There are those times in life when one, even knowing better, deliberately sticks his thumb in his own eye.
Here I go.
The demonization of John Cornyn has taken on an almost satiric tone. Cornyn, with a 96% rating in 2006 from the American Conservative Union, is now vilified as Un-Republican, Un-Conservative and, by some, even Un-American.
How did this happen to a boot-wearing, law-and-order Texas Senator who, just months ago, defied his home state two-time President (and two-time Governor) to stand up against the now-infamous “amnesty” bill for illegal aliens?
Two words: Mexican trucks.
Cornyn’s vote against the Dorgan amendment, a bill which sought to de-fund (and, thus, kill) the implementation of a portion of the controversial 1994 NAFTA bill, approved by the Senate in 1993 (with the support of both Texas senators Gramm and Hutchison), has elicited a shrill firestorm of opposition to the former Texas Attorney General by those who describe themselves as Republican conservatives. To be sure, Dorgan’s amendment - brought before the body after private litigation failed to stop the trucking program - passed the Senate overwhelmingly, thanks to the support of all the Democrats and roughly half the Republicans voting (McCain and Craig did not vote). Whether the bill will, indeed, stop the influx of Mexican trucks remains to be seen, as President Bush is threatening a veto and the Administration has not said it would halt the program (for example, it could seek to find the funds elsewhere).
I recognize – and even agree with – some of the concerns raised by critics of Cornyn on this vote. But as I watched the debate devolve into a mob flogging of an honorable man, I began to wonder: What exactly is the reason for this anger? And, more importantly, are we willing to abandon our core principles simply to destroy those who cast votes we don’t like?
In other words, have we become Democrats when it comes to free trade?
As far as I can discern, there are three major objections to Cornyn’s vote:
- It threatens our national security.
- It threatens our safety on the roads.
- It threatens our jobs.
National security – if it is your argument that trucks could carry dangerous cargo, capable of inflicting major destruction on US cities and citizens, it is a point well taken. But anyone who has stood at the border at Laredo or El Paso can testify that security is not what it should be. To ensure our safety, we need to do a better job of inspecting all vehicles, from an 18-wheeler to a Volkswagon. After all, frightening as it is, weapons which can inflict catastrophic damages can come in very small packages. I am confident Cornyn shares the same concerns. So, if this is the objection, I am with you – shut down the border to all traffic.
Safety – all of us drive the roads of Texas, and many of us have children who do likewise. Ensuring the safety of foreign trucks (Mexican or Canadian) is not only a noble idea, it is essential. This is one reason why Cornyn offered his own amendment to strengthen the safety requirements for Mexican trucks. For some reason, those “safety-minded” Senators voted it down.
Jobs – Ah, here is the rub. The first two arguments make perfect sense – from a Republican, conservative and American point of view. But here is where so-called Republicans turn into Democrats – apparently without shame or compunction.
What is lost in the Cornyn bashing is that he refused to be cowed by foreign competition, believing that free trade was best for America, most importantly the consumer, who has to pay the freight for the cost of the goods being hauled by trucks from any nation. In fact, this point has barely seen the light of day in either the print media or over the airwaves. Why has he been refused the courtesy of having all of his views presented?
In the 30-plus years that I have been voting Republican, campaigning for candidates, serving as precinct chairman and election judge, I had been under the distinct impression that the GOP believed in our country’s ability to win, whether in battle or commerce. From Ronald Reagan to current Republican platforms, we were confident that our vision and drive were sufficient to carry the day against all foreign challenges.
We believed it in 2000 when the platform sought to:
Advance a Free Trade Area of the Americas to take advantage of burgeoning new markets at our doorstep
We believed it in 2004 when the platform (p. 49) insisted :
We reject moves toward economic isolationism.
America is the best place in the world to do business, and our workers and products are the best in the world. On a level playing field we can outmatch any other nation. We applaud the President’s actions to open foreign markets to American manufacturing products, agricultural goods, services, andintellectual property, while ensuring enforcement of trade agreements so that othernations live up to their promises.
