President Bush's State of the World Address!

[Pauldo]

President Bush's State Of The World Speech
By Chuck Baldwin
February 3, 2006


George W. Bush might be a Republican. He might be a Texan. He
might even be a nice guy. However, after listening to his State of
the World speech last Tuesday, one thing is for certain: George W.
Bush is not a conservative! He is plainly a globalist!

He was barely into his speech when he boldly asserted that
America is proudly leading a "world economy." Obviously, Mr.
Bush is not really interested in the U.S. economy. It may be that he
doesn't even think in those terms.

Of course, there is good reason for President Bush to focus on the
"world economy" (whatever that is) instead of the U.S. economy.
According to Paul Craig Roberts (quoting the January 19 issue of
Manufacturing & Technology News), "During Bush's presidency
the U.S. has experienced the slowest job creation on record (going
back to 1939). During the last five years, private business has
added only 958,000 net new jobs to the economy, while the
government has added 1.1 million jobs."

The "economic recovery" Bush speaks of is mostly the new jobs of
waiting tables and serving booze. In reality, America is in a job
depression, all the Bush-speak notwithstanding.

Furthermore, Roberts quotes McMillion as reporting that "during
the past five years of Bush's presidency, the U.S. has lost 16.5% of
its manufacturing jobs." The biggest culprit, of course, is
government-generated "free trade" deals and mass job outsourcing
which has skyrocketed under the Bush administration. In fact,
"free trade" outsourcing is so bad that the U.S. has run up nearly
$3 trillion in trade deficits during the Bush years.

Roberts properly summarized the impact President Bush has had
upon the U.S. economy by saying, "Globalization is wiping out the
American middle class and terminating jobs for university
graduates, who now serve as temps, waitresses and bartenders."

No wonder President Bush likes to talk about a "world economy."
But it doesn't stop there.

In the very next paragraph, Bush said, "[W]e seek the end of
tyranny in our world."

Not only is Bush a globalist, he is a utopian. Does he really believe
that one country can end tyranny and oppression all over the
world? If so, how will he do it? Does he intend to invade China,
Cuba, The Sudan, Zimbabwe, plus most Middle Eastern and most
African countries? Is G.W. Bush President of the United States or
king of the world? I wonder if he knows.

Mr. Bush redundantly promoted globalism and utopianism in his
speech with statements such as, "The U.S. will not retreat from the
world." We will "move the world toward peace." We will "lead the
world toward freedom." "We will compete and excel in the global
economy." Ad infinitum. Ad nauseam.

Moreover, while President Bush repeatedly told us that Iraq is
experiencing "the benefits of freedom," he boldly told the
American people that they were in the process of losing theirs. Of
course, he did not say it in those terms, but that is the net result of
his intention to continue to ignore the Constitution and rule of law
in turning the federal government's military and intelligence
apparatus against its own citizens.

Mr. Bush even had the audacity to say that immigrants (translated:
illegal immigrants) are necessary to America's well-being. He
went so far as to say, "[T]his economy could not function without
them." I suppose Mr. Bush believes that America could not
function without the Mafia dons, either!

All-in-all, the speech was laced with accolades for globalism and
utopianism and with calls for bigger and more intrusive
government. Yes, George W. Bush might be a Republican. He
might be a Texan. He might even be a nice guy. However, he is
anything but a conservative!

© Chuck Baldwin

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Wonderful post. I agree. Who are all these middle class voters who support Bush? I think they are so busy worrying about terrorism that they don't see the ground shifting beneath them -- and their children.

World economy my you-know-what. The end of the middle class is more like it.

[LHardy]

The problem the US is going to have is its' reluctance to except the fact that it is a world economy. The motion in that direction has been accurring for some time now. My quess would be just after WWII.
We used to talk about how everything was from Japan. Now it is China, India and the like.
What Americans need to do. IMO
Is not sit around and continue this whoa is me attitude and find a better way. Not the old way but a new and better way.
As an example the auto industry is not falling apart because cars from foreign countries are that mush cheaper or made better. They have just priced themselves out of the market of affordability. Remember the days when even a ford employee couldn't even afford to by the car the produced. Well now it is the public can't afford the cars that the auto industry produces.
The pendelum has swung to far in the other direction. Leaving foreign competition to take advantage of that weekness.

