Middle Class Will Look for a Friend in Either Party

[peejay 327]

Middle Class Will Look for a Friend in Either Party

by Phyllis Schlafly

Posted Nov 27, 2006

The best post-mortem on the 2006 election came from that perennial politician, Sen. Teddy Kennedy (D.-Mass.). He said, "People want to know who's on their side. Whether it's health care or wages or retirement issues, they want to have someone on their side."

The biggest electoral bloc of the "they" who are seeking friends is the middle class, which includes people variously labeled blue-collar workers, skilled workers or Reagan Democrats. They are the swing voters, often called the moveables.

President Ronald Reagan's victories absolutely depended on their support. But Presidents Bush I and II kicked them away from the Republican Party, particularly on the issue of jobs.

Did the 2006 election teach Republicans that it is smart to be friends of the middle class? Have Republicans realized that jobs were second only to the unpopular war as the issue of 2006, and will surely be the No. 1 issue in 2008? George W. Bush carried Ohio in 2004 because the marriage amendment brought out the values voters. But Democrats can play that game, too: In 2006, the Ohio referendum on increasing the minimum wage raised the jobs issue, passed by 57%, and helped to bury Republican candidates.

Ohio has lost its manufacturing base. Some of the good jobs went to plants that were outsourced overseas and some disappeared in the tsunami of cheap Chinese goods as Wal-Mart replaced small businesses and left behind towns with empty streets and boarded-up windows.

Incumbent Republican Sen. Mike DeWine was badly defeated by Rep. Sherrod Brown (D.-Ohio), who had led the congressional fight against CAFTA and wrote a book called "The Myths of Free Trade" (New Press, $16). Brown's TV ads showing him standing in front of a "plant closed" sign were powerful.

Almost every Republican member of Congress who bit the dust in the 2006 election had been an enthusiastic booster of the globalists' agenda: North American Free Trade Agreement, Central American Free Trade Agreement, World Trade Organization, Fast Track, permanent normal trading relations and free trade agreements with countries most Americans never heard of. Republicans were badly on the defensive in the face of Democrat ads touting the issue of jobs.

The United States has lost more than 3 million manufacturing jobs since George W. Bush became president in 2000. The U.S. trade deficit hit a record high of $717 billion last year, and is expected to be even higher this year.

The middle class is not placated by feel-good talk that the stock market has climbed to a record high, or that unemployment is at a record low, or that the gross domestic product is growing. Unemployment statistics don't count the guys who lost $50,000 jobs in manufacturing and are now working $25,000 jobs in retail, but job-growth figures happily do count the wives who have been involuntarily forced into the labor force just to keep groceries on the table.

The middle class is not placated by glib slogans that free trade is good for the economy and that protectionism is a nasty word. Common sense tells them that there is no such thing as a free lunch and, yes indeed, they do expect friends in government and industry to protect U.S. jobs against unfair competition from foreigners who work for 30 cents an hour.

Americans relish competition, as our national fixation on sports contests proves every day. But the globalists have destroyed a level playing field and, in addition, have subordinated us to an umpire (aka the World Trade Organization) that is biased against us.

Globalist policies have encouraged U.S. employers to use near-slave labor in Asia, whose products are then guaranteed duty-free or low-tariff re-entry to the United States. Those products are then sold here for prices that are cheap by U.S. standards but are marked up as much as 80%.

Globalist policies also allow discrimination against U.S. manufacturers by the Value Added Tax racket, whereby foreign governments subsidize their products both coming and going. For example, German automobiles cost 16% less in the United States than the same car sold in Germany, and U.S. automobiles cost 16% more in Germany than the same car bought in the United States.

House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) plans to shift the dialogue on Capitol Hill to worker's pay, college tuition, health care costs and other issues that touch ordinary families. Her solutions are all bad economics and very expensive, but they will enable her to pose as a friend of the middle class.

All six U.S. senators thought to be planning a run for the Democratic nomination for president voted against the Central American Free Trade Agreement. The issue would be dramatically joined if the Democratic nominee were opposed, for example, by Sen. John McCain(R.-Ariz.), who supported NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO and permanent normal trading relations for China.

