Snow reignites fight over job outsourcing

The Mercury News ^ | March 30, 2004 | Martin Crutsinger

[Iscool]

There are too many globalists in the Bush administration. Mr. Snow should be swept aside. Would he be singing that tune if his job were outsourced?

The Bush administration is NOTHING BUT GLOBALIST...The Clinton administration was NOTHING BUT GLOBALIST...These people at the White House aren't giving George B the bum's rush...They are bing used to convey this globalism to the masses as something to be desired...

A Democrat I know recently gave his take on the deal...The Republican globalist politicians are trying to create this New World Order for the purpose of seizing the world's wealth thru corporations and the World Banks...And to remove any semblance of a working middle class...

The Democrat globalist politicians are working for a world-wide environment where the poor people and nations rise to some kind of utopian world void of poverty...Of course, at the expense of the working middle class...This will be controlled by the United Nations...This Democrat plan is a far more noble plan since it is based on humanitarian goals as opposed to financial ones, so this fella says...

One thing is for certain, this globalism scheme is in the works and it's going to take some serious moves on the part of what's left of the sovereigns to turn it around...

[neutrino]

who are simultaneously teaching me Taxation of International Business at one of the better law schools in Chicago.

Ahh, yes, a soon-to-be lawyer. I do hope you clerk for a Federal judge and get on with a large firm...and make partner. Otherwise, your living may be rather modest.

Don't think that a graduate degree will protect you. There are lots of unemployed PhD's around.

[maui_hawaii]

There is such a thing as being too big of an intellectual.

There is also such a thing as not being original enough, and an independent thinker enough, to tell one's professor that they are full of crap.

To a certain extent one has to challenge the world around them.

Original thought is far more important than some degree holder who lacks the ability to think originally.

[Euro-American Scum]

The only salient issue that Kerry and the Rats have to clobber Bush with is the jobs/outsourcing/economy conundrum. It's bad enough that Bush has to deal with it but to have idiots like Snow and Mankiw throwing gasoline on the fire, handing the issue to the Rats on a silver platter to clobber Bush with, is just too much to take.

And in Ohio, no less. With all the manufacturing jobs that have vanished from that state, and Ohio being crucial to GWB's re-election campaign.

I never took John Kerry seriously as a serious opponent to George W. Bush in 2004. He doesn't have the charisma or the teflon coating of a Bill Clinton. And there is no Ross Perot to syphon votes from the Bush campaign. But with advisors like Bush has, this could easily shape up to be a repeat of 1992.

[maui_hawaii]

Einstein's professor didn't teach him E=MC^2

[international american]

"The Bush administration is NOTHING BUT GLOBALIST...The Clinton administration was NOTHING BUT GLOBALIST...These people at the White House aren't giving George B the bum's rush...They are bing used to convey this globalism to the masses as something to be desired...

A Democrat I know recently gave his take on the deal...The Republican globalist politicians are trying to create this New World Order for the purpose of seizing the world's wealth thru corporations and the World Banks...And to remove any semblance of a working middle class...

The Democrat globalist politicians are working for a world-wide environment where the poor people and nations rise to some kind of utopian world void of poverty...Of course, at the expense of the working middle class...This will be controlled by the United Nations...This Democrat plan is a far more noble plan since it is based on humanitarian goals as opposed to financial ones, so this fella says...

One thing is for certain, this globalism scheme is in the works and it's going to take some serious moves on the part of what's left of the sovereigns to turn it around..."

True all the way down the line!

[maui_hawaii]

I have posted on that many times. Its my recurring theme that most of the 'others' simply ignore because they can't answer it.

They are defending theory via trying to call everyone a protectionist.

I am trying to inject reality into the deal.

Trade has to have certain dynamics to it in order for it to work properly.

If we try to do what we did 50 years ago regarding trade, I say thats a bad precedence. We can improve greatly on our past performance.

[Euro-American Scum]

Would Karl Rove please call this idiot and tell him to shut up?

