Obama Buy American Radio Ad (4.00 / 2)

http://tpmelectioncentral.talk...

"stop John McCain from shipping our jobs overseas."

~* the * Will * to go on *~

---

by: ObscureName @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 20:43:13 PM CST

And what about Obama arguing against "buy american" now??? (0.00 / 0)

Hello? I don't like McCain gaining political capital from his opposition to the rescue plan now, either, but it's a fact that "U.S. President Barack Obama said Tuesday he wants Congress to make changes to the controversial "Buy American" provision in its nearly $900-billion economic stimulus legislation, warning it would be a "mistake" for the United States to put up new barriers when global trade is already suffering."
http://www.vancouversun.com/Bu...

Really, David, it would be nice if you would acknoledge at least some of the recent news in your stories, even if you don't like them!
|-(

---

by: Gray @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 21:10:36 PM CST

I think that is the point (4.00 / 4)

Obama supporting the smae things he opposed during the campaign. the things that got a lot of us to donate and vote for him. We are bleeding jobs and we should not be spending our tax dollars overseas.  

---

by: teral @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 21:20:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We are bleeding jobs, too, and still some of our bucks go to the US! (0.00 / 0)

It would be really nice to see less US egocentrism in this dire situation. After all, it are the US who are responsible for this mess! And now they want to leave the boat, and once again go for a unilateral move that puts them in conflict with the rest of the world? Where's that change we can believe in?
:-/

---

by: Gray @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 21:27:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Change? (4.00 / 2)

The policy you are pushing for so very hard is Bushism funded by the Merchants of Death (the WW I era name for arms manufacturers).  "Buy American" is change, and welcome change at that.

---

by: David Kowalski @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 21:43:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A time travel back to 1929 is change? (0.00 / 0)

Very funny!
:D

---

by: Gray @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 22:05:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Date (0.00 / 0)

The time travel is back to January 19, 2009.  You are the one who wants to make this Hoover not George W. Bush.

---

by: David Kowalski @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 23:24:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Germany has protectionist policies, they demanded preference under their entrance to the EU (0.00 / 0)

Germany, as well as France and Spain all demanded the right to enact protectionist policies for themselves, while at the same time they attacked farm and other subsidies that England and the UK had. In fact, Germany has protected it's manufacturing base, and only recently allowed some outsourcing. So sit and spin, corporate mole. If you don't like your government, than do a better job in selecting leaders, and get Frau Mengele oops, Merkel out of office.

The EU, including Germany has attacked Ireland for having a referendum, where the citizenry got the chance to vote, to decide whether or not to accept the Lisbon treaty, while your country, Germany denied it's citizens that right. It slandered Ireland for being "protectionist" after the EU had "given them so much", what has Ireland gotten out of the EU, a few billion? What has Ireland lost by it's being in the EU, let's look at it's fishing rights in the waters that surrounds the island nation, shall we? Contingent upon joining the EU, Ireland was forced to give up it's rights to commercial fishing in it's own waters. Was that resource used to support the EU as a whole? No. France and Spain were allowed to seize those fishing rights, and keep the profits for themselves, 7.2 trillion dollars worth per year. Sounds like protectionism on France and Spain's part.

England too lost it's fishing rights, and it's lost jobs not only from outsourcing, but by the EU demand that people from other EU countries be able to flock to England to take jobs, and be supported by that country's safety net.. something that France, Germany, Spain and others don't allow to happen in their own countries. English citizens have been denied work, so eastern Europeans could underbid them. There's a general strike building among energy workers across the UK, because a French company received a contract and locked British workers (an entire town of them in a northern coastal town) out of the ability to get those jobs. The French company then imported 600 Italian and Portuguese workers to work on the project. They are living on barges just off the coast. British taxpayers are subsidizing this and sympathy strikes have sprung up across the country. Gordon Brown, that fraud who promised British jobs for British workers, has attacked his constituents for striking and being sympathetic to their fellow citizens.

Germany has never had to be responsible for it's atrocities in the middle of the 20th century. Americans not only sacrificed their lives to end the nazi regime, they paid untold millions to rebuild your sorry country so it could once again support itself after it bloodied Europe with it's fascistic dreams of unchecked power. Has Germany paid one penny back for this? No, it's gone on trying to repeat it's past mistakes ever since. You do  not have the right to destroy the economies of other countries, Gray. A responsible citizen would look to his own mess and clean it up. I suggest that rather than pointing the finger of blame at the US, you deal with your own corrupt government and policies. I'd rather die fighting than put up with the nazi German jackboot on my throat.