If it is going to be the end of the middle class. I wish they would hurry up and be done with it. I have been hearing that since I was very young. The middle-class is still here.
Look on the bright side if the middle class is gone that means it is only the rich and the poor. The poor right now get a better deal then most in the middle class.
I'll take the free ride and lunch for awhile.:)

[Pauldo]

Originally posted by LHardy
The problem the US is going to have is its' reluctance to except the fact that it is a world economy. The motion in that direction has been accurring for some time now. My quess would be just after WWII.
We used to talk about how everything was from Japan. Now it is China, India and the like.
What Americans need to do. IMO
Is not sit around and continue this whoa is me attitude and find a better way. Not the old way but a new and better way.
As an example the auto industry is not falling apart because cars from foreign countries are that mush cheaper or made better. They have just priced themselves out of the market of affordability. Remember the days when even a ford employee couldn't even afford to by the car the produced. Well now it is the public can't afford the cars that the auto industry produces.
The pendelum has swung to far in the other direction. Leaving foreign competition to take advantage of that weekness.

If it is going to be the end of the middle class. I wish they would hurry up and be done with it. I have been hearing that since I was very young. The middle-class is still here.
Look on the bright side if the middle class is gone that means it is only the rich and the poor. The poor right now get a better deal then most in the middle class.
I'll take the free ride and lunch for awhile.:)

I for one do not buy into the global economy scenario expounded by the UN. All that it is, is an economic shift from the "have" nations to the "have not" nations. It's the fabled Fabian Socialist doctrine expounded by John Maynard Keynes and his followers such as Bill Clinton. The American middle class is caught in the economic crunch by policies generated by our own elected officials in Washington, DC. Unfortunately for Americans, the Democrat and Republican Party supports this global economy. Voters need to realize the hypocricy of both parties as they are destroying the USA as we know it today. Time for voters to look else where outside of the two major parties.

[steven]

Originally posted by Pauldo
President Bush's State Of The World Speech
By Chuck Baldwin
February 3, 2006


George W. Bush might be a Republican. He might be a Texan. He
might even be a nice guy. However, after listening to his State of
the World speech last Tuesday, one thing is for certain: George W.
Bush is not a conservative! He is plainly a globalist!

He was barely into his speech when he boldly asserted that
America is proudly leading a "world economy." Obviously, Mr.
Bush is not really interested in the U.S. economy. It may be that he doesn't even think in those terms.

All-in-all, the speech was laced with accolades for globalism and
utopianism and with calls for bigger and more intrusive
government. Yes, George W. Bush might be a Republican. He
might be a Texan. He might even be a nice guy. However, he is
anything but a conservative!

Applause from me for this paragraph. I so tire of everyone in NY thinking if you don't like bush you must be a ragging liberal. Sadly the conservative party here is so weak most proclaimed NY republicans have no idea what true conservatism is about. Its certainly not about worrying about any "world economy". Its all about America first.



Originally posted by Lhardy The problem the US is going to have is its' reluctance to except the fact that it is a world economy.
What Americans need to do. IMO Is not sit around and continue this whoa is me attitude and find a better way. Not the old way but a new and better way.
As an example the auto industry is not falling apart because cars from foreign countries are that mush cheaper or made better. They have just priced themselves out of the market of affordability. Remember the days when even a ford employee couldn't even afford to by the car the produced. Well now it is the public can't afford the cars that the auto industry produces. [/B]


I have heard the "world economy arguments and wonder why we seem to be the only western country so enamored of this ideal. You used the car industry in your example so I will counter with the same. When traveling through Germany I notice the vast majority of Germans are driving German cars. Not French, not British, not American, German. In the GB and in France because of their laws (GB cars steering columns are on the opposite side and in France headlights are yellow anti glare) at the very least cars are finished by a company from their country and I didn't see a lot of cars rolling through there streets that weren't produced by manufactures of their country.