You know, I'm starting to think Karl Rove is the problem here. Rove was touted to be the Republican version of James Carville. Politically savvy, sharp as a whip, absolutely ruthless. The way things are playing out on this, you can add dumb as a post as well.

Rove is acting like none of these comments are going to have an adverse effect. His attitude appears to be -- "We know you don't like offshoring, but we really don't care, because if you don't support GWB, you're going to have John Kerry and he will be infinitely worse."

I agree with the "worse" part about John Kerry. But I'm beginning to wonder if remarks such as these won't have an adverse effect. Seems to me Bush 41 didn't take Bill Clinton seriously either. And we all know what happened in 1992.

[international american]

Correct. One of the major problems we have is that Americans are not world traveled, and don't understand the other side of the fence.

[cheyguill]

If Bush is a globalist, then why did he not bow down to the United Nations as it relates to Iraq? Perhaps you should reconsider your analysis.

[navyblue]

If Bush is a globalist, then why did he not bow down to the United Nations as it relates to Iraq? Perhaps you should reconsider your analysis.

Because the United Nations is not behind Globalism! Trade and the TNC's, through the WTO, are behind Globalism.

[international american]

"Reagan's administration was the last administration where the globalist were held in check."

Smartest guy I have met on FR!

[maui_hawaii]

Ronald Reagan first proposed a free trade agreement between the U.S. and Mexico in his 1980 presidential campaign. Since that time, The Heritage Foundation is proud of the role it has played in articulating President Reagan's vision of free trade in Latin America and around the world. Since the mid-1980s, Heritage analysts have been stressing that a free trade agreement with Mexico not only will stimulate economic growth in the U.S., but will make Mexico a more stable and prosperous country. Heritage has published over three dozen studies stressing the benefits of free trade in North America.

source

[1rudeboy]

Sorry, bud. Private school.

[1rudeboy]

You have no idea how old I am, nor how much "life experience" I have. One would think that with all your "life experience," you wouldn't jump so readily to conclusions.

[1rudeboy]

Actually, I plan to go back into business. I don't care for lawyers very much. Or the law, for that matter.

[CasearianDaoist]

Actually I do not think that that is quite right. The Left wing globalists want to have political power over the corporate "economic globalist." They will accomplish that via the welfare state that must ensue as the Western economies are impoverished due to the wealth and technology transfer that is inherent in global economic integration.

These are just two factions of the globilst oerlordsfighting an internecine war for power in the new order. Odds are that the socialist will win in the mid term, after that the would system will break down, as all tyrannies eventually do.

[CasearianDaoist]

Well, this is of course not true. In the defense industries we have very strict laws about what a company can do overseas. There are also very strict ethical laws as well. For instance, General motors cannot open up cat houses in thailand, they will go to jail. So in a strictly legal sense you are wrong. But that is really beside the point. Limiting this practice in fact could be done by tax disincentives, export import laws, patent law and liability laws and of course tariff.

So what eer one feels about the issue, it is vlearly untrue that there is no recourse for nations states in the matter. I will point out that many of the other countries involved have serious restriction going the other way.

And there are informal practices. We for example, informally required the Japanese to undertake "voluntary quotas" and build plants over here.

[chimera]

But with advisors like Bush has, this could easily shape up to be a repeat of 1992.

People here need to realize the truth of what you say. Look at the catch phrases and buzzwords the Rats are tuning up this time around and you will see an eerie resemblance to those used in '92: "disconnected", "out of touch", "doesn't care about the common man", and "more interested in global politics than domestic needs". It's all hypocritical because the Rats and Kerry are all of those things and more, but it won't matter. The press will lap it up and try to paint Bush 43 as a Bush 41 retread. And with a$$wipes like Mankiw and Snow out there running their sewers, it only gives the Rats more ammunition to shoot holes in the Bush campaign.

[neutrino]

I guess you and I will get the last laugh.....except, there will be nothing to laugh about:)

I suspect so. Given the present trends, we'll be a third world country, dreaming of our previous greatness. Who knows, maybe we can dine out on stories of what once was.