Comments on: The debate http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/ Pride goeth before a fall. Thu, 11 Mar 2010 14:16:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Mitch/Redoubt10 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1553 Mitch/Redoubt10 Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:58:35 +0000 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1553 The only one on the GOP contender list that I am even slightly warm to is Duncan Hunter for his anti-NAFTA stance. Hunter at least adresses the 'why' of illegal immigration;Tancredo is a simpleton. The big negative is that Hunter's foreign policy is as militant as McCain's. Hunter, though not proven to be corrupt himself, has been attached to some corrupt characters such as Randy "Duke" Cunningham. It is my contention that not a true economic-nationalist with an 'enlightened nationalist' foreign policy advocate is in the ranks of GOP White House contenders and it is a sorry lot to behold. Frankly, I think that Republican economic-nationalists should aboard the 'Lou Dobbs Democrats' ship, this time around. Let's face it: with the current existing trade-protectionist public officials, almost all have a 'D' next to their names. Republicans have just a few token mavericks like King and Hunter and they are laughed or ostacized by their Free Traitor colleagues in the GOP, and they dominate the consensus within. It is nice to be loyal to your party, but not when your party has not been loyal to you. As Pat Buchanan eloquently narrated, the Republican Party at it's birth was the Party of Trade/Tariff protectionism up until post WW2, as you know. This is no longer the case and I see no hope of it turning back to tradition anytime soon. GOP Rank & File Economic Nationalists should stage a revolt and turn Ronald Reagan's famous quote backwards - "I didn't leave the Republican Party. The Republican Party left - me." Regards, Mitch/Redoubt10 The only one on the GOP contender list that I am even slightly warm to is Duncan Hunter for his anti-NAFTA stance. Hunter at least adresses the ‘why’ of illegal immigration;Tancredo is a simpleton. The big negative is that Hunter’s foreign policy is as militant as McCain’s. Hunter, though not proven to be corrupt himself, has been attached to some corrupt characters such as Randy “Duke” Cunningham. It is my contention that not a true economic-nationalist with an ‘enlightened nationalist’ foreign policy advocate is in the ranks of GOP White House contenders and it is a sorry lot to behold.

Frankly, I think that Republican economic-nationalists should aboard the ‘Lou Dobbs Democrats’ ship, this time around. Let’s face it: with the current existing trade-protectionist public officials, almost all have a ‘D’ next to their names. Republicans have just a few token mavericks like King and Hunter and they are laughed or ostacized by their Free Traitor colleagues in the GOP, and they dominate the consensus within. It is nice to be loyal to your party, but not when your party has not been loyal to you.

As Pat Buchanan eloquently narrated, the Republican Party at it’s birth was the Party of Trade/Tariff protectionism up until post WW2, as you know. This is no longer the case and I see no hope of it turning back to tradition anytime soon. GOP Rank & File Economic Nationalists should stage a revolt and turn Ronald Reagan’s famous quote backwards -

“I didn’t leave the Republican Party. The Republican Party left - me.”

Regards,
Mitch/Redoubt10

]]> By: Mitch/Redoubt10 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1552 Mitch/Redoubt10 Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:52:09 +0000 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1552 Howard, I've commented here before and I am glad to see that you have returned from your hiatus and are posting again! After you announced your hiatus, I decided to commence my own blog dedicated to economic nationalism, though I am a self-proclaimed New Deal liberal. I do think that both conservative and liberal economic nationalists can have a common cause: our #1 Enemy is *Globalism*. As long as the focal point is on this( and marginal social issues are shifted to the bottom of the pile), there are grounds for working together, in my judgment. Keep up the good work and keep posting! http://federalistleft.blogspot.com/ Howard,
I’ve commented here before and I am glad to see that you have returned from your hiatus and are posting again!
After you announced your hiatus, I decided to commence my own blog dedicated to economic nationalism, though I am a self-proclaimed New Deal liberal. I do think that both conservative and liberal economic nationalists can have a common cause: our #1 Enemy is *Globalism*. As long as the focal point is on this( and marginal social issues are shifted to the bottom of the pile), there are grounds for working together, in my judgment.

Keep up the good work and keep posting!

http://federalistleft.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Howard J. Harrison http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1534 Howard J. Harrison Thu, 07 Jun 2007 22:39:22 +0000 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1534 <em>Fred's statement was not one where he was proud of what he did, but an honest answer of his past behavior. Fred may not be a saint, but he seems to be pretty open and honest in his answers. Let him who hath committed no sin throw the first stone.</em> I think that this is a good point. Permit me to second it. Personally I lack knowledge in the matter, but if what one reads is correct, Fred Thompson has divorced once only, amicably, maintaining cordial relations with his ex-wife to this day. A twenty-year interval separates his two marriages. Not all divorces are equal, of course. Mr. Thompson wins no points with me for his admitted behavior between his two marriages, but admitting it and putting the matter behind him was surely the right thing for him to do. Though I prefer several others among the candidates, I like Mr. Thompson. I find it interesting that my wife does not. I share the latter fact with you, not because the fact is important to you in itself, but because it begs the question of how many other married Republican women might not react in the same way. (In twenty-six years of marriage, I have never yet voted against my wife's strong objection. This is because I have learned to rely on her judgment of character and because, in my personal view, severe conjugal disunion at the ballot box just is not right. Whether I like Mr. Thompson or not, he would naturally have to improve his standing with my wife if he actually wanted my vote. I might have explained this better in the article above; thanks for the chance to correct.) Thank you for the Fred Thompson campaign link. I shall add it to the article above now. Glad to hear from you any time. Keep this blog up to date, as you see fit, on how Mr. Thompson is doing. <em>Howard</em> Fred’s statement was not one where he was proud of what he did, but an honest answer of his past behavior. Fred may not be a saint, but he seems to be pretty open and honest in his answers. Let him who hath committed no sin throw the first stone.

I think that this is a good point. Permit me to second it. Personally I lack knowledge in the matter, but if what one reads is correct, Fred Thompson has divorced once only, amicably, maintaining cordial relations with his ex-wife to this day. A twenty-year interval separates his two marriages. Not all divorces are equal, of course. Mr. Thompson wins no points with me for his admitted behavior between his two marriages, but admitting it and putting the matter behind him was surely the right thing for him to do.

Though I prefer several others among the candidates, I like Mr. Thompson. I find it interesting that my wife does not. I share the latter fact with you, not because the fact is important to you in itself, but because it begs the question of how many other married Republican women might not react in the same way. (In twenty-six years of marriage, I have never yet voted against my wife’s strong objection. This is because I have learned to rely on her judgment of character and because, in my personal view, severe conjugal disunion at the ballot box just is not right. Whether I like Mr. Thompson or not, he would naturally have to improve his standing with my wife if he actually wanted my vote. I might have explained this better in the article above; thanks for the chance to correct.)

Thank you for the Fred Thompson campaign link. I shall add it to the article above now. Glad to hear from you any time. Keep this blog up to date, as you see fit, on how Mr. Thompson is doing.

Howard

]]> By: Fred Fan http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1527 Fred Fan Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:20:13 +0000 http://econnat.us/2007/06/the-debate/#comment-1527 Fred's statement was not one where he was proud of what he did, but an honest answer of his past behavior. Fred may not be a saint, but he seems to be pretty open and honest in his answers. Let him who hath committed no sin throw the first stone. Fred’s statement was not one where he was proud of what he did, but an honest answer of his past behavior. Fred may not be a saint, but he seems to be pretty open and honest in his answers. Let him who hath committed no sin throw the first stone.

]]>