We presumably believed in the repeated pronouncements of Reagan (for example, here, here and here) concerning the skill and initiative of the American worker and entrepreneur and the importance of open trade arrangements. But now we are afraid of Mexican trucks?
Ironically, some of talk show hosts and writers who fancy themselves Reaganesque have pompously derided Cornyn’s vote as one which would “take jobs from” Americans (or Texans, take your pick). These are the words of scared people. Moreover, these are the words of those who have abandoned Republican principles – or, worse, are ignorant of them. Have we lost the intellectual acuity to distinguish between arguments which are right and those which are wrong? Or do we, like the DailyKos crowd, hurl any nasty accusation we can, regardless of whether it comports with our real beliefs?
If this is our view, at least let us be honest about it. Let us openly concede that we can no longer compete on a fair playing field, that the Democrats were right on this one, and that we need to retreat into trade protectionism. Let us say outright that the Republicans were wrong on free trade.
But let’s not blame John Cornyn for believing we were right.
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
100 Responses to “Is Cornyn too Republican for Republicans?”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
Best damn contribution of the week.
Prepare for crucifixion, Rickster.
Well said.
I do believe this post deserves NAY demands a Squawkbox Fickle Finger of Fate Award. The only problem is that I cannot post the picture without banning myself.
Cornyn ‘08
Sen. Cornyn seems hell bent to carry Pres. Bush’s water on the “open at all cost” borders.
The open border presents the single biggest danger to the USA.
You guys sure like to keep the pot stirred. That being said, I think a lot of the animosity against Cornyn is due to frustration on the side of Republicans. Several media personalities that I have a lot of respect for are on the opposite side of the Mexican Truck issue than what I think they should be. It seems many people, myself included sometimes, are having a hard time separating anything to do with Mexico from the illegal alien problem.
I agree that there’s no reason to vilify Cornyn on this issue. It’s minor in the relative scheme of things, and ultimately inconsequential since the amendment passed anyway.
I do think the amendment is a good thing for the simple reason of safety. I’m sure Dorgan and the union thugs had plenty of other less valid motives. But I’m okay with that too if the goal of safety on our roads is achieved.
Phil, I don’t think passing the Amendment makes anything safer. How does cutting the funding for inspectors in a program already started increase the safety?
#4 KRAUT
The open border presents the single biggest economic opportunity out there at the present time. Our trade with Mexico has expanded about 6.5% a year since NAFTA and will increase even faster with streamlined access to the markets.
New FAXES (FREE) to send from:
http://www.numbersusa.com/index
#5
I think you are right about the frustration. It gets higher every day. I think Cornyn’s vote came at a bad time for him. People are fed up, and ANYTHING that is perceived as benefiting people in another country at the expense of people in this country is going to get pushed right back.
Job competition and free trade - I don’t think many conservatives have a problem with this, until they feel like different rules apply, depending on what country you call home.
Sure, consumers win when the cost of goods and services is reduced (or the growth thereof is slowed somewhat), but if the consumers don’t have any JOBS then the prices are irrelevant. Or, if they do have jobs but their earnings are flat and/or not keeping up with inflation.
I was thankful to Cornyn when he voted against the shamnesty bill. I’m not sure I understand why he wants to make things easier on Mexican truckers than American truckers.
That is the exact opposite of the way Cornyn voted. His amendment INCREASED inspections on Mexican trucks and truckers. The Dorgan amendment DECREASED the inspections.
People keep saying the Dorgan amendment banned Mexican trucks. It didn’t! It eliminated funding for the pilot study! The trucks are still coming!
#10 GriffithLea
That is the problem, no one cares about the truth.
That is not what he tried to do with his amendment.
Why is he supporting NAFTA? Because he knows this is the right thing to do for America, for our future, for our economy. That’s why he is standing on principle, standing up to the border watch/union coalition.
