Thread: Lawmakers want to repeal NAFTA

Free trade is not free, especially the countries we have a negative trade balance with. Japan will only allow 3% of foreign cars to enter their country. If limiting the junk from China and other countries that use unfair trade practices is protectionism, then count me in with a capital P.

No one can explain the short sightedness of outsourcing and importing. Sure, Walmart sells cheaper garbage, for awhile. But when enough Americans lose formerly good paying jobs because they were outsourced overseas, then eventually we can't buy the garbage and even Walmart looses.

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo talked of this during the presidential debates. We are hurting so bad for jobs now that it may be too little, too late. I worry that they are just dangling this carrot but like our immigration laws have no intention of actually enforcing it. Things will carry on, same ole, same ole, with or without NAFTA. They are all traitors to have allowed this to have happened. The very ones bringing this up now, including Bart Stupid, have been in Congress long enough and we are just hearing about it now? They just noticed now that there is a problem?

My cats died from the poisoned wheat gluten from China. They were not pets, they were family. I TiVo'd the congressional hearings on the pet food led by Bart Stupid. The chairman of the company that did the damage intentionally waited months before recall in order to sell his stock. Nothing happened to him, nothing happened to his company. They just had hearings. And hearings. And accomplished nothing.

Judy wrote,

Absolutely. Our Republican Party has been invaded by some people who used our political organization to advance their own causes without regard to our party principles, our party history and the best interest of the American People. When you see a Republican touting "Free Trade" you just call them what they are, either a "Free Trade Traitor" or a "Stupid Idiot". Bush I started this with NAFTA. Bush II continued it with CAFTA and many others.

Why did you leave out Reagan?

Here is something that I recently came across in a book that I am reading, could not help but think of your many posts when I read it. Enjoy.

From a speech given by McKinley when he was a congressman, given on the floor concerning the Mills bill in debate.

"From 1789 to 1888, a period of ninety-nine years, there have been forty-seven years when a democratic revenue (weak tariff policy) tariff policy has prevailed, and fifty-two years under the protective policy, and it is a noteworthy fact that the most progressive and prosperous periods of our history in every department of human effort and material development, were during the fifty-two years when the protective party was in control and protective tariffs were maintained, and the most disastrous years - years of want and wretchedness, ruin and retrogression, eventuating in insufficient revenues and shattered credits, individual and national -- were during the free trade or revenue tariff eras of our history. No man lives who passed through any of the latter periods but would dread their return, and would flee from them as he would from fire and pestilence, and I believe the party which promotes their return will merit and receive popular condemnation. What is the trouble with our present condition? No country can point to greater prosperity or more enduring evidences of substantial progress among all of the people. Too much money is being collected, it is said. We say, stop it; not by indiscriminate legislation, but by simple business methods. Do it on simple, practical lines, and we will help you. Buy up the bonds, objectionable as it may be, and pay the nation's debt, if you cannot reduce taxation. You could have done this long ago. Nobody is chargeable for the failure but your own administration."

"Who is objecting to our protective system? From what quarter does the complaint come? Not from the enterprising American citizen; not from the manufacturer; not from the laborer, whose wages it improves; not from the consumer, for he is fully satisfied, because under it he buys a cheaper and better product than he did under the other system; not from the farmer, for he finds among the employees of the protected industries his best and most reliable customers; not from the merchant or the tradesman, for every hive of industry increases the number of his customers and enlarges the volume of his trade."

"This measure is not called for by the people; it is not an American measure; it is inspired by importers and foreign producers, most of them aliens, who want to diminish our trade and increase their own; who want to decrease our prosperity and augment theirs, and who have no interest in this country except what they can make out of it. To this is added the influence of the professors in some of our institutions of learning, who teach the science contained in books, and not that of practical business. I would rather have my political economy founded upon the everyday experience of the puddler or the potter than the learning of the professor; or the farmer and factory hand than the college faculty. There is another class who want protective tariffs overthrown. They are the men of independent wealth, with settled and steady incomes, who want everything cheap but currency; the value of everything clipped but coin -- cheap labor, but dear money. These are the elements which are arrayed against us."

From another spot in the book concerning the Mills bill. From the minority(republicans) report. (Minority of the ways and means committee.)

In closing, the report asserted that the minority regarded the bill not as a revenue reduction measure, but as a direct attempt to fasten upon this country the British policy of free foreign trade. (the debate took place in 188

Originally Posted by GaPatriot

Free trade is not free, especially the countries we have a negative trade balance with. Japan will only allow 3% of foreign cars to enter their country. If limiting the junk from China and other countries that use unfair trade practices is protectionism, then count me in with a capital P.

No one can explain the short sightedness of outsourcing and importing. Sure, Walmart sells cheaper garbage, for awhile. But when enough Americans lose formerly good paying jobs because they were outsourced overseas, then eventually we can't buy the garbage and even Walmart looses.

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo talked of this during the presidential debates. We are hurting so bad for jobs now that it may be too little, too late. I worry that they are just dangling this carrot but like our immigration laws have no intention of actually enforcing it. Things will carry on, same ole, same ole, with or without NAFTA. They are all traitors to have allowed this to have happened. The very ones bringing this up now, including Bart Stupid, have been in Congress long enough and we are just hearing about it now? They just noticed now that there is a problem?

