Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dude1394
This may be some of the worst demagoguery and class warfare I've ever heard. His argument against trade agreements is chinese toys made with lead that Mattel has admitted was their own fault. This is straight out of all totalitarian playbooks, this could be Hugo Chavez talking.
|
the mattel apology was about one recalled toy in which a magnet in the toy could become loose and potentially be swolled by a kid, and which toy recall was the largest in numbers. there have been many, many issues with chinese products being hazardous due to lead and other toxic ingredients.
the issue of lead paint and unsafe products remains a problem. china recognized this very issue with severla hundreds of arrests accusing people of knowingly using hazardous ingredients in their products.
As for the allusion to hugo chavez, huh?
Quote:
|
America right now continues to be the envy of the industrialized world with a level of "poverty" that is truly enviable.
|
hard to quantify "poverty" across different nations, but....the USA is in the bottom quartile of industrialized countries in mortality rates for children under five, and one study from the late 1990's had the USA behind canada. germany, france, netherlands,switzerland, taiwan, luxemburg, belgium, austria, norway, sweden and norway in measuring the incidence of children in households below the poverty line.
Quote:
He claims that the us government is corrupt so his answer is to greatly increase that same government with more money, more control over our lives and that is somehow going to fix it.
The liberal credo, give us the means of production and I will give you back utopia.
|
did he claim that the answer is "more money" or "more control"? I do not find that in the speech.
what I read in the speech is edward's disgust with the ability of industry lobbyist to influence an election by their donations to campaigns, the revolving door of government workers going to work for these companies as lobbyist, and (this is the REAL message in the speech) the major party's candidates taking in million of dollars (read hillary...) and consequently being beholden to these contributors at the detriment of the public.
Quote:
|
If he wants to fix washington he should be proposing cutting it's funding in half, but instead he believes that if HE is given control then he'll be the "good" boss who will care for all the chilluns.
|
if the funding is cut in half and the lobbyist still rule the day, that means that the spending, although decreased in size, will still go to the industries whose lobbyist are successful co-opting the candidates, and the candidates who take the money will still carry the water for these companies at the detriment of those in the USA who truly need the help.
bottom line, are you pleased with the culture of our nation's politicians and the influence of business interests that is magnified by the donations they make?
or do you see the need to interrupt the constant "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" of the need for candidates to solicit donations for their campaigns from special interest groups?
me, I go with the latter.