#8 This is what I posted in Firdays comments.
With all the Mexican 18 wheelers rolling all over the USA, I can’t wait until someone invests in a mega-container port in Mexico (maybe two). That way the ships could unload cheap in Mexico and trunk it into the USA. No more having the cost and wait to get through the Panama Canal. Much cheaper than unloading in Texas, Calif or the east coast.
…unless you get a Mexican port official who makes you bribe him to pilot your ship in, a Mexican customs official who makes you bribe him to approve the shipment, and a Mexican container inspector who makes you bribe him to stamp your cargo as “safe.” Given Mexico’s track record on those sorts of things, all of those “charges” are pretty much a given.
The question, of course, is how much will the officials expect in bribe. Either way, shippers have to either pay for official fees in U.S. ports or unofficial bribes in Mexico.
#13 CherokeeCowboy
That is already happening. Want to know why? Because the California ports suck. They are overcrowded, expensive and slow. They have no idea what customer service means. If anyone here has EVER tried to ship anything out of Long Beach, they know exactly what I’m talking about.
Heres a link: Mexican Deepwater Port
They are putting their money where their mouth is and are willing to compete. The Teamsters better wake up instead of coalescing with Border Watchers to scare Americans into isolationism.
Lazaro Cardenas - hmmm, named after the President that nationalized the oil companies.
Do you smell a conspiracy?
#10 (my own post)
That last sentence was not well written. I realize that Cornyn offered up amendment 2842, but it’s not clear to me if that goes all the way. For example, are Mexican truckers going to be as proficient in English as American truckers?
What I should have said was, I’m not sure why he’s trying so hard to get the Mexican truckers in. Actually I do - it’s because they’re cheaper, but I think we need to ask ourselves WHY they’re cheaper. Sort of like we should have asked ourselves WHY Chinese goods and labor are so cheap.
Griffith, short answer to why they are cheaper, lower cost of living means they can sustain a lower livable wage, which means wages are naturally lower.
#18 GriffithLea
Have you talked to many drivers lately? Especially pulling export containers, livestock or produce?
Okay, I’ll ask you - WHY are they cheaper?
#16 Sounds like the #14 lunch special…
For one, remember that our trucks can travel into Mexico too. Secondly, there is a huge cost added to imports and exports because every single truck has to be off-loaded at the border then reloaded onto domestic carriers.
#17 - The wheels are turning. I must report back to Rosie O’Donnell and Charlie Sheen! They’re suppressin’ my message.
nafta
NAFTA
NAFTA
Did I mention that the trucks are coming because of NAFTA. Which is a trade agreement. Did I also mention that in that trade agreement the United States agreed to open the borders to Mexican trucking to facilitate commerce between the countries. Oh yeah and that NAFTA was conjured up during the Reagan years, written and negotiated during the Bush 1 years and certified, ratified and signed by Clinton. Did I also mention as Hammie so brilliantly pointed out that Cornyns amendment was to strengthen the inspections?
Here’s a stupid question… When you buy a big rig truck, does the bed of it come w/ it or do they haul truck loads of cargo - leave the loaded bed and pick up a another full one? I ask because you see just the cabs of the trucks driving around…
Are they like freight cars where the entire car is off loaded from a ship and placed on a train?(Toldja it was stupid, but I really don’t know.)
Liz
depends
#26 Well thanks Squawk. You cleared that right up!
Our pursuit of free trade policies began in earnest 30 years ago. Our economy and standard of living are unparalleled since. The government definition of American poverty includes some people that would have been the envy of much of my parents’ generation. Time after time, both parties have lined up behind these trade agreements. Unemployment has been so low for so many years now, I can’t remember the last time it was 7%, which used to be considered Full Employment in most quarters.
The death of a trucker. Dead Head.
That is a great theoretical way to ship. Unfortunately, the railroads and ports are so inefficient that all the costs savings are eaten up by the time delays.
