent elsewhere. You're falling into the trap that liberals fall into when discussing economic matters domestically. Economics is not a zero-sum game!

Speaking of this, if you say you are anti-trade with China (what about that other "outsourcing" bugaboo, India?) but still agree with the theory of free trade (as you implied), then I think it's disingenuous for you to use any of the "CEO fatcat" type arguments against. You shouldn't be able to use an argument if you don't believe it.

I should add a qualifier on China. When it comes to military technology, obviously, we can't just trade that with them willy-nilly, just like we don't even trade all our military technology with our closest allies. I don't trust their government any more than you do, but it is possible to favor trade liberalization without sacrificing military advantage.

One last thing - I don't like it when people get history wrong, so I have to tell you that you're off by about 20 years on Iran. When the Shah was in power, yeah, they were pro-American. But we sided with Saddam Hussein for a reason back in the '80s. I actually worked with a tech who was the son of a diplomat under the Shah, and he had to ski to freedom after the Ayatollah took power.