Time for some intelligent commentary instead of the usual BS.
A liberal pundit soars to a prominent perch - The Boston Globe
A liberal pundit soars to a prominent perch - The Boston Globe
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Rachel Maddow show starts tonight at 9pm
- Thread starter Chris
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #3
Yea baby! She is great. Finally someone from the LEFT has their own show. I hope they let her do what she does best. She tells us what the mainstream media isn't telling us.
She makes Pat Buchanan look like a dumb ass.
I like Pat Buchanan. He is a true conservative.
I hope she has him on her show a lot. I think they are good together. Thank God they ended the Matthews-Olbermann marriage. What a trainwreck! They should just dump Chris Matthews. I think he is losing it, like McCain.
Last edited:
I like Pat Buchanan. He is a true conservative.
I hope she has him on her show a lot. I think they are good together. Thank God they ended the Matthew-Olbermann marriage. What a trainwreck! They should just dump Chris Matthews. I think he is losing it, like McCain.
Just so you know, Conservatives have sat on their hands and let the party be taken over by extremists.
And conservatives from the 90's created NAFTA.
Even though Conservatives are better than what the GOP is now, they are still wrong for America.
TOM DELAY'S HOUSE OF SHAME | Newsweek Voices | Newsweek.com
indago
VIP Member
- Oct 27, 2007
- 1,114
- 109
- 85
sealybobo wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
And conservatives from the 90's created NAFTA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Roy Beck, from NumbersUSA, testified before a Congressional Committee 15 May 2001:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would like to use this occasion to stress the importance of re-establishing the "service" in the Immigration and Naturalization Service. American citizens of all races and walks of life, native-born and foreign-born, in communities in every region of this country are failing to receive even the most rudimentary of service when they call on the INS to deal with the rising tide of illegal immigrants.
In preparation for this testimony, we communicated with citizens in more than two dozen communities where immigration laws are violated openly and without apparent consequence.
The general mood and feeling of helplessness we found is perhaps best described in a May 7, 2001, Newsday article by Bob Weimer, a columnist for the Long Island Newspaper. He was specifically writing about the Long Island community of Farmingville where citizens have organized and met repeatedly with the INS and every other level of government — to no avail. Weimer describes the current scene in Farmingville, but he could easily be describing a hundred other communities:
"The [INS] service's well-documented inability to do anything about the rising influx of undocumented aliens on Long Island demonstrates a complete bureaucratic breakdown. It has failed to perform its mission….
"The word goes south; the aliens come north, and anarchy spreads and becomes routine. Every day in a thousand ways laws are broken. Congress made it a crime to aid, abet, conceal or induce an alien to enter and/or reside in the United States illegally….
"Farmingville teems with undocumented aliens, but Suffolk police, state officials and the hopeless INS manage consistently to look elsewhere while immigration law, tax law, labor law and local housing and sanitary codes are flouted. Landlords pack the aliens into hazardous and substandard housing. Contractors work them off the books, thereby avoiding all the nasty little charges and levies associated with legal labor transactions.
"Federal and state laws are broken in a thousand different ways every day at hiring sites on Long Island…. [After all the efforts of citizens to persuade the INS to enforce the law] nothing has changed. The influx continues. The burden on the town's worn-out housing stock mounts. Local officials, state officials and federal officials continue to avoid the issue….
"The people of Farmingville feel they have been abandoned. They feel the cold wind of anarchy."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INS and the Executive Office for Immigration Review
-----------------------------------------------------------------
And conservatives from the 90's created NAFTA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Roy Beck, from NumbersUSA, testified before a Congressional Committee 15 May 2001:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We would like to use this occasion to stress the importance of re-establishing the "service" in the Immigration and Naturalization Service. American citizens of all races and walks of life, native-born and foreign-born, in communities in every region of this country are failing to receive even the most rudimentary of service when they call on the INS to deal with the rising tide of illegal immigrants.
In preparation for this testimony, we communicated with citizens in more than two dozen communities where immigration laws are violated openly and without apparent consequence.
The general mood and feeling of helplessness we found is perhaps best described in a May 7, 2001, Newsday article by Bob Weimer, a columnist for the Long Island Newspaper. He was specifically writing about the Long Island community of Farmingville where citizens have organized and met repeatedly with the INS and every other level of government — to no avail. Weimer describes the current scene in Farmingville, but he could easily be describing a hundred other communities:
"The [INS] service's well-documented inability to do anything about the rising influx of undocumented aliens on Long Island demonstrates a complete bureaucratic breakdown. It has failed to perform its mission….