BTW, on #29, I wasn’t referring to containers, I was referring to domestic intermodal.
#12 - People do care about the truth, which is why they’re so suspicious. Suspicion sometimes means overcorrection. And why is NAFTA the right thing to do? Is it a more or less equal exchange, or in reality is a lot of US money flowing out of the country without much money flowing in to show for it?
#19 - Exactly. Different rules apply.
#20 - WRT English proficiency, brilliant comeback. Not. I can barely order food in some restaurants these days - heaven forbid we have someone piloting a 60-ton vehicle who can’t read a sign that says “WRONG WAY” . WRT cheaper, because they can only compete with American truckers on COST. Rarely can they compete on quality.
#22 - do our trucks travel into Mexico all that much? Offloading - good! That’s when you check for stuff that shouldn’t be coming in.
Sorry, Liz, your answer would require an epistle!
and I am not an Apostle
WRT?
#28 - for how much longer?
#34 - With Respect To
Sorry, old Usenet habit.
…and I am not an alpaca.
GriffethLea,
I think you misunderstood about English. Many drivers today, here in the US, do not speak English. 60 tons are very rare, permit loads.
Disagree on quality. Anyone, regardless of nationality, can provide quality service. It’s more about attitude than nationality.
Liz, JimBob down the street (and my brother in law) are owners of their trucks. Chances are both of them own a trailer along with their truck.
If JimBob goes to work for the Gigantic Trucking Co. he’ll probably be driving one of their trucks and they may have trailers stashed around the country, but it depends on the type of business they are doing.
Containers are often hauled locally by “Power Only” specialists when special “container chassis” are available.
“Power Only” refers to a tractor without a trailer.
There are certain situations/types of freight where trailers are dropped for loading/offloading.
There’s another 38 paragraphs of explanations/exceptions to this answer…but I’m old and tired. Like Squawk.
Just keep in mind, the guy running around in a cab is probably not making a dime at the time, is headed somewhere to get a trailer, and is miserable because the ride is mighty rough without a trailer.
#38 - were you talking about the truck drivers, or drivers in general? Besides, it still doesn’t make it right. And I don’t think it makes sense to quibble over the actual weight when in any case it’s going to be a LOT more than a car.
Quality - so if you can’t read “WRONG WAY” it’s okay as long as you have a good attitude? Who’s the Democrat now?
I happened to just come across this:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5133441.html
This statement disturbed me:
“…does not have the personnel to enforce a provision prohibiting U.S. truckers from carrying domestic Mexican cargo…”
If it’s all about market forces, competition, good clean fun, or whatever, why does there need to be a prohibition against Mexican goods in US trucks?
37
Just a lowly llama, eh?
When I went into the bowels of Mexico a few years ago to do a job I saw numerous 6-10 wheeler trucks chasis only with only steering column and seat sticking up being driven by guys wearing white painter type suits with hoods, leaning into the wind. These were new and obviously being transported from one plant to another, but the first one I saw I was ROTFLMAO sayin’ “yeah your in Mexico alright!”
Another LST front pager pulls the pin and drops the grenade at his feet. /sarc off
“The Mexican government has not negotiated the conditions that will permit freight haulers to compete on equal terms with its counterparts in the United States,” Martinez told a news conference. “Therefore, we demand that the Transportation Department suspend the launch of this pilot program … because it is not prepared to carry it out.”
They ain’t happy down south, either.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/5134037.html
Actually the first one I saw I didn’t believe what I saw untill the second one went by.
#41 Or maybe a vicuna. They have the softest fur.
31 Not to worry about a driver not being able to read “WRONG WAY”. A caller to Ed’s program said he has seen road signs being printed in English and Spanish at TexDOT. (or whatever it’s called)
#39 Thanks Shannon! See fellas? Shannon pulled it off w/o breaking a sweat and I learned somethin’…
Cornyn only wakes up and votes the right way when he is browbeat into submission. Now as I understand it, his job is to represent his constituents, but unless they are up there 24/7 beating him over the head, he’s going to vote liberal. I don’t have time to ride herd on him all the time.
