I for one am appalled that Hillary and Obama would suggest that we should want other countries to hold labor and the economy to the standards to which we hold them. That implies that foreigners are as human as Americans!
I for one am appalled that Hillary and Obama would suggest that we should want other countries to hold labor and the environment to the standards to which we hold them. That implies that foreigners are as human as Americans!
That's fine, Freddie, as long as they frankly acknowledge that their view of maintaining positive relations with the rest of the world, which they have criticized the current President for not doing, includes unilaterally repealing permamnent treaties with the rest of the world.
"Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.
The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."
Look, anyone who supported Bush during past 8 years while he was lying his ass off to get us into war CANNOT seriously complain about any lies the the democrats might peddle to get the nomination and win the presidency.
RICKM wrote: Look, anyone who supported Bush during past 8 years while he was lying his ass off to get us into war CANNOT seriously complain about any lies the the democrats might peddle to get the nomination and win the presidency.
Hey, if you get a one-size-fits-most politically expedient definition of "lies" to wrangle around at your convenience, then the other side gets one, too.
Luckily, neither of them are running for office in Mexico or Canada, and are rightfully seeking the support of their own goddamn country.
So let me get this straight: When Bush, McCain and other Republicans "alienate" foreign governments and foreign people by doing what they believe to be in the best interests of the United States, that's wrong. But when Obama and Hillary do it, it's just fine.
I don't care who we alienate. I don't want our country invading others for no good reason, jeopardizing our troops and wasting our resources. I'm not someone who's particularly invested in America's image abroad. At all. I do think, of course, that there's a major difference between aggressive, unilateral invasion and deciding how to regulate our own trade.
Thanks, Freddie. We Canadians can't even decide on our own environmental and labour policies. I guess we have to do what you tell us.
Find your own godddam oil.
OK. When you get invaded by some foreign power and have to contend with only your near-nonexistent military, send me a postcard.
Hey Freddie, what labour and environmental policies of Canada don't meet U.S. standards? It's been a while since I've lived there, but I thought that Canada's labour laws were stricter than the U.S.'s (and with dollar parity, currency really isn't an issue), and I had been under the impression that Canada was 'greener' than the U.S. as well.
Hey Freddie, what labour and environmental policies of Canada don't meet U.S. standards? It's been a while since I've lived there, but I thought that Canada's labour laws were stricter than the U.S.'s (and with dollar parity, currency really isn't an issue), and I had been under the impression that Canada was 'greener' than the U.S. as well.
Geez. Where is this coming from? I have no problem with Canadian policy, and I certainly don't want America dictating Canadian policy to Canadians. I just want America to have its own standards for its own trade policy, towards any other country, and-- and this is what I was saying initially-- I don't want our politicians to feel beholden to the people of other countries. What if I said that a Canadian prime minister candidate had to respect American voters wishes and worry about their opinions? I'm pretty sure you would call me an asshole. I don't see how wanting American politicians to worry about Americans is somehow critical of Canada. I really don't.
this would concern me if there was a chance in hell that either will revisit NAFTA. They both know it's been a net positive for the US. They both know that re-opening it would be more trouble than it's worth. The most they will do is something symbolic like have a conference on trade.
I do think it's about time we did something about the horrid working conditions in Canadian sweatshops, though. I'm told they're down to only one Molsen at lunch.
You seem to have lost track of the issue. According to Hillary and Obama, we need to "renegotiate" NAFTA because of supposed deficiencies in the labor and environmental standards of our trading partners, which supposedly put American workers at a competitive disadvantage and thus are causing Americans to lose their jobs unfairly. What Canadian labor and environmental policies do you think fail to meet U.S. standards? If there aren't any, why do we need to "renegotiate" NAFTA with Canada?
I always wondered why people seem to think that a Democrat would be better at “mending fences” with the rest of the world. I suppose there must be many people who agree with all of the three statements below:
1) Trade restrictions of some kind would benefit America at the expense of the rest of the world.*
2) America should impose said restrictions.
3) America should have better relations with the rest of the world.
They obviously see no contradiction.
It make you think about how different politics would be if people were forbidden to lie to themselves.
*rather than “benefit some Americans at the expense of other Americans and the rest of the world”.
The most hopeful part of this story is that, reportedly, Obama's signaled the Canadians (and one would hope the Mexicans), that this is just campaign bullshit. If true, score one for improved international relations.
In my view the most damaging aspect of NAFTA at the moment is its facilitation of the dumping of subsidized US corn into Mexico, with disastrous effects on small farmers there, and a direct negative factor in the current immigration "crisis".
It's ridiculous to alarm Canada and Mexico with threats of "renegotiation". We should just stop subsidizing agriculture, across the board.
The United States of America Government trully needs to quickly lower American gasoline prices at least down to $1 and 99cents(one dollar and ninety nine cents) per gallon this year at least, hmmm, now that would be really cheap American gasoline prices if done properly in America this year somehow!!!!!!!
Luckily, neither of them are running for office in Mexico or Canada, and are rightfully seeking the support of their own goddamn country.
I guess we should start preparing ourselves for our impending invasion and occupation of Canada and Mexico. After all, Saddam used to be an ally too.
Maybe Saint McCain will save us from this grave threat that the democrats pose to our foreign relations!
I for one am appalled that Hillary and Obama would suggest that we should want other countries to hold labor and the economy to the standards to which we hold them. That implies that foreigners are as human as Americans!
I for one am appalled that Hillary and Obama would suggest that we should want other countries to hold labor and the environment to the standards to which we hold them. That implies that foreigners are as human as Americans!
That's fine, Freddie, as long as they frankly acknowledge that their view of maintaining positive relations with the rest of the world, which they have criticized the current President for not doing, includes unilaterally repealing permamnent treaties with the rest of the world.
"Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.
The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."
Via CTV.Com
Guess Obama's claim of "change" is really just the same ol' lies and demagoguery.
Or its called pandering during a primary.
Look, anyone who supported Bush during past 8 years while he was lying his ass off to get us into war CANNOT seriously complain about any lies the the democrats might peddle to get the nomination and win the presidency.
Thanks, Freddie. We Canadians can't even decide on our own environmental and labour policies. I guess we have to do what you tell us.
Find your own godddam oil.
RICKM wrote: Look, anyone who supported Bush during past 8 years while he was lying his ass off to get us into war CANNOT seriously complain about any lies the the democrats might peddle to get the nomination and win the presidency.
Hey, if you get a one-size-fits-most politically expedient definition of "lies" to wrangle around at your convenience, then the other side gets one, too.
I forgot that "we do not torture" was equally dishonest as "i'll bring jobs to ohio"
Toys that don't require batteries. I love 'em.
Freddie,
Luckily, neither of them are running for office in Mexico or Canada, and are rightfully seeking the support of their own goddamn country.
So let me get this straight: When Bush, McCain and other Republicans "alienate" foreign governments and foreign people by doing what they believe to be in the best interests of the United States, that's wrong. But when Obama and Hillary do it, it's just fine.
I don't care who we alienate. I don't want our country invading others for no good reason, jeopardizing our troops and wasting our resources. I'm not someone who's particularly invested in America's image abroad. At all. I do think, of course, that there's a major difference between aggressive, unilateral invasion and deciding how to regulate our own trade.
Thanks, Freddie. We Canadians can't even decide on our own environmental and labour policies. I guess we have to do what you tell us.
Find your own godddam oil.
OK. When you get invaded by some foreign power and have to contend with only your near-nonexistent military, send me a postcard.
Hey Freddie, what labour and environmental policies of Canada don't meet U.S. standards? It's been a while since I've lived there, but I thought that Canada's labour laws were stricter than the U.S.'s (and with dollar parity, currency really isn't an issue), and I had been under the impression that Canada was 'greener' than the U.S. as well.
Hey Freddie, what labour and environmental policies of Canada don't meet U.S. standards? It's been a while since I've lived there, but I thought that Canada's labour laws were stricter than the U.S.'s (and with dollar parity, currency really isn't an issue), and I had been under the impression that Canada was 'greener' than the U.S. as well.
Geez. Where is this coming from? I have no problem with Canadian policy, and I certainly don't want America dictating Canadian policy to Canadians. I just want America to have its own standards for its own trade policy, towards any other country, and-- and this is what I was saying initially-- I don't want our politicians to feel beholden to the people of other countries. What if I said that a Canadian prime minister candidate had to respect American voters wishes and worry about their opinions? I'm pretty sure you would call me an asshole. I don't see how wanting American politicians to worry about Americans is somehow critical of Canada. I really don't.
this would concern me if there was a chance in hell that either will revisit NAFTA. They both know it's been a net positive for the US. They both know that re-opening it would be more trouble than it's worth. The most they will do is something symbolic like have a conference on trade.
I do think it's about time we did something about the horrid working conditions in Canadian sweatshops, though. I'm told they're down to only one Molsen at lunch.
Freddie,
You seem to have lost track of the issue. According to Hillary and Obama, we need to "renegotiate" NAFTA because of supposed deficiencies in the labor and environmental standards of our trading partners, which supposedly put American workers at a competitive disadvantage and thus are causing Americans to lose their jobs unfairly. What Canadian labor and environmental policies do you think fail to meet U.S. standards? If there aren't any, why do we need to "renegotiate" NAFTA with Canada?
In fact, under the Canadian constitution, the federal government cannot do much about environmental or labour policy.
I always wondered why people seem to think that a Democrat would be better at “mending fences” with the rest of the world. I suppose there must be many people who agree with all of the three statements below:
1) Trade restrictions of some kind would benefit America at the expense of the rest of the world.*
2) America should impose said restrictions.
3) America should have better relations with the rest of the world.
They obviously see no contradiction.
It make you think about how different politics would be if people were forbidden to lie to themselves.
*rather than “benefit some Americans at the expense of other Americans and the rest of the world”.
The most hopeful part of this story is that, reportedly, Obama's signaled the Canadians (and one would hope the Mexicans), that this is just campaign bullshit. If true, score one for improved international relations.
In my view the most damaging aspect of NAFTA at the moment is its facilitation of the dumping of subsidized US corn into Mexico, with disastrous effects on small farmers there, and a direct negative factor in the current immigration "crisis".
It's ridiculous to alarm Canada and Mexico with threats of "renegotiation". We should just stop subsidizing agriculture, across the board.
May we take it that Obama is being similarly honest with his other claims and signals?
The United States of America Government trully needs to quickly lower American gasoline prices at least down to $1 and 99cents(one dollar and ninety nine cents) per gallon this year at least, hmmm, now that would be really cheap American gasoline prices if done properly in America this year somehow!!!!!!!