My cats died from the poisoned wheat gluten from China. They were not pets, they were family. I TiVo'd the congressional hearings on the pet food led by Bart Stupid. The chairman of the company that did the damage intentionally waited months before recall in order to sell his stock. Nothing happened to him, nothing happened to his company. They just had hearings. And hearings. And accomplished nothing.

I'm so sorry about your cats. That was a terrible terrible thing.

Glad to count you in for Protectionism, GaPatriot, help us spread the word. Absolutely it will bring our jobs home but not by itself. We still have to do the other things like pass the FairTax so our companies want to come back and stay back as well as drill baby drill because to operate here they need plenty of domestic energy and for our manufacturers oil and natural gas are still critical requirements for their volume of use. They can use some alternative energy sources for some HVAC and light loads but for their heavy processing and distribution, they still need oil and gas And to make sure Americans get the jobs when they come back, the FairTax penalizes the illegal worker because they aren't eligible for the FairTax Rebate which puts them at a 23% comparative wage disadvantage in the work place every day they're here.

The Plan:

1. stop illegal immigration
2. pass the FairTax
3. protect our trade
4. legalize/regulate/tax under 2 the illegal drug trade
5. drill baby drill

Nafta always made me angry ever since Klinton imposed it and that idiot Perot supported it. How can anyone sell out their own country to sweat down under? Hell, Mexicans, Indians, Chinese, whatever--they don't have to steal our jobs because we steal them ourselves!

It was sold on the idea of freedom, but where is the freedom if all the jobs are gone? If people here can't feed their kids, but some Mexican is living a high life in Guadalahara. They even said it would be different in Mexico when they got rid of PRI and got a new president. Well folks never happened. Good for them. Mexico is basking in the glory and all we have are lost jobs.

And to add insult to injury it is not enough that the ILLEGALS still come up here and take our jobs. I'm out.

Originally Posted by tomgemza

Nafta always made me angry ever since Klinton imposed it and that idiot Perot supported it. How can anyone sell out their own country to sweat down under? Hell, Mexicans, Indians, Chinese, whatever--they don't have to steal our jobs because we steal them ourselves!

It was sold on the idea of freedom, but where is the freedom if all the jobs are gone? If people here can't feed their kids, but some Mexican is living a high life in Guadalahara. They even said it would be different in Mexico when they got rid of PRI and got a new president. Well folks never happened. Good for them. Mexico is basking in the glory and all we have are lost jobs.

And to add insult to injury it is not enough that the ILLEGALS still come up here and take our jobs. I'm out.

There is no freedom without the prosperity to protect it.

But Perot opposed NAFTA. BushOne supported it. Bush One is the one who negotiated the whole deal with Canada and Mexico, presented to Congress and lobbied it before Clinton was even President. I'm a Republican and was very disappointed with Bush One on this. He had lobbied it so well that he believed he had enough support to over-ride a Clinton Veto. We'll never know for sure if Bush actually had the votes to over-ride a Presidential Veto because Clinton reluctantly didn't veto it.

They lied voraciously about the benefits of NAFTA, CAFTA and all this free trade crap. It wasn't about freedom or anything free, good or decent. It was about bankrupting the US and integrating national economies and national populations into a global economy and a global population feeding off of the US economy draining it dry as a bone.

High Treason.

Originally Posted by Judy

But Perot opposed NAFTA. BushOne supported it.

OK, I meant that idiot Bush, not Perot. Klinton was all talk and was in the hip pocket of Soros and Gates anyway, so it would have been a done deal regardless.

Welcome tomgemza....

Originally Posted by tomgemza

Originally Posted by Judy

But Perot opposed NAFTA. BushOne supported it.

OK, I meant that idiot Bush, not Perot. Klinton was all talk and was in the hip pocket of Soros and Gates anyway, so it would have been a done deal regardless.

You may be right about Clinton. It is hard to see how with what we know now about Soros and the whole globalist plot he could have or would have been off track with Soros or any of the others that sponsored his career.

Bush One is the one who negotiated the whole deal with Canada and Mexico,

Is there no room for credit where credit is due? Reagan negotiated and got the FTA, free trade agreement with Canada first. Passed in Sept. of 88, one month prior to elections. NAFTA had already been in the works prior to Bush 1 winning election.

If your gonna hang'em, hang'em high and honest.

Originally Posted by roundabout

Bush One is the one who negotiated the whole deal with Canada and Mexico,

Is there no room for credit where credit is due? Reagan negotiated and got the FTA, free trade agreement with Canada first. Passed in Sept. of 88, one month prior to elections. NAFTA had already been in the works prior to Bush 1 winning election.

If your gonna hang'em, hang'em high and honest.

Well, yes, that's true, but Bush is the one who negotiated that deal with Canada as Vice President and convinced Reagan it was "Good For America".

Bush One has been a very busy little bee for a long long time. Working under the radar, news media ignoring him, busy working Americans completely in the dark believing "Good For America" actually meant good for America somehow or some way or another when it was all lies, total deceit and one of the grandest fraud schemes ever pulled on the American People.

The only time you can fool an American, is when we're not paying attention. Well, we're paying attention now.

Kick all these free trade bums to the curb and haul all of 'em on flatbeds to their permanent reservation at the End of the Soup Line.

These traitors make me want to puke.