Sorry, I didn’t have time to read all the posts. But if Bush’s plan for these 100 trucking companies to do commerce within the country were safe, there were inspections and there would be absolutely no inspection violations in the US of Mexican trucks because they were being closely monitored — they why would Cornyn offer his amendment in the interim. IF THESE WERE SAFE TO BEGIN WITH, THEY WHY WOULD CORNYN OFFER THIS AMENDMENT?
Bigjolly and Rick, Delete my #49 if you will. The people of the US are afraid of Mexican truckers because they are from Mexico - a corrupt 3rd world country who believes in bribes to get what they want. We are not afraid of Canadian truckers because Canada is not a third world country. You cannot compare Mexico with its corrupt politicians all the way down to its corrupt inspectors with Canada. When have you last heard of a Canadian truck full of expolosives being blown up? When has any Canadian trucker been in the news? You can trust Mexican truckers to within 25-30 miles within our borders. Let US truckers handle it from there until Mexico changes from a 3rd world country to a capitalistic, democratic country.
Neo, I think Cornyn was trying to counter those who said that it might not be safe. So he increased the standards and put a stop gap in that said the program could be terminated if it was shown that there was a safety concern.
duhmoose
I really do not believe Bush who loves the Mexicans would put any safety measure in the proposal, except to accept what the Mexicans told him. He would be totally okay with that. That is the problem. What Cornyn did was actually add safety measures to the proposal. That is what scares me. Was Bush totally relying on the Mexican government (my answer would be yes). How in the heck do you think we could inspect all of those trucks when we can’t even tell who is coming over our borders? Oh, now we have the technology to do it? Crap! What it boils down to is another bill to tighten security (Cornyn’s) that will be totally ignored, just like all the rest.
50. Neo
All good points that you raise. As I said, there are sound and necessary questions to be asked about national security and road safety. My point was primarily that, while we certainly must address those, let’s not beat Cornyn up for endorsing the Republican notion of free trade.
As for Bush, well, I’m sure you recall I parted company with him months ago.
Good comments.
Neo
By the way, where have you been? I’ve been waiting all day for you to weigh in on the issues.
RickG
Free trade is great. Let it be with Canada until Mexico gets its act together. We have given into Mexico, we have sunk money into its economy, we have given it every advantage, yet they will not do anything for themselves. Even the PP whatever says that “Mexico must do so and so” or “Mexico must complete…” or “unless Mexico….” Canada understands that Mexico will not do what is necessary for free trade, but the US is still giving them whatever they want. That is why I don’t fear a NAU. Canada has clearly stated that Mexico will not and has not cooperated. At least Canada will not keep doing for Mexico what Mexico can do for itself. It is tired of doing it. Just read the documents. It is there for all to read.
55. Neo
Surely you know I have never defended the Mexican government. I even got razzed by some family and friends for opposing the amnesty bill.
And I didn’t even support NAFTA when it was passed in the ’90s. But, if you look at some of the statistics posted here (not by me, but by commenters), we have actaully prospered under it.
In any event, I, like you, intuitively trust Canada more than Mexico, but I cannot affirm that there is empirical support for that trust. I just don’t know - I haven’t researched it.
#22 - “because every single truck has to be off-loaded at the border then reloaded onto domestic carriers.”
Hammy Ab SO LUTE LY not true sir - our customers pay for NO trans loading at the border - only a trailer swap - the closest their freight comes to even being touched at all is if it’s a tarped load and the MX tarps are reclaimed and replaced by the American driver’s tarps or vice versa
Rick
We have done much better under Canada than Mexico (also empirical data that I can’t support now), but I know that Canadian trucks are hauling all over the US. Bigjolly would have us compare Canadian trucks to Mexican trucks and there ain’t no comparison. Canada is not a third world country who depends on bribes and graft to exist. Mexico does. I would rather trust Canadian trucks than Mexican trucks any day because Canadian trucks are truly inspected without bribes or graft, when we all know that Mexican trucks are not.