What's lost in the whole "world economy" argument is the culture and buying habits of differing western countries. An American family will purchase a French brand of, say, butter if its the cheapest thing in the store (albeit it must have decent taste) the average French family would not be so inclined to purchase parkay or any American brand of butter. Buying local is ingrained in their society.

The USA's biggest retailer Wal-Mart's total merchandise imported in 2004 was over 60%. I can tell you having shopped and lived overseas in that same time frame those numbers aren't even close for European retailers. Most of the goods they stock and sell come from their country, furthermore I have never seen a supermarket like Tops or wegmans (ala Alldis a German supermarket chain that seems to be opening up all over now) in Europe.

Finally (in what's turning out to be a really long post) if nothing else, we are slowly becoming a nation that does nothing but consume. It has become impossible to buy for instance an American made TV (Zenith was the last American TV company and was bought out by the Chinese yrs ago). I think history has shown what happens to great nations that produce nothing and consume everything, they become lazy and decadent

[atotaltotalfan2001]

Having spent long stretches of in time in England and Europe when my husband was working abroad, the first thing I noticed was the difference in U.S. consumption vs. overseas consumption. The U.S. is voracious in its appetites (and, with a huge obesity rate, is that any surprise?). Not so elsewhere. Once, in a small village outside of Geneva we went for a fancy Sunday brunch. It was very expensive. About $40 for the four of us. The appetizer was fresh baked bread. the main meal, a thin, rare roast beef with tons of french fries. plus, champange. For the amount of food, the price was, IMO, outrageous (although you coudn't beat the atmosphere). Then again, there wasn't a single fat person in the whole cafe.

Anyway, my point is that we expect EVERYTHING in this country, and lots of it. To get it, we need the cheapest of cheap, no matter what the impact on our own neighbors. It hasn't been good for us, has it?

[mikewrona]

Originally posted by steven
Applause from me for this paragraph. I so tire of everyone in NY thinking if you don't like bush you must be a ragging liberal. Sadly the conservative party here is so weak most proclaimed NY republicans have no idea what true conservatism is about. Its certainly not about worrying about any "world economy". Its all about America first.





I have heard the "world economy arguments and wonder why we seem to be the only western country so enamored of this ideal. You used the car industry in your example so I will counter with the same. When traveling through Germany I notice the vast majority of Germans are driving German cars. Not French, not British, not American, German. In the GB and in France because of their laws (GB cars steering columns are on the opposite side and in France headlights are yellow anti glare) at the very least cars are finished by a company from their country and I didn't see a lot of cars rolling through there streets that weren't produced by manufactures of their country.

What's lost in the whole "world economy" argument is the culture and buying habits of differing western countries. An American family will purchase a French brand of, say, butter if its the cheapest thing in the store (albeit it must have decent taste) the average French family would not be so inclined to purchase parkay or any American brand of butter. Buying local is ingrained in their society.

The USA's biggest retailer Wal-Mart's total merchandise imported in 2004 was over 60%. I can tell you having shopped and lived overseas in that same time frame those numbers aren't even close for European retailers. Most of the goods they stock and sell come from their country, furthermore I have never seen a supermarket like Tops or wegmans (ala Alldis a German supermarket chain that seems to be opening up all over now) in Europe.

Finally (in what's turning out to be a really long post) if nothing else, we are slowly becoming a nation that does nothing but consume. It has become impossible to buy for instance an American made TV (Zenith was the last American TV company and was bought out by the Chinese yrs ago). I think history has shown what happens to great nations that produce nothing and consume everything, they become lazy and decadent


If you've got the time, you might enjoy reading this piece on Ancient Rome. Particularly in it's waning years post 180 BCE.

http://www.roman-empire.net/articles/article-018.html

[buffknut]

Gang,

You sure read alot into what Bush said.

It is a global economy and we can and should lead it. What exactly did Bush say about that that was so bad.

Reality must be tough on some of you.

Many people, even here in Buffalo work for companies that are heavily dependent on exports.

