Thread: Shocking Lou Dobbs Video! Opinions Needed ASAP

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

The Constitution Party National Platform | Foreign Policy

http://azconstitutionparty.com/foreign-policy

"Europe has a set of primary interests, which have to us none, or very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collusions of her friendships or enmities. "Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?" (George Washington's Farewell Address)

"I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration,…peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." Thomas Jefferson-First Inaugural Address. Bergh 3:321. (1801.)

"America has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when the conflict has been for principles to which she clings....She goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." (John Quincy Adams, Speech Delivered in Washington DC 04 July 1821)

"In the wars of European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do....Our policy in regard to Europe...is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers..." (James Monroe, Monroe Doctrine)

Dobbs didn't have a better policy than this.

What does that have to do with Lou Dobbs? That's a foreign policy position, not a trade policy.

It is on this basis that their trade policy is established.

No, that's a no trade policy of unrestricted free trade, which means more free trade, not less, which means more outsourcing, not less, which means more job loss, not less, which means more jobs, money supply, more infrastructure and more technology leave our country and we all end up unemployed paupers with globalists in absolute control of the US government because they're underwriting the US government with their import tariffs.

The people who wrote up this plan didn't do the math and think it through. They're promoting tariff trade but not to reduce imports, they're promoting tariff trade to increase imports so they can increase the tax revenues from foreign trade.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

The Constitution Party National Platform | Foreign Policy

http://azconstitutionparty.com/foreign-policy

"Europe has a set of primary interests, which have to us none, or very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collusions of her friendships or enmities. "Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?" (George Washington's Farewell Address)

"I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration,…peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." Thomas Jefferson-First Inaugural Address. Bergh 3:321. (1801.)

"America has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when the conflict has been for principles to which she clings....She goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." (John Quincy Adams, Speech Delivered in Washington DC 04 July 1821)

"In the wars of European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do....Our policy in regard to Europe...is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers..." (James Monroe, Monroe Doctrine)

Dobbs didn't have a better policy than this.

What does that have to do with Lou Dobbs? That's a foreign policy position, not a trade policy.

It is on this basis that their trade policy is established.

No, that's a no trade policy of unrestricted free trade, which means more free trade, not less, which means more outsourcing, not less, which means more job loss, not less, which means more jobs, money supply, more infrastructure and more technology leave our country and we all end up unemployed paupers with globalists in absolute control of the US government because they're underwriting the US government with their import tariffs.

The people who wrote up this plan didn't do the math and think it through. They're promoting tariff trade but not to reduce imports, they're promoting tariff trade to increase imports so they can increase the tax revenues from foreign trade.

With tariffs on trade we won't be importing as much, I can guarantee it. We import more without tariffs. It is not the aim of the Constitution Party to put Americans out of work.

I think my tummy upset is settled down now finally so I can get to sleep. I check back tomorrow.

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by Judy

We need protected trade policies that manage imports and exports using tariffs and quotas to achieve balanced trade, where imports and exports are either in balance or exports are in surplus.

Exactly, and that's exactly what the Constitution Party is for...balanced trade.

That may be, but that's not what Chuck Baldwin is for. He is for "free trade with all, alliances with none." He's for unrestricted free trade, same as Ron Paul, they want more free trade, not less.

Trade with tariffs to protect Americans is not "unrestricted trade".

Yes it is. It's just free trade with a tariff on it, no restrictions, no agreements, no alliances. Farmers lobby for a low tariff so they can negotiate a low tariff for their exports. Automakers lobby for a low tariff so they can negotiate a low tariff on their imports. Walmart lobbies for a low tariff so they can negotiate a low tariff on their imports here and their exports from over there.

I support the restoration of tariffs and quotas, but not to generate tax revenues as the Constitution Party desires, but to reduce the amount of imports. What do you think Congress is going to do when their purse strings are linked to imports? They're going to increase imports to increase their revenues which means more imports not less, it achieves the opposite result of our goal which is to reduce imports. If corporations and businesses are expected to pay the bulk of the tax revenues by importing, then who do you think controls Congress? We the People? No, the people underwriting the US government control the US government which under the Constitution Party's scenario means the very people we're fighting ... the globalists. And the Constitution Party even has a proviso that when the revenues aren't sufficient, they'll state-tax-rate the states and force them to come up with the balance of the monies needed or wanted by the federal government. Now the globalists not only own the US Government they own every state government to boot by federal law.

The theory of the Constitution Party is flawed.

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

I think my tummy upset is settled down now finally so I can get to sleep. I check back tomorrow.

Okay, sleep well, dear Cynthia and we'll pick it up tomorrow. I understand that the objective of the Constitution Party is well-intentioned and that it's not their goal to put people out of work, but that unfortunately is exactly what taxed trade will do if the motive is to use those import taxes to underwrite the government.

The only way to get the jobs back is to run protected managed trade which requires the very tariff agreements between countries that makes that possible that the Constitution Party says it wants "none" of.

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

With tariffs on trade we won't be importing as much, I can guarantee it. We import more without tariffs. It is not the aim of the Constitution Party to put Americans out of work.

It depends entirely on what the tariff rate is and whether or not you use quotas to restrict it. It depends on which country you have what tariff rate on and what our desired exports are to those countries. If their plan didn't eliminate tariff agreements with other countries, and if their plan didn't tie financing of the federal government to tariffs, then that would be a good protected trade policy plan. But to tie funding of the federal government to import tariffs, means Congress is going to set the rates low to increase the import activity which increases the tariff revenues by volume which sucks all our jobs out of the country.

We the People need to pay the taxes to underwrite all our governments, not corporations and businesses. We the People need to agree to pay consumption taxes, like the FairTax, on new products and services, money we pay when we're good and ready and desiring of making new purchases so the US government is solely dependent upon US voters and US consumers for their revenues, not the corporations and business lobbies to whom they're already more beholding than US citizens.

[quote="cynthiatweedle"][quote="Judy"]

Here's a link on Chuck Baldwin and his unrestricted free trade position, just like Ron Paul's.

Baldwin: ‘Free trade with all, entangling alliances with none’
June 3rd, 2008 · 11 Comments

While speaking with a group of Ron Paul Meetup members, Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin fielded questions on medical marijuana and foreign policy.

Of medical marijuana, he said it was a “state’s issueâ€

[quote="cynthiatweedle"][quote="Judy"]

Here's a link on Chuck Baldwin and his unrestricted free trade position, just like Ron Paul's.

Baldwin: ‘Free trade with all, entangling alliances with none’
June 3rd, 2008 · 11 Comments

While speaking with a group of Ron Paul Meetup members, Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin fielded questions on medical marijuana and foreign policy.

Of medical marijuana, he said it was a “state’s issueâ€

Originally Posted by ControlFreaks

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

I wouldn't compare people's disappointment to a Salem Witch Trial. I find that remark very derogatory to all of us who love this country.

And that you apparently have no disappointment is shocking.

Quite to the contrary Miss Cynthia. I am VERY disappointed in what I saw initially, and that is what inspired me to go back and watch it 3 more times. I used to be a person that acted with emotion, rather than with reasoning.

Now I err to the latter.

I personally would not want to persecuted, tried and hanged, without first being given the opportunity to present my version of what is/has taken place. If you find the reference to the Salem Witch Trial derogatory, then my apologies to you, as I do not intend to offend, but when I speak or write, I remember 2 very important things; The mouth speaks what the mind thinks, and you will never get anything "warm and fuzzy" from me.

I don't play games and I don't beat around the bush. If I am passionate about something happening in this country, then I will participate, and will do so with as much reasoning and reality as possible. I have been consumed by this site since I posted my first comment last night, and have only had 3 hours of sleep as a result of that consummation.

I have said before that I need to start posting video's on YouTube about these very passions, and even if one person comes around, then I will have made my contribution.

It's time to get some sleep ControlFreaks - you make some good points - a LOT of us make some good points that are similar or different, but all valid and honest. We took the evening off and headed to the casino for a few hours to get me away from it, so I know what you mean by being consumed by the whole thing.

Again, I state, that there doesn't seem to be much we can do - one way or the other until we hear from Lou and I, for one, would like to give him a little more time to 1) get the news and 2) formulate a coherent and measured, but true response to our concerns.
CF - it's time for you to go take a nap - believe me, we'll all be here when you get back lol. (There were another 4 pages for me to go over that were posted while I was gone!) - I don't know HOW William is keeping up with this, twitter, facebook, etc. - it HAS to be exhausting and I, for one, want to give a round of thanks and applause to all of our moderators who take it upon themselves to be responsible for certain threads and portions of the day to see that we don't go too far astray while no one is looking. They all deserve a vacation when this is over, but won't take it because ANOTHER issue will drop in their laps to handle. Anyway, thanks to all - William, Dixie, Judy - sorry, I'm too tired to remember more names, but you know who you are - and so do we. If we DON'T, it's time to start looking at some of the names and titles on each post to see who the moderator, etc. is. They are our 'nannies' for their portion of time and see to it that we don't run amok. Thanks to all.

I suppose you're right. It's 0424 now, so I'll be back after a bit. Sleep good.