#58 Neocon
No, we don’t all know that. Especially those of us that actually do business with, gasp, Mexicans.
You have no clue what you are talking about, so I’ll choose to ignore any further comments from you on this issue.
Yes, I do know what I am talking about as do most Americans. Mexicans have a different mind set than Americans. They think first of graft, bribery and theft. Then the think how graft, bribery and theft will gain them money.
We all know Mexicans indulge in graft, bribery and theft. It is part of their culture. Do you not want their culture to be part of what they bring to the US? Apart from tacos, tamales, etc. they bring a culture of corruption. They bring a culture of failing to follow laws (DWI) failing to follow laws (getting driver’s licenses); failing to follow laws (getting liability insurance); failing to follow laws (getting REAL social security numbers); failing to follow laws (staying here after green cards have expired). Need I go on?
I’m ignoring my own advice. Yes, please, carry on. Then read it again tomorrow.
Let everyone see.
#60 Neocon
Unbelievable. Yes, do carry on.
Just look at what you have said. You are so in bed with the Mexicans, you cannot even see a dissenting opinion. Shame! What? Was I too close to the truth?
G’nite.
I see hints of racial overtones developing here so I would strongly suggest that “we” move along.
Squawk,
Someone disagrees with Bigjolly and its racial overtones. Yeah, I get it. No one is to disagree with Bigjolly and get away with it. So says Squawk!
Neocon I politely addressed what I saw. Let’s not ramp this up with me. Thank you very much.
Deleted
Sorry Squawk, I didn’t mean to “ramp it up.”
60. Neo
Come on, Neo. Is this like the “black folk, eatin’ cornbread and fatback three time a’ day”?
Have you never met a Mexican businessman? Do you really want to go down this road with bigjolly, who actually knows (from experience) what he’s talking about?
I give you the benefit of the doubt, Neo. Surely you don’t believe all Mexicans are scum.
Squawk,
I just said I was not trying to “ramp this up.” If you thought so, I apologize!
Rick G
Of course, I don’t believe all Mexicans are scum! Neither do I believe they are all good businessmen. I’ve worked for Mexican businessmen and they were great to work for. But they were working to change their country to a capitalistic country. They were in banking, mortgages and real estate. They were American educated. I hope they will make a dramatic change in their country. I truly hope they succeed, for if they do, Mexico will be the one to gain.
72. Neo
Well said. Let us hope they get their act together down there. You and I agree - they have a long way to go. And their Government does not even slightly appreciate what we are trying to do for them. I have no idea how it will turn out.
Good evening, my friend.
RickG
#73
I agree. There are many folk who are working for the Mexican econony who are ham-strung by the Mexican government. Hopefully they can convince the government that the correct way to go is not the past, but the present capitalistic, free trade way to go. It may be slow, but I think it will come. Once capitalism comes to Mexico, you will see a decline in corruption. Once the 12 families are no longer in control, the corruption will decline, or I would hope so. I still think this is many years in the future. Mexico has so many resources and so much riches, it is a shame to see it wasted as it is today.
No corruption in Canada? Give me a break!
Corruption in America
Corruption(?) in Canada is not the same as corruption in Mexico. Mexico is a third world country, which lives off corruption. Canada is a rich country which doesn’t have to live off of corruption to thrive. Comparison of apples to oranges. A third world corrupt country vs. a rich. capitalistic, free trade country. Big difference. Especially since Canada doesn’t need our constant monetary aid to exist, while Mexico needs it for its very existance, without which, its very existance, it’s economy will crumble.
I don’t think I have ever seen a thread that is so overtly racial. This really strains the credibility of the anti -immigration arguments.
What do they say, “give someone enough rope…”?
RickG wrote:
“I recognize – and even agree with – some of the concerns raised by critics of Cornyn on this vote. But as I watched the debate devolve into a mob flogging of an honorable man, I began to wonder: What exactly is the reason for this anger? And, more importantly, are we willing to abandon our core principles simply to destroy those who cast votes we don’t like?”
Rick, when are you ever going to learn ?
The Perfect is always the enemy of The Good.
Rick and texpat,
So, does it really go back to what bigjolly posted the other day? That this is more of a racial issue than anything else, and anyone caught in the crosshairs (ie. Cornyn) will be villified?
Neocon’s comments tonight tend to support that theory, eh?
Stories like this one that RickG posted makes me, the moderator, real testy when I read the comments. It is OK to shake things up but don’t make life unbearable for me, if you know what I mean.
Keep the comments focused on the issues presented in the story and not each other. I hate having to take anyone out behind the barns and smack em around.
#81 mby35
My point in #80 is directed towards those who relentlessly criticize political leaders for not dramatically falling on their sword on every point of order, each and every minor issue, and trying, but perhaps failing, to defeat their opponents in the House or Senate. I have very little patience any longer with people who think they are qualified to slam pols on issues on which they themselves are ignorant. I am disgusted with people who are not just uninformed, but seem to boldly, proudly wear their ignorance of American history, the structure and responsibilities of the branches of government, the separation of powers, foreign treaties, the limitations of officeholders, ad infinitum.
But, of course, none of that should be a barrier to running on endlessly at the mouth as long you are angry enough. Anger and frustration seem to be the only prerequisites some folks think is required for public political commentary.
#83
Yep. How many people really take the time to become informed, rather than just listening to soundbites and forming opinions based upon them?
Hence, you have a majority of the population living in an ignorant state.
Comments like these…
…are why most of the folks I know of Mexican descent, many of which are hard core conservative in their beliefs even on issues like the failed amnesty bill, feel completely alienated by the Republican Party today. Frankly I find it disgusting and way over the line. Shame? Bigjolly should be ashamed??? You’ve got to be kidding me.
And this mindset is exactly what liberals look for so they can go scream racism. If you don’t believe me look at gadboy’s #78, and he’s a sane liberal!
#86 I think that was a compliment. Thanks.
#87 It was. And you’re welcome. I just hope you understand that what you witnessed here tonight is not representative of conservatives.
#84 mby35
I am ignorant about many subjects, but I avoid going to public forums, such as widely read websites, and rambling on about them. I care too much about my reputation and really dislike being humiliated by people who actually know what they are talking about. For some reason, those things are not a problem for some people who want to comment here and many other places.
#1 and #2. Well said, gentlemen. I started reading LST late this evening. I think it is most beneficial not to allow one’s emotions to trump one’s good sense in discourse. Assuredly that is not easily done when emotions run high on a subject.
The last thing we need is to slide into the opposite end of the morass the Kos-acks inhabit.
Rick, Rick, Rick. (Going back to the original post.) You should realize that the score cards of many organizations are intended to differentiate among candidates across the whole spectrum from liberal to conservative. That’s why many conservative groups show high ratings for republicans that generally vote the right way most of the time. If you want to differentiate between hardcore conservatives and run-of-the-mill garden variety republicans, you have to be a bit more selective. Take guns for example. The NRA score cards will show you the big difference between a democrat and a republican. If you want to separate out the true champions of gun rights from the rest of the flock, you need to look to an organization like the GOA.
That said, I think most of us would agree that Cornyn is a lot better than any democrat alternative on most of the issues. However, he’s not the ideal that we conservatives will continue to look for.
Here’s just one recent example that bugs the heck out of me: Vitter (yes, that Vitter) had an amendment to the immigration reform bill that would have simply stripped out title 6 which contained all of the amnesty provisions (and left only the enforcement provisions). Cornyn voted AGAINST that amendment. When I asked his office why, they said “without title 6, it wouldn’t be comprehensive”. So, be taken in by his tough talk if you want to, but don’t try to tell conservatives that he’s the Second Coming and should be above our critisism. He feeds from the same trough as Bush, Perry, Dewhurst, etc., and we ought to be able to do better. A lot better.