Microsoft, McDonalds, and many, many American companies sell bazillions of goods overseas.

The stock markets around the world are intertwined. Do you really think all your pension money is invested in the US?

And who said Bush buys into the UN version of a global economy? Where's that come from.

I got this from www.polipundit.com today. I took out some of the comments:

Raw Math

As everyone around here surely knows by now, the gummint today issued its monthly report on the labor markets.

Here are some of the highlights:

295,000 = Total net jobs created in Jan. 2006 (including payroll jobs, 1099 contractors and the self-employed).

193,000 = Net payroll jobs created in Jan. 2006.

* * *

4.7 = Overall unemployment rate.

To put that into perspective:

Jan. 1998 = 4.6 unemployment rate.
Jan. 2006 = 4.7 unemployment rate.

3.6% = Annual (nominal) gain in weekly wages of lower-tiered workers. That’s well *above* the prevailing rate of inflation.

Here’s an interesting quote from the report:

Since January 2005, [nonfarm payroll] job gains have averaged 174,000 per month.

Last but not least, total employment by the state and federal gummints is lower now than it was 60 days ago. During that same period, however, the private sectors added nearly 340,000 net payroll jobs.

[speaker]

buffnut--why don't you just go to the link itself? The website, with a "slight conservative bent", gives a few stats.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm basically gives more information.

And is there any doubt that the economy has been going global since mass production was instituted? And particularly now with mass communication via computer? It's just the bad timing of certain laws and treaties, or that when these things are put in place, there should be other safeguards put in place also. I'm talking about the trade agreement with Mexico, and yet tens of thousands still come here to work and take their money with them. And, receive benefits such as medical, welfare, education to boot. And there still is a trade deficit.
As a matter of fact, it would be interesting to know if the US is suffering a trade deficit with all other countries. We know China, yes, but who else?

[LHardy]

Originally posted by speaker

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm basically gives more information.

And is there any doubt that the economy has been going global since mass production was instituted? And particularly now with mass communication via computer? It's just the bad timing of certain laws and treaties, or that when these things are put in place, there should be other safeguards put in place also.

I'm talking about the trade agreement with Mexico, and yet tens of thousands still come here to work and take their money with them. And, receive benefits such as medical, welfare, education to boot.

And there still is a trade deficit.
.....it would be interesting to know if the US is suffering a trade deficit with all other countries.

Ok lets see if we can get through this thread without personal jabs.

If we are going to discuss the Global economy. Lets' do this from a point of facts and good information.

speaker has presented a good site for US labor information for 2006.

Now;
If we are going to discuss the global economy and the US roll in it. You should start here.
http://www.bea.gov/beahome.html

This the US dept of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis
These are the headers for the various reports.



U.S. Economic Accounts

National
International
Gross Domestic Product
Personal Income and Outlays
Corporate Profits
Fixed Assets
More ...

Balance of Payments
Trade in Goods and Services
International Investment Position
Direct Investment
More ...

Regional
Industry
State and Local Personal Income
Gross State Product
Regional Input-Output Multipliers
More ...

Annual Industry Accounts
- GDP by Industry
- Input-Output Accounts
Benchmark Input-Output Accounts
Travel and Tourism
More ...

Here is just a brief discription of what you will find in the reports.



About International

The international economic accounts encompass the international transactions accounts (balance of payments) and the international investment positions accounts (the accumulated stocks of U.S.-owned assets abroad and of foreign-owned assets in the United States), as well as estimates of U.S. direct investment abroad and foreign direct investment in the United States.

The following links are pdf-formatted documents that present an overview of the principal statistics prepared by BEA’s international economics program:
BEA's International Accounts - Summary
International Transactions Accounts
International Investment Position Accounts
International Services
U.S. Direct Investment Abroad
Foreign Direct Investment in the United States
Research and Analysis
Additional Information on the International Accounts:
Data - Access to recent news releases, interactive tables, and downloads
Articles - Articles on transactions, investment, and methodologies
International Investment Division Product Guide - Comprehensive list of BEA materials on international investment
http://www.bea.gov/beahome.html

The following are quotes from a Web site EUROPA
http://europa.eu.int/comm/trade/issues/global/index_en.htm

This site is dedicated to the following information reguarding the EU and its' position.