---

by: Mary @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 09:01:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Sry, but I won't engage with you in "discussions". (0.00 / 0)

As I pointed out in my response to your prior comment, you verifiably don't know what you're talking about. And to correct all the falsehoods in your new comment would take too much time, and I'm not interested in reading more about your strange world view. Go looking for someone else to play with.  

---

by: Gray @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 09:11:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Can't you... (0.00 / 0)

read another's viewpoint in order to refute/strengthen your own? That is so ignorant to not even look at another's viewpoint and refute maturely. You're starting to sound like the HuffPo audience that yells 'troll' everytime they read an argument they can't fathom. It takes a very mature individual to actually contemplate another's point of view in order to strengthen their own or abandon it...how do you think opinions change! This holier than thou has to stop if you want progress (especially since you're considered a Progressive, or are you?)

---

by: justsaying @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 10:04:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Excuse me pls, but have YOU reaqd the stuff Mary is posting here? (0.00 / 0)

Do it, and then think again. I stand by my convicton that a) she gets a lot of facts wrong and b) we're so far apart that we won't be able to find a common ground.

Sry if I start to sound like the HuffPo gang, but for two days know, I have been almost the only one arguing against "buy american" here, and I'm really a bit exhausted now.

---

by: Gray @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:13:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No surprise here.... (4.00 / 1)

....anybody who thought Obama would go against corporate power was deluding him or herself.  This is a pro-corporate anti-populist administration, that has shown its colors early.  The whole Obama frenzy is looking a little pathetic now, I sort of feel sorry for those who expected real change.  Expect more liberal-speak on social issues, but a big devastating nothing for creating good working and middle class jobs.  He has filled his administration with many of the same people who destroyed the middle class in this country.

Regards,

Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me-and I welcome their hatred. - FDR

---

by: FLGibsonJr @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 21:47:55 PM CST

Yup, nothing to see here folks, move along. (4.00 / 1)

We had a choice between In Your Face Fascism and Smiley Faced Fascism.  Naomi Klein warned us that we were next to experience "the shock doctrine'.  We are all on Mr. Toad's Wild Ride and the ride operator has gone missing.

---

by: FeralCat @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 22:02:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Aggggghhhhh! (0.00 / 0)

The sound you hear is my gagging

---

by: abbeysbooks @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 22:01:53 PM CST

... (0.00 / 0)

Those that want to get the grassroots movement back in gear should take this on.  

The Chamber of Commerce is violently against these Buy American provisions, so they must be good for you and I.

Call your elected ones and raise holy hell that you want these provisions left in the bill.  If they're worried about violating trade agreements Bush signed put a clause in that we won't violate our legal obligations and hand it all over to Holder to find a way around Bush's deals.

---

by: GrDavis @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 00:58:15 AM CST

Free trade vs Protectionism (0.00 / 0)

I spent the last year working on the campaign and doing a lot of union outreach for the campaign in helping them organize union members to help knock doors and get out the vote. One of the reasons they were so eager to help is because of the promises about "buy american" and a new approach to free trade...

That said I am a supporter of free trade however I do realize it has plenty of flaws that need to be corrected. While I support free trade the govt should be using most if not all of tax payer money on stimulating the american economy. Sending that money overseas would decrease the multiplier effect it has here at home and will not help out economy as much. The reason FDRs new deal worked so well was because the money was spent here at home.

It is very disappointing to think that we looked a lot of those Union folks in the eyes and told them we would help them out. I think they are going to have a hard time seeing how giving money to a french, british, indian, chinese company is going to create jobs here and help stimulate the economy.

---

by: dn.johnson @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 02:39:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

But the money goes both ways (4.00 / 1)

If the money stimulus money is for activities, services and products that benefit the US, we get the primary benefit. The secondary benefit is whether all the contract money goes to American firms, and the tertiary benefits are whether those American firms complete in the US or subcontract out to non-US firms.