"The word goes south; the aliens come north, and anarchy spreads and becomes routine. Every day in a thousand ways laws are broken. Congress made it a crime to aid, abet, conceal or induce an alien to enter and/or reside in the United States illegally….
"Farmingville teems with undocumented aliens, but Suffolk police, state officials and the hopeless INS manage consistently to look elsewhere while immigration law, tax law, labor law and local housing and sanitary codes are flouted. Landlords pack the aliens into hazardous and substandard housing. Contractors work them off the books, thereby avoiding all the nasty little charges and levies associated with legal labor transactions.
"Federal and state laws are broken in a thousand different ways every day at hiring sites on Long Island…. [After all the efforts of citizens to persuade the INS to enforce the law] nothing has changed. The influx continues. The burden on the town's worn-out housing stock mounts. Local officials, state officials and federal officials continue to avoid the issue….
"The people of Farmingville feel they have been abandoned. They feel the cold wind of anarchy."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INS and the Executive Office for Immigration Review
Last edited:
indago
VIP Member
- Oct 27, 2007
- 1,114
- 109
- 85
Journalist Bob Herbert wrote for the New York Times in 1995:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in 1993, in a typical declaration of faith in the projected glories of the North American Free Trade Agreement, a vice president of Mattel Corp. named Fermin Cuza assured a congressional subcommittee that NAFTA would result in the creation of new jobs at Mattel and have "a very positive effect'' on the 2,000 men and women already employed by Mattel in the United States.
Cuza's was just one of many promises made during that season of devotion to free trade. The consumer group Public Citizen took a look back at them.
Let's start with Mattel. Not only have no jobs been created, but a check of federal records by Public Citizen found that 520 workers at Mattel's Fisher-Price facility in Medina, N.Y., have been certified as laid off specifically because of "increased company imports from Mexico'' that resulted from NAFTA.
Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch unit surveyed the job creation promises of dozens of staunchly pro-NAFTA corporations. They included, in addition to Mattel, Allied Signal, General Electric, Procter & Gamble, Scott Paper and Zenith.
In a report released last week, Public Citizen noted that every one of those companies has already "laid off workers because of NAFTA.''
Of the companies surveyed, 89 percent had failed to take any significant step toward fulfilling their promises of job creation or export expansion.
In November 1993, President Clinton asserted, "If this trade agreement passes NAFTA we estimate America will add another 200,000 jobs by 1995 alone.''
He was mistaken. There has been no meaningful job creation from NAFTA, which has been in effect for 20 months. But the U.S. Department of Labor, through its NAFTA Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which was designed to help people thrown out of their jobs by NAFTA, has certified that 38,148 workers lost their jobs by mid-August.
An additional 30,000 workers have filed for assistance under the program, which is not well known and not available to most workers who are at risk. It is expected that the true job loss under NAFTA will reach one million by the end of the year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Yes, we presided over the transfer of American jobs to foreign lands!
So, wuddaya gonna do about it?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in 1993, in a typical declaration of faith in the projected glories of the North American Free Trade Agreement, a vice president of Mattel Corp. named Fermin Cuza assured a congressional subcommittee that NAFTA would result in the creation of new jobs at Mattel and have "a very positive effect'' on the 2,000 men and women already employed by Mattel in the United States.
Cuza's was just one of many promises made during that season of devotion to free trade. The consumer group Public Citizen took a look back at them.
Let's start with Mattel. Not only have no jobs been created, but a check of federal records by Public Citizen found that 520 workers at Mattel's Fisher-Price facility in Medina, N.Y., have been certified as laid off specifically because of "increased company imports from Mexico'' that resulted from NAFTA.
Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch unit surveyed the job creation promises of dozens of staunchly pro-NAFTA corporations. They included, in addition to Mattel, Allied Signal, General Electric, Procter & Gamble, Scott Paper and Zenith.
In a report released last week, Public Citizen noted that every one of those companies has already "laid off workers because of NAFTA.''
Of the companies surveyed, 89 percent had failed to take any significant step toward fulfilling their promises of job creation or export expansion.
In November 1993, President Clinton asserted, "If this trade agreement passes NAFTA we estimate America will add another 200,000 jobs by 1995 alone.''
He was mistaken. There has been no meaningful job creation from NAFTA, which has been in effect for 20 months. But the U.S. Department of Labor, through its NAFTA Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which was designed to help people thrown out of their jobs by NAFTA, has certified that 38,148 workers lost their jobs by mid-August.
An additional 30,000 workers have filed for assistance under the program, which is not well known and not available to most workers who are at risk. It is expected that the true job loss under NAFTA will reach one million by the end of the year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Yes, we presided over the transfer of American jobs to foreign lands!
So, wuddaya gonna do about it?"
indago
VIP Member
- Oct 27, 2007
- 1,114
- 109
- 85
Hedrick Smith, reporting in a FRONTLINE program, noted: " When trade agreements were signed between the U.S. and China in the 1990s, bringing China into the World Trade Organization, American political and business leaders embraced the idea. China's 1.2 billion people were viewed as an enormous untapped market for American-made goods. The reality, experts say, is the opposite. China's exports to the U.S. have skyrocketed."
In the report, it was also noted: "Yvonne Smith, the communications director at the Port of Long Beach, literally sees the imbalance in U.S.-China trade. She reports that through Long Beach alone, the U.S. is importing $36 billion in goods yearly from China and exporting just $3 billion. By her account, the mix of products is very unfavorable to the U.S.
"We export cotton, we import clothing," Smith reports. "We export hides, we bring in shoes. We export scrap metal. We bring back machinery. We're exporting waste paper, we bring back cardboard boxes with products inside them."
Overall, the U.S. trade deficit with China reached a record $124 billion dollars in 2003 and the figure is headed even higher this year. Today, U.S. imports from China outpace U.S. exports to China by more than five to one, and the deficit shows no signs of abating."
William Greider, a political journalist writing for The Nation, wrote: "For decades, globalization advocates insisted, for example, that the solution to America's trade deficits was more "free trade." Each new trade agreement has been heralded as a market-opening breakthrough that would boost US exports and thus move toward balanced trade. That is not what happened not after NAFTA (1993) and the WTO (1994), nor after China normalization (2000). In each case, the trade deficits grew dramatically. (Yes, it's true that since the early 1970s US export volume has grown by more than five times, but import volume has grown by eight times.) Economists have also claimed that ending deficit spending by the federal government would eliminate the trade gap. Yet when the federal government's budget did finally come into balance in 1999, the trade deficits were exploding. This discredited explanation is nonetheless being recycled, now that huge federal deficits have been spectacularly revived by the Bush Administration."
Chantell Taylor, writing for the Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, wrote: "Throughout his presidency, President Clinton has given lip service to labor organizations at home while surreptitiously selling out American workers in trade negotiations abroad. In his 1999 State of the Union address, President Clinton told America that: "we ought to tear down barriers, open markets, and expand trade. But at the same time, we must ensure that ordinary citizens in all countries actually benefit from trade a trade that promotes the dignity of work, the rights of workers, and protects the environment." Yet the President has aggressively continued to push the status quo free trade agenda, chartering new accords that replicate the existing failed model and refusing to change one iota of substantive obligations that protect labor at home and abroad." It was also noted: "President Clinton sold the NAFTA to skeptical American workers by promising to condition his support on the signing of a labor side agreement, then betrayed labor when he ultimately caved in to the dissent of Mexico by deleting from the NAALC "provisions that provided the possibility of trade sanctions and monetary penalties for a persistent failure of a party to the NAALC to enforce its own labor laws . . . ." The deletion essentially removed all teeth that the NAALC may have had to enforce workers' right to collective bargaining and freedom of association".
Noam Chomsky wrote, in an article on NAFTA: "When the bulk of the American (and Mexican) people remained opposed to NAFTA, Clinton bought Congressional votes with pork barrel concessions and promises of trade relief. Thus Rep. Johnson (D-Tex) traded her vote for $ 1.7 Billion in additional govt aircraft production and Rep. Pickle got a trade center built in his district. Critical votes of the Florida delegations were changed by promising protection for citrus and vegetable growers. Protection for Florida and Midwest beet sugar growers was also included in the implementing language in exchange for more votes. Almost 20 of these deals that swung votes in the critical House vote are discussed in ref 3. Some of the promises were kept, but many, like the agreement to protect Florida's tomato growers and U.S. broom corn growers were not."
President Clinton did a lot of arm-twisting in the Congress to get the NAFTA passed, and now we are living with the results.
"Just look at those DumShits out there!
We sure pulled some shit over on them, didn't we?"