Globalisation is a real opportunity for growth and higher living standards throughout the world. But multilateral governance is needed to ensure that the globalisation benefits are distributed fairly. Steering a course between protectionism and unbridled opening-up of markets, the European Union is seeking to promote a model that balances market forces with policies negotiated at multilateral level. The EU's strategy for sustainable development aims at reconciling economic growth, social cohesion and environmental protection.


Trade and development
The European Union is committed to supporting developing countries' efforts to integrate into the trading system to help them reap the benefits of market opening.

Generalised System of Preference (GSP)
The Generalised System of Preferences allows industrialised countries to grant non-reciprocal tariff reductions to developing countries.

Access to essential medicines
The EU is deeply committed to insure access to cheap medicines in poor countries.

Trade and environment
The respect of the environment is a vital condition for a sustainable trade growth and long-term development.

Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA)
The European Commission has commissioned an independent assessment of the impact that trade negotiations may have on sustainable development.

Trade and social
In an integrated global economy, the impact of trade on social welfare and rights has to be carefully managed.

Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business activities.

Civil Society Dialogue
We hold regular meetings on trade issues in Brussels with civil society stakeholders.

Now we have referance points for all to use. Lets' see how far we can take this good debate. I have faith.

[steven]

Originally posted by speaker
And is there any doubt that the economy has been going global since mass production was instituted? And particularly now with mass communication via computer? It's just the bad timing of certain laws and treaties, or that when these things are put in place, there should be other safeguards put in place also

And therin lies the rub, there are no safegaurds put in place. Im no big fan of a lot of the unions, but honestly how exactly is free trade equal trade when a U.S. auto or steel worker is expected to compete against some third world guy making $3 an hour? Is the U.S.economy gonna adjust so he can support his family flipping burgers for 3 and a quarter?

If that sounds far fetched then consider this, Biker mentioned Mcdonalds as an example. Well Biker guess what? Employees of mcdonalds in the GB, France, and Germany all have *gasp* healthg insurance, the same for wally world. When exactly is the american employee going to see the even playing field so he can both compete and support his family?

For the life of me I dont understand this expectation Bush and his cronies have that suddenly 295,734,134 Americans are suddenly going to be able to get desk jobs.

I wanted to use the Rome example as mikewrona did, instead I will just add this. During the presidential debates Bush said something to the effect of it was ok that we had so many immagrants sneaking over the border from mexico "to do the jobs we wouldnt want americans to have to do" .

What high handed elitest B.S.

What ever happened to the values that made this country great? Hard work, sweat of your brow and all that? If anyone thinks we can survive as a country with no laborers and just the rich and the poor working at mcdonals and walmart they are sadly mistaken. There has never been a powerful country in history that has survived with a two class system.

[steven]

what a rant
:o

[LHardy]

Originally posted by steven
what a rant
:o
And a very nicely written rant at that!:)

Here is another site that is basically a
"US economics for Dummies" general info. It helps explain the US positions and how it got there.

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap1.htm
Here is what you will find.


How the U.S. Economy Works

The U.S. Economy:
A Brief History

Small Business and the Corporation

Stocks, Commodities, and Markets

The Role of the Government in the Economy

Monetary and Fiscal Policy

American Agriculture:
Its Changing Significance

Labor in America:
The Worker's Role

Foreign Trade and Global Economic Policies

Afterword:
Beyond Economics


This site will allow you to explore all aspects of the Dept. Of State and the policies of the US in relation to economics and trade.

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/tpp/



Trade Policy and Programs


Thriving international commerce has long served U.S. interests by promoting U.S. prosperity and job-creation and promoting peaceful foreign relations. U.S. trade policy is based on two primary goals:

To expand access for American exporters to overseas markets, and
To ensure that commercial competitors and partners abroad observe fair trade practices.
To achieve these goals, the State Department and others in the U.S. helped establish the system of international trade rules administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The U.S. Government works to lower barriers to trade through negotiations both multilaterally in the WTO and bilaterally in negotiations with individual nations and regional groups. Currently a major round of negotiations is underway aimed at making trade more free and fair. We also work hard, including through U.S. Embassies and Consulates overseas, to ensure that foreign governments live up to their trade commitments.

Many U.S. agencies are involved in the formulation of U.S. trade policy and negotiating positions, under the coordination of the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). The State Department's Trade Policy and Programs (TPP) division actively participates in the policymaking process to ensure that U.S. foreign policy goals are fully considered in the formulation of our trade policy.

The Trade Policy and Programs division is divided into four offices with responsibility for the diverse aspects of trade policy:

Office of Multilateral Trade Affairs
Office of Bilateral Trade Affairs
Office of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Textile Trade Affairs
Office of Intellectual Property Enforcement
The Trade Policy and Programs division is led by Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs (EB) Deputy Assistant Secretary Christopher Moore.

[LHardy]

More must reads to get up to speed on economics and the US.

The US Dept. of Commerce

http://www.commerce.gov/

Which you will be able to locate the following info.



About Commerce
Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez
Deputy Secretary
David A. Sampson
Newsroom
DOC FY 2006 Budget Request
Tsunami Relief Information
Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita Information
FY 2005 Performance and Accountibility Report
Economic Development
Minority Business Development
Grant Opportunities
Contracting Opportunities
Job and Career Opportunities
Export-Related Assistance and Market Information
Trade Opportunities for U.S. Business
Ensuring a Level Playing Field
Export Regulations
Trade Statistics Express
Iraq Reconstruction
Task Force
Afghanistan Reconstruction Task Force
Trade Missions

[mikewrona]

Originally posted by steven
And therin lies the rub, there are no safegaurds put in place. Im no big fan of a lot of the unions, but honestly how exactly is free trade equal trade when a U.S. auto or steel worker is expected to compete against some third world guy making $3 an hour? Is the U.S.economy gonna adjust so he can support his family flipping burgers for 3 and a quarter?

If that sounds far fetched then consider this, Biker mentioned Mcdonalds as an example. Well Biker guess what? Employees of mcdonalds in the GB, France, and Germany all have *gasp* healthg insurance, the same for wally world. When exactly is the american employee going to see the even playing field so he can both compete and support his family?

For the life of me I dont understand this expectation Bush and his cronies have that suddenly 295,734,134 Americans are suddenly going to be able to get desk jobs.

I wanted to use the Rome example as mikewrona did, instead I will just add this. During the presidential debates Bush said something to the effect of it was ok that we had so many immagrants sneaking over the border from mexico "to do the jobs we wouldnt want americans to have to do" .

What high handed elitest B.S.

What ever happened to the values that made this country great? Hard work, sweat of your brow and all that? If anyone thinks we can survive as a country with no laborers and just the rich and the poor working at mcdonals and walmart they are sadly mistaken. There has never been a powerful country in history that has survived with a two class system.

I am not an economist by any stretch of the imagination. My 9 credit hours came in 1969-70.

One thing I do remember - Production generates wealth.
Not giving each other haircuts.

[citymouse]

Bu****es

Why was that edited?
B-u-s-h-i-t-e-s
like Isrealites only with Bush in front.
Are we being subjected to political censorship here? Is my phone being tapped?

[citymouse]

I will try again.
Yes production Generates wealth, for the producers.
When labor organized for better wages and working conditions (an end to slave labor in this country), they created the middle class.
When world markets opened up and it became easier in this modern world to operate over seas corporations went back to slave labor on other shores (the grass is always greener).
Now the middle class is shrinking and the Bu****es are blaming unions. Many people here buy into it.
You can wipe the unions off the map. unless your willing to accept what the chinese and other third worlders are getting you will continue to lose jobs.