Will Republicans continue to follow George W. Bush in his post-election travels to solicit even more Asian products made by cheap labor and subsidized by their governments? Or will Republicans get smart on the jobs issue and re-establish their friendship with the Reagan Democrats?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18215

[Artegal 1]

I wonder will Steveninky post his opposition to any free trade aggreement--not likely as he likes to hijack threads--he will probably post about the lack of WMD in Iraq, the State of Israel, Globalization, or his all-time favorite: Anti-Globalization--which is like trying to be Anti-Earthling--I mean we live on one planet and it is shrinking you can't stop Globalization--and why would you? Travel and Communication makes it where you know your neighbor across the ocean or in Instanbul better than you know the neighbor right next door or just across the street.

[Ban Hammer 14,235]

I wonder will Steveninky post his opposition to any free trade aggreement--not likely as he likes to hijack threads--he will probably post about the lack of WMD in Iraq, the State of Israel, Globalization, or his all-time favorite: Anti-Globalization--which is like trying to be Anti-Earthling--I mean we live on one planet and it is shrinking you can't stop Globalization--and why would you? Travel and Communication makes it where you know your neighbor across the ocean or in Instanbul better than you know the neighbor right next door or just across the street.

i thought steven was the environment/trade guy, erekose the wmd in iraq guy?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party.

Sadly, that is true.

[peejay 327]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

Clearly not all Republicans or conservatives buy into the "free trade at any cost" camp. It amazes me that as these trade deficits get bigger and bigger each year...the same pundits continue to crow about broadbased prosperity for all is just around the corner, but the reality proves otherwise. Yes...if we export jobs and import more foreign labor everyone will prosper, but it will happen in the mythical future. Globalism is the new mantra.

It reminds me of the S&L debacle that cost the taxpayer $1/2 trillion. Yes...the new age of deregulation was all the rage and mantra. Any naysayers were ignorant hayseeds behind the times. In the end...the bandits made out like bandits and the little guy is left holding the sh!tty end of the stick.

Ditto for the .com / Enron / WorldCom crowd. The old fundementals didn't apply. The world was reinvented and the naysayers were ignorant rubes.

When will the people learn? When pigs grow wings and fly.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The solution to middle class woes is simple. Don't be middle class anymore. Either win the megamillions lottery or spend every penny you have. Either way, you'll end up with an entire political infrastructure on your side. It's lonely in the middle.

[Jenn! 918]

The solution to middle class woes is simple. Don't be middle class anymore. Either win the megamillions lottery or spend every penny you have. Either way, you'll end up with an entire political infrastructure on your side. It's lonely in the middle.

I choose option A.

[peejay 327]

The solution to middle class woes is simple. Don't be middle class anymore. Either win the megamillions lottery or spend every penny you have. Either way, you'll end up with an entire political infrastructure on your side. It's lonely in the middle.

As citizens around the world that live in oligarchies well know. The problem is that only the oligarchs are represented.

The question is...do we want to live in an oligarchy or a democracy?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

Clearly not all Republicans or conservatives buy into the "free trade at any cost" camp. It amazes me that as these trade deficits get bigger and bigger each year...the same pundits continue to crow about broadbased prosperity for all is just around the corner, but the reality proves otherwise. Yes...if we export jobs and import more foreign labor everyone will prosper, but it will happen in the mythical future. Globalism is the new mantra.

It reminds me of the S&L debacle that cost the taxpayer $1/2 trillion. Yes...the new age of deregulation was all the rage and mantra. Any naysayers were ignorant hayseeds behind the times. In the end...the bandits made out like bandits and the little guy is left holding the sh!tty end of the stick.

Ditto for the .com / Enron / WorldCom crowd. The old fundementals didn't apply. The world was reinvented and the naysayers were ignorant rubes.

When will the people learn? When pigs grow wings and fly.

Many bought into Milton Friedman's contention that the market can regulate itself through competition. His fatal optimism didn't see how corporitism would undermine that very principle (competition). It doesn't help to have a sitting President who favors corporations over small business, and profits above all else. The fox is watching over the hen house.

Edited November 28, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[mawilson 2,133]

Hahahahaha..........reality check is in the mail..............how clever

[Artegal 1]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

Clearly not all Republicans or conservatives buy into the "free trade at any cost" camp. It amazes me that as these trade deficits get bigger and bigger each year...the same pundits continue to crow about broadbased prosperity for all is just around the corner, but the reality proves otherwise. Yes...if we export jobs and import more foreign labor everyone will prosper, but it will happen in the mythical future. Globalism is the new mantra.

It reminds me of the S&L debacle that cost the taxpayer $1/2 trillion. Yes...the new age of deregulation was all the rage and mantra. Any naysayers were ignorant hayseeds behind the times. In the end...the bandits made out like bandits and the little guy is left holding the sh!tty end of the stick.

Ditto for the .com / Enron / WorldCom crowd. The old fundementals didn't apply. The world was reinvented and the naysayers were ignorant rubes.

When will the people learn? When pigs grow wings and fly.

Many bought into Milton Friedman's contention that the market can regulate itself through competition. His fatal optimism didn't see how corporitism would undermine that very principle (competition). It doesn't help to have a sitting President who favors corporations over small business, and profits above all else. The fox is watching over the hen house.

So Steveninky you would favor the Central government owning everything as opposed to say AT&T, Exxon, Aetna, Coca-Cola, Kimberly-Clarke, etc?

Of course the market could never regulate itself through competition because the market was never unregulated--so Milton Friedman's contention and those of Adam Smith for that matter could never be realized.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The middle class will not actually find a friend in either party. When will people learn?

Clearly not all Republicans or conservatives buy into the "free trade at any cost" camp. It amazes me that as these trade deficits get bigger and bigger each year...the same pundits continue to crow about broadbased prosperity for all is just around the corner, but the reality proves otherwise. Yes...if we export jobs and import more foreign labor everyone will prosper, but it will happen in the mythical future. Globalism is the new mantra.

It reminds me of the S&L debacle that cost the taxpayer $1/2 trillion. Yes...the new age of deregulation was all the rage and mantra. Any naysayers were ignorant hayseeds behind the times. In the end...the bandits made out like bandits and the little guy is left holding the sh!tty end of the stick.

Ditto for the .com / Enron / WorldCom crowd. The old fundementals didn't apply. The world was reinvented and the naysayers were ignorant rubes.

When will the people learn? When pigs grow wings and fly.

Many bought into Milton Friedman's contention that the market can regulate itself through competition. His fatal optimism didn't see how corporitism would undermine that very principle (competition). It doesn't help to have a sitting President who favors corporations over small business, and profits above all else. The fox is watching over the hen house.

So Steveninky you would favor the Central government owning everything as opposed to say AT&T, Exxon, Aetna, Coca-Cola, Kimberly-Clarke, etc?

Of course the market could never regulate itself through competition because the market was never unregulated--so Milton Friedman's contention and those of Adam Smith for that matter could never be realized.

Does it make you feel squishy inside to put words in my mouth?

Here's some food for thought. One of the principles of a Democracy is having a balance of power. Corporatism throws off that balance. Imagine an economy that is built upon smaller entrepreneurs, much like the family farms. We have shifted from an economy built on production to a service oriented economy which has diminished the Middle Class. Corporations in their incessant search for the highest profit margins have moved production to where they can find cheap labor at the expense of the American economy - yet we're reminded how cheaply we can buy toilet brushes at Walmart as compensation. I would prefer that the corporations that we know today were a dying breed of dinosaur, where if new ones existed, they would be employee owned and operated, instead of run by a CEO who's more concerned about short term gains for the shareholders than any longterm benefits to the company, it's employees or to society as a whole. That would bring us back to an ownership society and bring balance of power back. When we've got corporations like Enron having closed door meetings with the VP (Cheney) and shaping our energy policy, the weight of political power in this country is taken out of the hands of the American people.

Milton Friedman's contention has never been fully realized because corporations by their very nature seek to dominate the market through whatever means necessary, including buying out the competition. His idealistic view of a self regulating market can't work when true competition doesn't exist, and corporations will forever try to undermine that principal. Deregulation has proven that.