And don’t forget. The other republicans who ran for the 7th state senate district were all better than a democrat alternative, but isn’t it far better to have a real conservative in that seat now?
Just for the record, not only does the US not inspect “all” trucks coming in, that would be impossible. Right now we inspect less than one half of one percent and some days the line coming north at the border stretches five miles.
Free trade today is a minority position in both parties. Four decades ago in both parties it was the majority position. IMO it’s myopic and foolish to call free trade a GOP position, or a D one. Free trade has always been an issue with a strange-bedfellows coalition, backed by disparate interests in both parties, and opposed by others.
Bush’s immigration and trade positions represent the classic free market approach, but the conservative movement obviously no longer embraces it. On the left, much of organized labor (depending on the industry) disavowed free trade to supposedly protect their jobs, but that didn’t work (though it turned out the “giant sucking sound” was to India and China instead of Mexico).
Anti-free trade factions in both parties are engaged in futile, quixotic quests that ignore economic realities. But Cornyn’s case shows why realists don’t speak up. When you dare talk about economic reality in American politics, in either party, you get bitterly slammed - and not by your enemies but by your supporters.
grits says:
It is a mistake to classify all conservatives as border watchers. True, the media has lumped them together but they are two separate groups and I think that eventually, conservatives will see that they’ve been had by the propaganda and will want to solve the problem we have with illegal immigration without tossing our economy down the drain.
grits says:
Absolutely true. I laugh when I hear people saying that we have to inspect every container coming in to the US. Can you imagine what would happen on the docks of the Port of Houston, Long Beach or Newark/Elizabeth?
Jolly, I’ll acknowledge the mistake of overgeneralizing. But I do think the GOP base that thinks of itself as the conservative movement (as opposed to the Bob Perrys and big donors of the world) largely considers “border watching” a staple conservative position, while those who want free markets are inevitably derided as corporate greed-heads and RINOs by those representing themselves as the party’s conservative wing.
Personally, as you know, I think a true historic “conservative” position would definitely include support for free markets - both in goods and labor - but as I wrote, both parties have simply migrated en masse away from free trade positions, which were always more of an intellectual exercise than a populist one. I hope you’re right folks will soon realize “they’ve been had,” but when? best,
Grits, I would submit that the “Party” may have abandoned Free Trade, but the base in general still supports it. However, free trade with Mexico has so much baggage because of the border issue that it becomes a devisive issue within the base. I think what bigjolly and RickG were trying to get to with these two post is for the two sides within the base to actually start talking about it. Are those who oppose free trade with Mexico doing so because of an irrational fear of Mexicans? Are those who are for free trade with Mexico placing money over safety?
Duhmoose, When I was an economics major at UT 22 years ago or so, I was taught that labor markets are an integral part of “free markets,” that free markets enhance security (while black markets erode it), and per Adam Smith that markets do not respect cartographic boundaries. That’s why I find anti-immigration positions by those who consider themselves “free trade” advocates an almost bizarre conundrum - I mean, I understand it on one level, but I cannot imagine simultaneously holding both positions at once. best,
A certain percentage of the conservative base was always against free trade, remember the “Buchanan Brigade”? He had a small but very vocal following. I believe now you still have those and added to it people like me that border security has become right up there with pro-life and National security.
We do not trust the government’s ability or resolve to handle this properly. I have grown weary of the arguement that we don’t check trucks or cargo now and “you should see the Canadian trucks”. Those arguements go straight to the point. The business lobby that wants the cream of an open border needs to be shown they must support securing them first.
But don’t worry, this just came at an inopportune time for you guys on the heels of the immigration reform mess where we are feelin’ our oats. Just as in the Dubai ports debate, it will go away and life return as you know it.
Ahh, left you speechless ay?
Oh and, 100!