Opening up $850 billion worth of contracts that can only be serviced by Americans will bring out the best Abramoffs and Duke Cunninghams we have, either to funnel a good chunk of the money to incompetent and uncompetitive American contractors or to shell firms that really are a front for foreign firms.

The way the stimulus is designed it looks like most of the money will be contracted to US companies anyway, but I'm not much for the inefficiencies that putting in no-foreign bid clauses provides.

---

by: Desider @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 04:21:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I understand that "buy american" is popular at face value... (0.00 / 0)

..but it has to be pointed out to people that engaging in trade with fair trade partners brings even higher results than stingily keeping all bucks to yourself. The US profits from the rescue plans of Canada and Europe, too. But, of course, those nations wouldn't simply stand by if the US would start to discriminate against their products. This would result in retaliation, and for every additinal dollar kept in the nation, the US would lose one from abroad. And the lack of competition would make many infrastructure projects more costly. Not to speak of the huge bureaucracy that's nececessary to determine if any given product is really more than 50% "made in the US". What's to be gained from this?

And there's a real danger that such protectionist measures would gain traction and escalate, and that soon there would be another big round of new tariffs, like the infamous Smoot-Hawley act of 1930, which paved the way towards the Great Depression:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

---

by: Gray @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 06:46:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Integrity (0.00 / 0)

The NYT apparently defines integrity as the ability to admit you've made a mistake - at least that is what the Op Ed on Obama implies.

Integrity is doing what you said you'd do in my view.

Obama isn't doing it, not by a long chalk.

No amount of saying "I screwed up" is going to save his credibility.

Actions are needed. He has to Walk the Talk. The time is running out. There are weeks, perhaps days to swing things around.

---

by: jane mc @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 06:06:32 AM CST

By your defintion, Bush was a role model of integrity! (0.00 / 0)

Hmm, sry, but integrity shouldn't be confused with stubborness. It takes a lot of courage to acknoledge that a promise was based on false premises, or that the situation has changed so much that fulfilling it isn't reasonable anymore. That's what most people call integrity.  

---

by: Gray @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 06:49:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Bush a model of integrity?? (0.00 / 0)

Bush said he wanted to protect freedom and civil liberaties. He did everything to erode freedom and civil liberities.

Bush said his administration did not torture. He did everything to enable his administration to torture.

Bush said he wanted to spread democracy. He spread tyranny.

Bush was a fraud and fake if ever there was one.

---

by: jane mc @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 10:30:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Buy American is a noble effort ... (0.00 / 0)

But must be killed. We depend on the global economy too much. Sure, in the short term we will see a boost but the damage we will do to International Trade is too much.

We need more business, not less.

---

by: ckoeber @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 10:21:38 AM CST

Buy American (0.00 / 0)

Obama going back on his word is problematic but...

"Buy American" laws are really bad ideas for infrastructure projects.  The cost differential in getting products like steel, concrete, and many other basic materials from American producers vis-a-vis international producers is very significant.  If you have cheaper inputs, you can do more projects.  You thus can employ more people and create more infrastructure, building the basis for a better future economy.  

"Buy American" is a really bad signal to send right now, given global economic conditions.  If we are going to get out of this mess, its going to take a huge amount of coordination between central banks, etc.  If that coordination breaks down, there are a lot of really troubling scenarios.  You want to give the finger to China and have them start dumping T-bills?  Now is a really dumb time to send a "we're on our own" signal to the rest of the world.

John McCain: Health insurance for low income children represents an "unfunded liability."

---

by: FuzzyDunlop @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 10:35:32 AM CST

I have to agree (0.00 / 0)

We no longer live in a world which can be separated by man made boundaries. We live in a global world and if you do not believe this you need to get out into the world and see for yourself. On a recent trip to China we could only distinguish the U.S. corporations from the other nationalities by the small print on their signs. Same thing in Europe and other Asian countries. Buy American is virtually impossible to do. The product may say made in U.S.A. but the company is owned overseas or the technology, or some component came from overseas. Then there is the packaging and shipping. Do you really believe all those truck and railroads are owned solely by U.S. concerns? I recently had to agree with Rush Limbaugh on his proposal for marriage reform and now I have to agree with John McCain but this is a new era even our president is apologizing now.

Chaplainkent
http://travelswithchummy.blogs...

---

by: Chaplainkent @ Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 12:47:18 PM CST