[DR_GONZO]

Global economies should have global cost of living expenses and wages equal in all the global economies along with the same tax codes, safety issues, and environmental standards. Not $14.00/hr here vs. $.03/hr there or taxes and strick environmental laws here vs little or none there. That would be the global thing to do. :cool:

[steven]

Originally posted by mikewrona
Production generates wealth.
Not giving each other haircuts.

Thumbs up!

[mikewrona]

Originally posted by citymouse
I will try again.
Yes production Generates wealth, for the producers.
When labor organized for better wages and working conditions (an end to slave labor in this country), they created the middle class.
When world markets opened up and it became easier in this modern world to operate over seas corporations went back to slave labor on other shores (the grass is always greener).
Now the middle class is shrinking and the Bu****es are blaming unions. Many people here buy into it.
You can wipe the unions off the map. unless your willing to accept what the chinese and other third worlders are getting you will continue to lose jobs.

I have two theories.

1. You don't grow if you don't organize. The typical union member is not interested in organizing.

2. American Capitalists are now firmly in bed with Communist Capitalists. Don't know what you would call that marriage. As long as the Chinese Communists assure profits, who cares about democracy.

[Pauldo]

Originally posted by mikewrona
I have two theories.

1. You don't grow if you don't organize. The typical union member is not interested in organizing.

The typical member in union is a follower and not a leader. That is why union membership in the USA is down to a record low level of only 13%




2. American Capitalists are now firmly in bed with Communist Capitalists. Don't know what you would call that marriage. As long as the Chinese Communists assure profits, who cares about democracy.

In all my life, I have never heard of a Communist Capitalist. I see Karl Marx rolling over in his grave if he heard this term!

[mikewrona]

Originally posted by Pauldo
In all my life, I have never heard of a Communist Capitalist. I see Karl Marx rolling over in his grave if he heard this term!

You should spend less time calling other people stupid and spend more time educating yourself. It's never too late.

Communist capitalists?
From the Journal Sentinel
Last Updated: July 4, 2001
Anyone who doubts that the Chinese Communist Party has its back against the Great Wall ought to reflect on a remarkable proposal that President Jiang Zemin, 74, made in a speech the other day at the close of the party's 80th birthday celebration.

Jiang proposed that private business owners - capitalists - should be welcomed into the party. This is the same party that killed, jailed or exiled most of its capitalist members after the 1949 revolution, the same party that banned entrepreneurs after the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989 on the ground that, as Jiang himself declared at the time, they "depend on exploitation for their living." Why the 180?

China is undergoing more rapid and dramatic change than any other major country in the world. To many Chinese, especially young people who are interested in making a living and getting ahead, the Communist Party is the equivalent of your father's Oldsmobile. It is increasingly populated by old men trying to keep alive a flame that is running out of oxygen.

Unless the party finds a way to recruit and maintain its best and brightest young people, it will wither and die an unmourned death. Thus, the party's attempt at inclusiveness is an act - perhaps even a desperate act - of renewal and self-preservation.

It is also a reflection of reality, since about 113,000 of the Chinese Communist Party's 65 million members already run businesses. Why scorn the people in the best position to supply work to the millions of factory workers, farmers and others who have lost their jobs to privatization? What will happen if China's entrepreneurs cannot find jobs for these people?

But the party's embrace of capitalists is risky. Mainly, it runs the risk of creating dissident factions that can turn into opposition political parties. Such parties now are banned. But it's far from clear the Communist Party could effectively ban a party led by some of its most influential members.

Officials in Beijing like to remind visitors that Zhou En-lai, one of the founders of the Communist Party, once told a foreign guest, "First and foremost, I'm a Chinese; then I'm a Communist." In embracing capitalists in the name of self-preservation, Zemin was simply following the lead of one of his most eminent forebears.

[Pauldo]

Mikey,
I bet you will enjoy this! This is how low the Democrat Party has stooped!

[avet]

This is the republican's "IDIOTIC" idea of a "gift" to America.....


Iraq War is the Best Gift to Our Grandchildren
John Boehner, the new Majority Leader talked with MTP and responded to a question about corruption in Iraq.
Boehner: It may not benefit our generation, but for our kids and theirs, this maybe the greatest gift we give them.
__________________________________________

"our kids\grandchildren", ...as in:

bush kids'
cheney's kids
rumsfield's kids
boehner kids
delay's kids
kids of Halliburton CEO's
kid's of Exons CEO's
kid's of Phizer's CEO's

They will ALL be very, very, very, "rich" and "running" the country (God help us, and the *"real" kids that make up America!). * They are the ONLY ONES making ALL the ....sacrifices.

The "kids" of everyday good Americans, being thrown deeper into poverty everyday, are the ones serving\dead\dying everyday in IRAQ, and elsewhere.

NOT THEIR ..."KIDS" !! Their "groomed", conditioned, trained, educated, financially supported, from day number one, for the rise into "power". HOW to use it....to the MAX, and ..... sometimes, way BEYOND.

THAT'S WHAT IS CALLED...... A GIFT?? !!!!

FOR ....."OUR".... KIDS?? &^%$#^&** !!!!!

A ..."WREATH" IS ..."NOT".... A GIFT !!

[avet]

HOW MUCH "LOWER" CAN REPUBLICANS GO ???

Gonzales not put under oath in NSA Hearing
Feingold demanded that Alberto be put under oath. Specter didn't want to put Alberto under oath. A vote ensued. Nice to see the right wingers on the committee do an admirable job of protecting Gonzo.

EVERY\ALL hearing has ALWAYS started with being ..."sworn in" !

EXCEPT for:
the gas gouging OIL CEO'S hearing ("agressively" refused to by STEVENS)
and now Alberto, in the NSA hearings

WHY??

WHY ARE REPUBLICANS "C-O-N-S-T-A-N-T-L-Y" ACTING LIKE, THEIR TOTALLY ..."ABOVE THE LAW"?

[mikewrona]

Originally posted by Pauldo
Mikey,
I bet you will enjoy this! This is how low the Democrat Party has stooped!

The one with the mustache looks like your mother.

[avet]

Take away the title, the podium, the crest...pretend that he is a "total stranger" you never seen before giving a speech if front of your college class, or group, whatever...

would you believe he has ANY sort of a ....."college degree or education" ?

would you believe he is "the" one who talks to many other world class leaders?

would you believe he is "the" ... "most powerfull" person in the entire world, controlling history,.. policy?

would you trust him, if you were an interviewer, to run your company, if you were hiring?

This would be totally hiliarious, ....if it weren't true.
_______________________________

Bush Blooper/Satire video
(1.75 meg)
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Funniest_Video_of_the_Year_1.wmv
_______________________________

G.H.W.B.'s "gift" .... to this nation.

[tomac]

Originally posted by Pauldo
George W. Bush might be a Republican. He might be a Texan. He might even be a nice guy. However, after listening to his State of the World speech last Tuesday, one thing is for certain: George W. Bush is not a conservative! He is plainly a globalist!

Look at most of the things that "conservatives" espouse these days.
They used to believe in conserving our natural resources, our money and our freedoms. Now they're devouring our natural resources, busting our bidget and sending our troops where they're not wanted. What's next?
When Clinton lied under oath about having an extramarital liaison, those "conservatives" couldn't wait to impeach him, but when Scooter Libby was indicted, those same "conservatives" said that it was no big deal because he wasn't indicted for revealing the identity of a CIA agent (which he did), but for lying under oath.
Which is worse?
An affair or endangering the life of a patriot working to defend her country and then trying to cover it up?

[steven]

Originally posted by LHardy
Ok lets see if we can get through this thread without personal jabs.

Didnt last long did it?
:(

[WNYresident]

Originally posted by DR_GONZO
Global economies should have global cost of living expenses and wages equal in all the global economies along with the same tax codes, safety issues, and environmental standards. Not $14.00/hr here vs. $.03/hr there or taxes and strick environmental laws here vs little or none there. That would be the global thing to do. :cool:

I agree.... to a point... You do have to have some assembless of a level playing field...

[DR_GONZO]

Forgot one more, global healthcare and it's costs.