In the report, it was also noted: "Yvonne Smith, the communications director at the Port of Long Beach, literally sees the imbalance in U.S.-China trade. She reports that through Long Beach alone, the U.S. is importing $36 billion in goods yearly from China and exporting just $3 billion. By her account, the mix of products is very unfavorable to the U.S.
"We export cotton, we import clothing," Smith reports. "We export hides, we bring in shoes. We export scrap metal. We bring back machinery. We're exporting waste paper, we bring back cardboard boxes with products inside them."
Overall, the U.S. trade deficit with China reached a record $124 billion dollars in 2003 and the figure is headed even higher this year. Today, U.S. imports from China outpace U.S. exports to China by more than five to one, and the deficit shows no signs of abating."
William Greider, a political journalist writing for The Nation, wrote: "For decades, globalization advocates insisted, for example, that the solution to America's trade deficits was more "free trade." Each new trade agreement has been heralded as a market-opening breakthrough that would boost US exports and thus move toward balanced trade. That is not what happened not after NAFTA (1993) and the WTO (1994), nor after China normalization (2000). In each case, the trade deficits grew dramatically. (Yes, it's true that since the early 1970s US export volume has grown by more than five times, but import volume has grown by eight times.) Economists have also claimed that ending deficit spending by the federal government would eliminate the trade gap. Yet when the federal government's budget did finally come into balance in 1999, the trade deficits were exploding. This discredited explanation is nonetheless being recycled, now that huge federal deficits have been spectacularly revived by the Bush Administration."
Chantell Taylor, writing for the Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, wrote: "Throughout his presidency, President Clinton has given lip service to labor organizations at home while surreptitiously selling out American workers in trade negotiations abroad. In his 1999 State of the Union address, President Clinton told America that: "we ought to tear down barriers, open markets, and expand trade. But at the same time, we must ensure that ordinary citizens in all countries actually benefit from trade a trade that promotes the dignity of work, the rights of workers, and protects the environment." Yet the President has aggressively continued to push the status quo free trade agenda, chartering new accords that replicate the existing failed model and refusing to change one iota of substantive obligations that protect labor at home and abroad." It was also noted: "President Clinton sold the NAFTA to skeptical American workers by promising to condition his support on the signing of a labor side agreement, then betrayed labor when he ultimately caved in to the dissent of Mexico by deleting from the NAALC "provisions that provided the possibility of trade sanctions and monetary penalties for a persistent failure of a party to the NAALC to enforce its own labor laws . . . ." The deletion essentially removed all teeth that the NAALC may have had to enforce workers' right to collective bargaining and freedom of association".
Noam Chomsky wrote, in an article on NAFTA: "When the bulk of the American (and Mexican) people remained opposed to NAFTA, Clinton bought Congressional votes with pork barrel concessions and promises of trade relief. Thus Rep. Johnson (D-Tex) traded her vote for $ 1.7 Billion in additional govt aircraft production and Rep. Pickle got a trade center built in his district. Critical votes of the Florida delegations were changed by promising protection for citrus and vegetable growers. Protection for Florida and Midwest beet sugar growers was also included in the implementing language in exchange for more votes. Almost 20 of these deals that swung votes in the critical House vote are discussed in ref 3. Some of the promises were kept, but many, like the agreement to protect Florida's tomato growers and U.S. broom corn growers were not."
President Clinton did a lot of arm-twisting in the Congress to get the NAFTA passed, and now we are living with the results.
"Just look at those DumShits out there!
We sure pulled some shit over on them, didn't we?"
SwingVoter
VIP Member
Mexico's imports of US soybeans have grown more than tenfold since NAFTA, not sure why anyone thinks this is a bad thing.
SwingVoter
VIP Member
Time for some intelligent commentary instead of the usual BS.
Might have to check this out, she seems a lot more level-headed than that useless blowhard Olbermann.
- Thread starter
- #11
Mexico's imports of US soybeans have grown more than tenfold since NAFTA, not sure why anyone thinks this is a bad thing.
I think NAFTA was a great idea.
If we had universal healthcare, we could compete much better.
- Thread starter
- #12
I'm so excited about her show!
I loved all the fans cheering her in Denver.
I will miss her and Pat duking it out.
She needs a good conservative on her show. Maybe Peggy Noonan?
Similar threads
- Replies
- 22
- Views
- 300
- Replies
- 145
- Views
- 4K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 358
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 30
- Replies
- 79
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 235
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 9250
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 497
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-