posted on May, 7 2007 @ 11:47 PM
This sums up Clinton foreign policy very well.
INNOCENTS ABROAD: HOW THE WORLD VIEWS CLINTOWS FOREIGN POLICY
By Lawrence T. DiRita Deputy Director of Foreign Policy and Defense Studies
This doubt stems from the confused and often contradictory nature of the Clinton Administra- tion's foreign policy. In Haiti, for example, the
President first promised to end the Bush policy of returning refugees to Haiti, then reversed himself and adopted the identical policy. He reversed
him- self again later by bowing to liberal pressure to tighten sanctions and even to threaten invasion. More recently, President Clinton decided to
extend most-favored nation trade benefits to the Peo- ple's Republic of China (PRC), but only after having accused former President Bush of
"coddling" the "dictators" in Beijing with the same policy.
What it doesn’t say is NAFTA and it’s Bush counterpart CAFTA have undermined our nations work force, our job market and has started the eventual
demise of our economy. We have millions without jobs, a huge infiltration of illegal immigrants (not just Mexican either) and long time policies in
place which are not being enforced. Believe it or not, the Bush administration is just a continuation of the Clinton administration and I would
venture to say that it possibly goes back as far a ‘Daddy Bush’ or even farther. In case you haven’t noticed, the Clintons and Bush’s,
especially Daddy Bush, have become quite cozy over the last few years. And Bill Clinton is riding the tsunami wave right to UN super hero status.
The Bush's and Clintons are playing the 'good cop bad cop' game with all of us and it's working like a charm.
I remember the “Look for the union label” advertisements back in the 70’s asking people purchase products made in our country. Then there was
the ever popular “Buy American” advertisements back in the 80’s. Now, almost every major company has their production and telemarketing offices
in other counties. Go to the store and pick up a pair of shoes or clothing and try to find something with a ‘Made in the USA’ tag in it. You can
say it’s economy and our free market system. But when all tariffs are removed from imports from most countries and companies are given incentives
by the government to export their work to other countries, I call that giving away our country.
The North American Free Trade Agreement NAFTA called for immediately eliminating duties on the majority of tariffs between products traded among
the United States, Canada and Mexico, and gradually phasing out other tariffs, over a 15-year period.
The agreement is a treaty under international law, but not under the US Constitution. In the US, laws require majority approval in both houses,
while treaties require two-thirds approval in the Senate only. Under US law DR-CAFTA is a congressional-executive agreement. The United States Senate
approved the DR-CAFTA on June 30, 2005 by a vote of 54-45, and the House of Representatives approved the pact on July 27, 2005 by a vote of
217-215, with two representatives not voting. For procedural reasons, the Senate took a second vote on CAFTA on July 28 and the pact garnered an
additional vote from Sen. Joe Lieberman — who had been absent on June 30 — in favor of the agreement.
The implementing legislation became Public Law 109-053 when it was signed by President George W. Bush on August 2, 2005.
The goal of the agreement is the creation of a free trade zone, similar to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which currently encompasses
the US, Canada, and Mexico. DR-CAFTA is also seen as a stepping stone towards the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), another (more ambitious)
free trade agreement that would encompass all the South American and Caribbean nations except Cuba and Venezuela, as well as those of North and
Central America. Canada is negotiating a similar treaty called the Canada Central American Free Trade Agreement.
Most people believe this as being a way to assist third world South and Central American countries. In reality, the whole thing will work a lot like
ice in a hot drink. While it may assist the less fortunate countries to some degree, it will be draining our counties resources and dragging us down
to their level. Ultimately we are moving toward a two class system just like those of our southern counterparts. And guess who stays on top!
President Clinton will leave the worst national security legacy of any president in the last 100 years, according to Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa.,
considered Capitol Hill's leading expert in Russian studies, and a senior member of the House National Security Committee.
"First, and most obviously, we must by word and deed renew internationalism for a new century," said Clinton, a likely Democratic Party
presidential candidate for the 2008 election.
Now with this last statement in mind, and with Bills past foreign policy history, do we really want this tag team running our country (into the
Oh and if you think Mr. Bill’s foreign was all love and peace he attacked Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan. There are probably
more and who knows what any president does with ‘Black Ops’ and other secret, paramilitary activities.
Don't forget, people are sheep. Try not to BAH.