Hillary going the wrong way on free trade with Panama and Colombia

One of the hardest, but most important, tasks facing America is the integration of the Western hemisphere. But like the integration of Europe across the pond, the dream of the Americas is for half the world (by land and sea area) to live in peace, prosperity, and democracy. Certainly the New World stands a much better chance at tranquility than the old…

President Bush has been a tireless advocate of immigration, and bravely stood up against the hidebound of his own party in struggling for it. He failed, but he was on the right side.

Unlike Senator Clinton, who came out recently against even free trade deals with Columbia and Panama (hat-tip to Democratic Underground). Panama is a country created/liberated by the United States to build the Panama Canal, and Colombia (Panama’s previous sovereign) is facing a narco-fueled Marxist insurgency. Free trade in capital and goods is far easier to achieve than free trade in labor, yet Clinton opposes even that small step.

I hope Hilldog is being deceptive, like her husband rallied against NAFTA and the “butchers in Beijing” before signing a free trade deal with Mexico City and paving the way for China to join the WTO. Given that the Clinton circle is close to the Wall Street faction of the Democratic Party, I certainly think she is.

Still, it’s crummy to hope that politicians are lying. And opposing free trade with Columbia and Panama is a crummy thing for Hillary Clinton to do.

8 thoughts on “Hillary going the wrong way on free trade with Panama and Colombia”

  1. I'm sorry, Dan. It's not Hilldog. It's Hillhound. As in substitute an e for an i (wait, that's probably a campaign slogan in the making!).

    The Clintons are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Peoples Republic of China, Inc. They are willful traitors of the worst sort, and the ninth ring beckons for Bill and what's her name these days.

    Cheers,

    Mike

  2. I don't trust Hillary Clinton to tell the truth, but I trust her to be a competent President.

    “Hilldog”, “Hillhound”, all these other juvenile nicknames [1] are stupid and should stop. To me, they signal “irrational Hillary Clinton hater” and they cheapen political debate. It's analogous to people who call Bush “Chimpy” or other stupid nicknames. It says more about you than the person you insult.

    http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/13/john-mccain-supporter-on-hillary-how-do-we-beat-the-bitch/

  3. The straw that broke the camels back, after

    1) Seeing that video of “how do we beat the bitch”
    2) Mike DeWitt's brilliant substantive comment about how the Clintons are really Communists in disguise
    3) The general idiocy in discussing the 'boys' 'ganging up' on Clinton and the overtly sexual nature of political coverage of Clinton ('OMG BOOBS'-gate, gangbang-gate, 'Sean Hannity's fear of dominant women'-gate, “bitch”, etc.)

    I held back because I know you actually do look at the substance despite using silly nicknames to describe her. But it still ticks me off.

  4. It is a shame she (and some other Democrats who know better) voted against free trade with these nations. Especially Colombia, whose leadership has come a long way from the far more disturbing times of 2001-2004, with gov't sponsored death squads knocking off with impunity not only the leftist drug lords and rebels, but the leftist union leaders, journalists and civil servants as well. Uribe has brought them under more control than they would have been had the US not applied quiet, consistent pressure on the matter. He and his country deserve a reward for their strong efforts and friendship.

    Yet, this goes back to the problem in American politics of the masses not being prepared for globalization. They still aren't. No one running for president is credibly talking about how to prepare our people for the competition that is globalization. It is not a zero-sum setting for sure, but they are under that impression because of the media, the political classes and the lack of widespread, effective corporate and government efforts to improve the “American brand and American team” for this period of globalization we are in.

    In a climate of fear and uncertainity, it is hard for any politician these days to face the masses and convince them of the benefits of free trade credibly until they do something of substance to prepare the masses to compete with China, India, the EU, etc.

  5. Eddie,

    A related part of the program is that we use trade policy as welfare policy, arguing against trade in this or that case because some group would be disproportionately harmed (uneducated workers, for example). It makes more sense to protect those people through general revenue.

  6. “I don't trust Hillary Clinton to tell the truth, but I trust her to be a competent President.”

    I trust her to start her administration as a Nixonian paranoiac and have a complete meltdown about two years in, give or take month.

  7. Adrian,

    Aside from the nature of the longstanding Hillary! cult that composes her inner circle, a close friend of mine ( a female, liberal Democrat) worked for the Clinton WH in the first term. not filing papers at EOB but up close in a sensitive position.

    She's supporting Obama.

    Clinton is bright and she's even become more politically deft since serving in the Senate – but she's a control freak with manichean tendencies who thinks with an analytical mind trained by law school – just like Nixon did. And like Nixon, she likes to isolate herself behind an impenetrable wall of loyalists. Hence my analogy.

  8. Back when “Hardball” was still watchable, Chris Matthews had then First Lady Hillary! on and asked her the question, “Do you love America?”

    She refused to say “Yes.”

    About the closest she would come was to say that she loved what America could become.

    Yes, Hillary! is intelligent. Yes, she is competent. Yes, she is ruthless enough. Problem is that she is not on our side. Why would we want to give her that kind of power? She does not really like us very much and there are a lot of Americans that she seems to hate more than any ill will she might have towards the jihadis who want to kill us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *