Why do Liberals always sqawk when the US interferes in the internal affairs of other countries?

Question

But neither Libs nor Cons seem to care when other countries do it to us?

Not just multinational corporations, but Foreign Governments make heavy contributions to our poltical campaigns and maintain thousands of lobbyists in DC, our major cities and state capitals.

GATT, NAFTA and CAFTA trump our food and highway safety laws.

A huge chunk of out media is foreign owned. Not just Rupert Murdoch and Sung Yung Moon, but Cuban exiles, Arabs, the Brits, the Japs and even the Red Chinese. You wanna know why the Chicago Cubs suck? Arabs don't play baseball and that's who owns the Cubs through the Tribune Group, which is in turn owned by Arabs through a British Holding company.

Saudi Arabia has enough money sunk into Bush family businesses and campaigns to own the clan outright. And no politician is going to stay in office long if he gives a higher priority to US interests than he does to Israel's.

There's a lot more to protecting US Sovereignity than Deporting wetbacks.

Theresa, there's a big difference between Free Markets, where everyone has equal access and rigged markets, where other countries freely sell their goods here while blocking our exports.

I'm being a little hard on Liberals here because it ain't like there are REAL Conservatives anymore. As the only people who still care about America, it's on Liberals to do something about our increasing slide into foreign control.

I finished the question with 10 characters to spare Lilly. And I noticed you ducked the Bush-Saudi connection. Bill Clinton did sell the Chinese missile bases on US soil--the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. But Bush is likely to let them take Taiwan before he leaves office.

And Lilly, Osama bin Laden was Bush's Family friend--not any Liberal's.

Gary, has it occurred to you that we intervened in Iraq twice by way of doing the Saudis dirty work for them?

Just plain Jim, maybe you can explain how we can beat Red China at the slave labor game?

Answer 1

Mad, my friend, I see where you're going with this. GATT, NAFTA, and CAFTA are NOT intended to be a "FREE" Market. They're intended to BOOST foreign interests in order to bring lesser developed nations to a more level playing field. Unfortunately, that is exactly what has NOT happened. American multi-national corporations haveused those treaties to EXPORT American jobs overseas, NOT American products. Foreign multi-national Corporations have used them to export GOODS to the US at ridiculously subsidized rates and evading MOST US import tarriffs. The intent was to make foreign workers be able to achieve a higher standard of living (which it has NOT), and to make America more competetive in foreign markets (also which it has NOT). Many of the nations who have signed onto those treaties EXCLUDE American investment as a matter of law whereas, the U.S. does not. The playng field is NOT a level one and foreign interests DO have the advantage. This is at the disadvantage of the average American Working family, who has seen a loos of REAL income, a loss of REAL jobs that pay a living wage, AND a loss of spending power by the American consumer.

As long as the major economic indexes are linked to the stock marketsto define the health of the economy we will remain in this quandry. The Wall Street economy has NO relevance to the Main Street Economy, and while things are nice and rosey on Wall Street, they are NOT very reassuring when it comes to the Main street economy. America's job base has slipped from being primarily a manufacturing economy to being a Service economy. Service jobs typically pay substantially lower than manufacturing jobs. This has a result in an overall lowering of the standard of living for the typical Amercian worker. The people are further hoodwinked when the reporting agencies stiopped using the Average American income and switched to the Median American income. It was a trick of political usage of statistics. Median Income is NOT Average income. Median is the midway point between the highest earner and the lowest earner. Average is ALL incomes added up and divided by the number of ALL workers earning an income. Doing the math BOTH ways, Median is significantly higher (as top executives are earning MUCH more in salaries and benefits than the lowest paid workers). Based on the AVERAGE income, Americans are earning, on average, barely enough to meet their financial obligations, leaving little left over for savings and investments. Just another example of WHY Statistics are NOT a reliable tool to gauge how well or bad things are doing, because the statistics are only as good as the FIGURES that are used to make one's point.

BB,
Raji the Green Witch

Answer 2

Excellent queston, Madpol. I think at least part of the problem lies in the fact they (both Libs and Cons) do not consider the influence of foreign interests in the US threatening to our democracy (and it is very threatening indeed) as they think the US is invincible and thus not subject to a vague and diffuse threat such as mass media ownership by foreigners or Chinese owning most of our debt, or DC lobbies. It is, I believe, a calculated unwillingness to admit US is not a country it was a few decades ago. They live in the past and still refuse to ackgnowledge, even to themselves, the world has changed and so did the US.
House of Saud - roughly 80 BILLION dollars invested in the US
Prince Walid, a Saudi, de facto ownership of Citigroup
Red China - owns most of US debt
R. Murdoch - owner of the US mass media
IPAC in DC, the most powerful lobby - let me give you a quote of Y. Shamir (former PM) "who cares who the president is in the US, as long as we have the Congress"
Cuban Exiles - de facto dictating US policy toward Cuba

I think we gave away, or sold, our sovereignity when we became the biggest debtor nation in the world, and that momentous event was not lost on the likes of Murdoch or the Saudis. And I must say we did this rather nonchalantly and with premeditation. It was about the same time a war on the middle class was declared. Besides, they can't tell the people the ugly truth, if they did there would be a revolution in the US which would end up exposing and then deposing them for what they did.

Answer 3

Instigator! Back Back! Some one get me an exorcist! This guy is at it again.
Morning Steve.
You speak the truth, most of us will never hear.
The liberals have a defective gene that leads to a common form of Tourets syndrom. They squawk they can't help it. I tend to humour them. I am pretty sure I know what you think, so I will go down the road with my own little dittie doo doo.
Maybe there is just not enough incentive to keep American money in America. The billionaires and millionaires of North America are afraid to lose their money, or they are selfish, or they just think they have to leave some sort of legacy behind for their equally shallow offspring. They are not willing to put forth the effort to save any other American but their own. So the field is left open for buy outs takeovers, or just hand it to em on a plate cause 'quicknobodieslooking' kinda deals.
Youscrachamyballsiscratchayouballs and then there's 'we don hav ta tell ya wut we do'

Answer 4

Good question, wrong assumption.

According to a 2005 congressional study, the USA sells 35% of the worlds arms, some independent studies put that at 50% and others as high as 60%.

Therefore, I'd say we interfere in others countries in ways that are murderous.

As far as economically, again good question, wrong assumption.

What the USA needs to do is not to have protectionist practices, but rather beat the China's of the world at their own game. We do not plan (except ones like Cheney's secret energy plan) while other countries, like China plan and their people know what those plans are.

Our biggest problem is lack of planning. We'd rather argue about protectionist practices and tell everyone to buy America when there is little to buy from America.

Our biggest allies are the countries that do plan for their economic future. Our biggest enemy, is we don't listen to them. We can learn so much from the ones that are planning, how to do it, why its working for them, how we can make it work for us. But we don't. At least we don't do it publicly, it seems we'd rather take our eyes off the eight ball and argue about flag burning, abortion, and prayer in school, issues that don't affect the vast majority of us, as we fetter away our future and most importantly, our children's future.

That is why I have lost faith in America's economic future.

Peace

Jim

.

Answer 5

Nothing to add. Don't care about the points. Just wanted you to know that I learned something from your question - and the answers it drew. Guess I'll go do some "research" on the subject - so as to be able to "squawk" more intelligently - assuming, that is, that squawking does not necessitate affiliation to any political party in particular. Does it? Anyway, thanks muchly, Mad. Very interesting.

Answer 6

If you are really interested in the answer, check out 'America: Freedom to Facism'. It's a DVD documentary about America's ties to foriegn interests, and there is some interesting information on the immigration issue.

By the way, using the words 'liberals', 'squawk', and '*******' don't lend a whole lot of credibilty to an otherwise valid point. You would do well to keep your questions a bit less biased and concentrate on the facts. Your arguement is solid without mudslinging. Just my opinion....

Answer 7

there is a big difference in our government interfering in other countries , and privet citizens from any country investing in privet companies , i do have a problem with us leasing out our public roads to foreign investors to make toll roads , i have a problem with us using foreign company's doing our checks on our docks and airports, and i do have a problem with foreign countries running our pipeline

Answer 8

this is common conservative fallacious logic.
One doesn't affect the other. NAFTA and the rest are frauds, but so is what we do all over the world.

what you re saying is we either have to squawk both times or neither. study some critical thinking, youll understand why we can squawk whenever we want.

Answer 9

Why do Liberals always sqawk when the US interferes in the internal affairs of other countries ?

In the light of all this that you have mentioned herein ----
could it be that these "liberals" that you're speaking of
see that there is FAR MORE WORK TO DO HERE---- which makes it all that much more important --- than to be spending time somewhere ELSE doing "business" ?? !!!

Answer 10

Interesting points.

I would say it is because Liberals don't see a problem with market involvement, just military or political involvement. Neither do Conservatives for that matter - they are all about free markets.