On Handshakes, Stolen Slogans, and The Big Picture.

[Tatiana]

I replied to a thread in NanceGreggs' OP http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4373945&mesg_id=4373945">"I Will Not Be Moved". By her request, I am posting it here for discussion.

*****
It is so frustrating to see the narrow-mindedness and "tunnel" vision we exhibit. The masses didn't see this coming in 2000. They didn't anticipate the effect Republican rule would have on them. I don't believe Democrats voted for Bush, so much as they just stayed home, thinking that eight years of prosperity and a term of surpluses would magically continue no matter who was guiding the helm of national policy. Well that apathy killed us then and if folks grab their marbles and stay home this time, their petulance will slaughter us once more.

We're quibbling over handshakes and stolen slogans when, by the way, China and India and http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2007/10/01/foreign_buyouts_raise_us_fears_as_weaker_dollar_drives_deals/">Saudi Arabia and Germany and even the UK are http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-07-15-u.s.-highways_x.htm">buying up our country at bargain rates. One America, Two Americas... there won't be anything wholly American if we don't stop the Republicans from continuing their rule. People seem to not get that we fought for independence from Great Britain and we are now on our way to being economic slaves to several more nations if we don't beat back the right-wing assault.

There is a big picture. Neither Hillary's nor Barack's health care initiatives will become law when either takes the oath of office. You see, if we do our job and elect Representatives and Senators who actually do the business of the people, if there is an aspect of either plan that we don't like, we can voice our opinion and force our legislators to draft a bill that's more to our liking OR draft something entirely different. This election is about placing someone in office that won't say "this bill isn't what I asked for, so I'm not signing it." This election is about putting someone in office that will say, "this bill is the will of the people; I will listen to what they want and sign it."

[Tennessee Gal]

1. Precisely on point!

k & r

[NanceGreggs]

2. Oh, so proud ...

... to be REC No. 1!

Hopefully, Tatiana, this is just one of the many insightful threads you will be starting here in future.

:kick: :kick: :kick:

[H2O Man]

3. Nominated.

Well done.

This is what type of quality we should be seeing on DU. Thank you.

[JeffR]

4. Fifth rec!

Well done.

[Tatiana]

5. This is what happens when you have a President who ignores the will of the people:

Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Poll: Americans disapprove of Bush's Iraq veto

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A majority of the U.S. public disapproves of President Bush's decision to veto a war spending bill that called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq in 2008, according to a CNN poll released Tuesday.

The poll found that 54 percent of Americans opposed Bush's May 1 veto, while 44 percent backed the president's decision to kill the $124 billion bill.

Now that the veto has been cast, 57 percent of Americans said they want Congress to send another spending bill with a timetable for withdrawal back to the White House, the poll found -- but 61 percent would support a new bill that dropped the timetables in favor of benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet to maintain American support.

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2007/05/poll-americans-disapprove-of-bushs-iraq.html

Bush Keeps Vow to Veto War Funding Bill
President Says Pullout Deadline Is 'Date for Failure'

By Michael Abramowitz and Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, May 2, 2007; Page A01

President Bush vetoed a $124 billion measure yesterday that would have funded overseas military operations but required him to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq as early as July, escalating the most serious confrontation between the White House and Congress over war policy in a generation.

Bush carried through on his veto threat just after the legislation arrived at the White House, calling the timetable a "prescription for chaos and confusion" that would undercut generals. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments," he said last night. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure."

Democratic congressional leaders cast the veto as willful defiance of the American people. "The president wants a blank check," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said just minutes after Bush's statement. "The Congress is not going to give it to him." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said that "if the president thinks that by vetoing this bill he will stop us from trying to change the direction of this war, he is mistaken."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/01/AR2007050100968.html

Do we really want more of this?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

6. K & R. This is as a good a summary as I've seen here of our current state of affairs.

:kick:

[emilyg]

7. K&R

good stuff

[GoldieAZ49]

8. wow, thanks for the insight

[caseycoon]

9. K&R Thanks for posting this! n/t

[sandnsea]

10. China and India

buying up the country. Hmmm. How did that happen.

The same old thinking about our politics will not do.

[Tatiana]

11. Well Bush I kicked things off and from there it's gotten progressively worse.

Both Bill Clinton and the Dubya regimes have contributed to what is now a crisis situation. The bottom line is that we need a comprehensive trade policy. We cannot continue with the same neoliberal trade agreements and the same free trade school of thought as before. We will end up bankrupt, our highways will be owned by the French, our tech companies by India, and our retail by China. We will have no market for innovation, for job opportunity, for entrepreneurs.

Trade is one issue we don't focus enough on, in my opinion.

June 3, 1998
Clinton Proposes Renewing China's Most-Favored Trade Status
Congressional reaction mixed amidst larger China policy issues

House Speaker Newt Gingrich welcomed Clinton's recommendation for renewing MFN status for China, and vowed to work in a bipartisan manner to ensure that China receives it from Congress.

<snip>

The lawmakers told Clinton, "We welcome the determination you made today to recommend the renewal of MFN trade status for China, and we pledge to work with you in a bipartisan manner to preserve our longstanding policy of commercial and diplomatic engagement with the Chinese. Seeking to keep China open to the West has proven to be the most effective way to advance our democratic values in this turbulent region of the world -- a policy we are committed to maintaining."

<snip>

Many members of Congress are not as positive about the president's announcement as Speaker Gingrich.

House Democratic leader Richard Gephardt issued a statement Wednesday opposing Clinton's plan to extend China's trading status for another year. Gephardt said China has not significantly improved its human rights record and "America must stand for more than money."

Gephardt has consistently opposed Clinton on China's most-favored-nation status, only to lose when the contentious issues comes to a vote. But Democratic opponents say they have a better shot at defeating the president this year because of new questions about Clinton's China policy.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/06/03/china.trade/

November 20, 2005
Bush presses China about trade, human rights
President gets promises but little else from Hu during two day stop

BEIJING - Amid concern over a crackdown on dissidents, President Bush pressed China on Sunday to expand religious, political and social freedom and won little more than promises from President Hu Jintao to open China’s huge markets to U.S. farmers and businesses.

Hu said the two leaders sought an outcome of “mutual benefit and win-win results.”

But their meeting Sunday at the Great Hall of the People on the edge of Tiananmen Square appeared to produce no breakthroughs on U.S. demands for currency reforms in China and no details about how China would cut its trade surplus with the United States, on track to hit $200 billion this year.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10042690/

March 3, 2006
Bush: India a jobs opportunity, not an obstacle
In India, president says ‘America will trade with confidence’

NEW DELHI, India - Applauding newly warming U.S.-India relations, President Bush said Friday that Americans should not respond to India’s exploding economy by closing itself off to global trade.

“The United States will not give into the protectionists and lose these opportunities,” Bush said in a speech at Purana Qila, a historic fort here. “For the sake of workers in both our countries, America will trade with confidence.”

Bush wrapped up his three-day stay in India with a landmark nuclear deal that is the centerpiece of America’s new romance with this 1 billion-strong democracy, the world’s largest. Later Friday, he was heading to Pakistan for an overnight visit under extraordinary security to a close anti-terror partner struggling with terrorism problems.

“They target democracies because they think we are weak and they think we can be frightened and retreat,” Bush said. “Terrorists have misunderstood our countries. Americans and Indians love our freedom and we will fight to keep it.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11650277/

[Kurovski]

12. K&R. (nt)