Donald Trump has proposed--probably with full knowledge he is being overly simplistic--has called for slapping a 25% tariff on China. Trump, Michelle Bockman, and Sarah Palin are the ONLY Republicans who might be running for Presidentt who are out there saying someting: actually taking on Obama and the mainstream media. And no, I will not support Trump for the nomination (do not even believe he will run). I might support Palin, depending on how the others do when they actually start saying something, if ever (where, again, I do not believe she will run, and think she should not). I do not believe Michelle Bockman has any chance of becoming President in 2012 (probably running for Vice President, although I can't see any Republican nominee choosing her), even though I really like Michelle Bockman. I do not know whether I would support her for the nomination. Again, it depends on whether a more "winnable' candidate seems to be set frimly on the right course (whether he or she believes it deeep down or not, where I have my doubts about ALL of the potential candidates other than Palin and Bockman). . Remember, I supported Romney in 2008 (really 2007) BEFORE the main conservatives did so--IN FORESIGHT accurately blaming Limaugh, Hannity and the rest for failing to see what had to be done to stop McCain. I have no problem with supporting Romney again, but am not impressed with his performance SINCE 2008 (his leadership, in other words). I would vote for ALL of the above named against Obama--with some qualms about Trump--which I did not do as to McCain (without regrets, and I would take the same position again, as I will as to any Republican nominee who I regard as similar to McCain). The point here is to let you know where I am coming from, and to let you know that I am almost OBJECTIVE in evaluating Republicans (always recognizing that my lifetime principles will never let me support the left, except on very isolated issues--where I consider McCain and the Repubican "establisshment as part of the Big Government left, and part of the culture destroying left). On to Lawrence O'Donnell, the leftist political hack on MSNBC.
O'Donnell is doing his very best to make Trump look good. What was O'Donnell's reaction to Trump's proposal for a 25% tariff on imports from China? It was hysterical--literally and in terms of being funny. O'Donnell RIDICULED Trump for the kind of thing OBAMA and the unions have regularly said--while taking on places like Columbia instead of China. Am I saying O'Donnell and leftist Democrats are unprincipled BULLIES unwilling to take on a major Communist country for both idological and cowardly reasons? Exactly so.
O'Donnell said this was a SALES TAX (that 250 tariff proposed by Trump). O'Donnell, you LIE (or are so misleading it amounts to a lie). Let us say that China is conducting WAR against the United States by SUBSIDIZING its own exports to the tune of 25%--creating what Democrats have called an "unequal playing field". Is O'Donnell really sayihng that NO economic experts think we should take on China? If so, then it would confrim my view of economic "experts".
Yes, there are many people who DO think--Trump says he is one--that China is UNFARILY conducting economic WAR against the United States, and the West, by tilting the playing field in international trade. Now I favor free trade (NAFTA, a free trade deal with our FRIENDS in Columbia, and elsewhere). A tariff war was one of the main reasons for the Great Depression (length and severity). But say the Chinese government simply gave Chinese exporters a 25% subsidy for all exports. Is O'Donnell really saying that we should ignore that? If so, does O'Donnell realize that the PEOPLE are going to be on Trump's side and not on his? Something like that is exactly what Trump, and others, say China is doing. The main way China is doing this is by UNDERVALUING its currency--perhaps by MORE than 25%.
You can see how COMPLEX this issue is, and how HYPOCRITICAL O'Donnell is for accusing Trump of stupidity. Being TOUGHER with China is something I fully endorese, and I am sure I am on the side of the American people on this. O'Donnell is not.
But I oppose a tariff war with China. I have told you why. There is a case for it based on the SINS (deliberate) of China. But the damage to international trade is simply too great--even if China is subsidizing its trade, unfairly, to the tune of 25%. Free trade is a principle to abandon only as a last resort. No, I do not think this is a last resort, because O'Donnell is right in one sense. A 25% tariff would be paind by AMERICAN CONSUMERS. What is China doing when it subsidizes its exporrts--maknig them so cheap they undercut U.S. businesses? China is SUBSIDIZING American consumers, and supporting our lifestyle. Is that benefit greater than the detriment to American manufacturing and jobs? Not clear. But the overall world principle of free trade is important enough not to risk it over this fight.
Have you worked out why ODonnell's "sales tax" comment is a LIE? Firt, why does O'Donnell whink his audience thinks that is BAD? Leftist Democrats have never seen a tax they do not like, and the sales tax (or its deceptive cousing, the Value Addded Tax) is not exception. Why does O'Donnell think his listeners will believe his HYPOCRISY in suddenly rejecting a tax. Further, it is NOT really the equivalent of a general sales tax. Rather, a 25% tariff (or threat of same) is much more analogous to a SIN TAX like that on acohol and cigarettes. Those are a type of "sales tax", but really aimed at CONDUCT. A tariff aimed at China is really a SIN TAX aimed at China's SINS in international trade, and against our businesses. To call it a "sales tax" serves no purpose, and completely distorts the debate around what is fundamentally a lie. You could more accurately call a 25% tariff on China exports a FINE for unfair international trade ractices. I ooopse such a taqriff, but not because I want to use an excuse to UNFAIRLY ridicule Trump. I DARE any economist to comment on this blog and tell where I am wrong as to the possible CASE against China. I just don't think that case is enough to undermine the principle of free trade.
What people perceive, and what hypocrite O'Donnell knows they perceive, is that Trump is sending a message that we should play HARDBALL (yes, an MSNBC program name) with China. While I do not agree with undermining free trade, I agree with Trump on the general idea that we need to play more HARDBALL with China. Instead, leftists like O'Donnell are busy supporting the UNIONS preventing a free trade agreement with Columbia (frindly country, as stated). Are rules suggested by unions to be REQUIRED of people with whom we make a free trade deal (union-type rules adding to costs of labor) the equivalent of a SALES TAX on American consumers? Damn right, and with not nearly as much justificatioin as we have for punishing China.
Is this all of my case as to why O'Donnell is a world class hypocrite? Not on your life, bison breath. What is O'Donnell trying to do here? He is trying to ridicule Trump for making outrageous statements that he knows are ridiculous. Now the tariff for China is not one of those statements, although it is probably hyperbole on Trump's part. But the thing that makes O'Donnell a world class hypocrite is that OBAMA routinely engages in the same kind of hpberbole and outright lies. Doubt me? Don't.
Yes, it was Obama who deliberately tried to SELL his health care plan by saying that he was giving small businesses a 3000% savings on their premiums. Trump has NEVER said anything that outrageous. And the "explanation" was just as bad. The "explanation" was that Obama meant to say that businesses would get a $3,000 savings on health care premiums with the Obama subsidy. Problem: This was a lie as well, and made no sense in the context of the speech (where only a percentage made any sense). Peoop out of O'Donnell, except perhaps to defend Obama? Not a chance. ODonnell (and all of MSNBC) is nothing but a partisan political advocate for Obama. It is as an advocate that he is over-criticizing Trump. You might almost expect that O'Donnell has been bought off by Trump, because O'Donnell--as stated---is doing his best to make Trump look good. After a few minutes of O'Donnell (the most I ever see), I think a lot better of Trump.
Oh, Obama and O'Donnelll hypocrisy? What about the outrageous speech when Obama told that Orwellian Big Lie about how surgeons got $20,000, $30,000 or even $40,000 for amputaton of a leg, because preventative diabetes care did not make them nearly so much money. What can you say about a LIE this bad from our Liar-in-Chief? Again, you can say it was worse than anyfalsehood Trump has ever told--at least in terms of any example I have heard from O'Donnell. You can say that HYPOCRITE O'Donnell did not ridiculue Obama over this obvious falsehood, on MANY LEVELS. The actual surgeon's charge for an amputation is often under $1,0000, and very unlikely to go as high as $5,000.00 (especailly under Medicare, Medicaid, or insurance company rules). Further, the surgeon is NOTA the same doctor who does the preventative care. The diabetes doctor, as a general rule, will NOT benefit from neglecting preventative care. Nope. Obama is an obvious liar, and O'Donnell is an obvious hypocrites.
I could go on. There is the time Obama said that 1000 people had died in that Kansas tornado, in a POLITAICAL effort to accuse President Bush of depriving Kansas of adequate National Guard resources (untrue). The actual number of deaths was something like 13. But being off by a factor of 100 (two orders of magnitude) is not unusual for Obama. He was "tired". And Trump is being HARRASSED by people wanting to harm him (an experience Obama simply never faces). Yes, there was Obama misquoting the Declaration of Independence. There was Obama and the 57 states. There was Obama seeming to mix up Memorail Day and Veteran's Day, or else he just did not care. The list just goes non and on, but the mainstream media hypocrites are not interested. And many of these things are DELIBERATE on the part of Obama--to SELL by LIES.
Enough. Let us get down to fundamentals. When Obama says that "the Federal Government has to learn to live withinn its means (within the revenue it gts), like ordinary families", do you believe him? How can you. He shows it to be an obvious LIE every single day. When Obama says new spending is "apid for", when we have not "paid for" the old spending, do you realize that is OBJECTIVBELY a LIE? You should. dAgain, Trump is not saying things any more outrageous, and usually less outrageous, than these things.
Nope. O'Donnell is a world class hypocrite, and IF Trump were ever to become President (don't think so), it will be the mainstream media---people like O'Donnell--who will have made it possible.
P.S. Nope. No proofreading or spell checking (my eyesight). However, my younger daughter APPEARS to have fixed the paragraphing problem--letting you answer the burning question of whether you believe my paragraphing is so bad that I am better off with Google and my computer disregarding the paragraphs shown on my comosition screen. You can tell I am not really of the computer age when I do not understand why what you see is not what you get (often, especailly for me, as to the difference between what is on the computer screen and what comes out).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment