Archive for the ‘Free Trade’ Category

HOW THE CHINESE THINK

Monday, January 18th, 2021

 

If you are curious as to how the Chinese think and how they  see themselves, their history and their future, this speech from 15 years ago, will make it clear to you that they are definitely a major threat to the United States. Nancy  P.S.  I researched this speech on google and it is definitely authentic.  

Speech By Comrade Chi Haotian
Vice-Chairman Of China’s
Military Commission
December, 2005
3-1-9
 

The following is the actual text of a speech delivered in December, 2005 by Comrade Chi Haotian ­the Vice-Chairman of China’s Military Commission to top officers and generals. Keep in mind that China has for many years advocated deceitful and covert warfare against its enemies. This is their Modus Operandi. There should be little question that a “Bird Flu” Pandemic would deeply excite them. (Don’t forget how they have poisoned thousands of American pets and knowingly placed lead paints on toddler’s toys.)
 
“Comrades, I’m very excited today, because the large-scale online survey sina.com that was done for us showed that our next generation is quite promising and our Party’s cause will be carried on. In answering the question, “Will you shoot at women, children and prisoners of war,” more than 80 per cent of the respondents answered in the affirmative, exceeding by far our expectations. Today I’d like to focus on why we asked sina.com to conduct this online survey among our people. My speech today is a sequel to my speech last time, during which I started with a discussion of the issue of the three islands [Taiwan, Diaoyu Islands and the Spratley Islands — Ott] and mentioned that 20 years of the idyllic theme of ‘peace and development’ had come to an end, and concluded that modernization under the saber is the only option for China’s next phase. I also mentioned we have a vital stake overseas. The central issue of this survey appears to be whether one should shoot at women, children and prisoners of war, but its real significance goes far beyond that. Ostensibly, our intention is mainly to figure out what the Chinese people’s attitude towards war is: If these future soldiers do not hesitate to kill even noncombatants, they’ll naturally be doubly ready and ruthless in killing combatants. Therefore, the responses to the survey questions may reflect the general attitude people have towards war..We wanted to know: If China’s global development will necessitate massive deaths in enemy countries; will our people endorse that scenario? Will they be for or against it?
(more…)

Share

VIDEO- GLOBALISTS UNITE AGAINST FREEDOM – LAURA INGRAHAM

Saturday, November 21st, 2020

 

VIDEO   LAURA INGRAHAM    November   20, 2020
GLOBALISTS UNITED AGAINST  FREEDOM
GLOBAL ELITES SUBVERT YOUR RIGHTS WITH ONEROUS CLIMATE POLICIES  – ” DO WHAT YOU ARE TOLD” 
Laura Ingraham on Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg’s plan to subjugate America to international whims.
THE END GOAL: INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WILL BE SUBJUGATED TO GLOBAL RIGHTS
Share

FACING UP TO THE CHINA THREAT

Thursday, November 12th, 2020

 

This article from a speech given at Hillsdale College, is packed with a tremendous amount of very important information about China.  I have highlighted what I thought were the important facts for those of you who only have time to skim the article as it is a long article.  The title of this article ‘Facing Up to the China Threat’ is definitely what we, as a country, needs to do to ensure our survival as a free nation.  Nancy   

IMPRIMIS

Facing Up to the China Threat

Septembe 2020
Brian T. Kennedy
American Strategy Group

Brian T. Kennedy is president of the American Strategy Group, chairman of the Committee for the Present Danger: China, and a board member and senior fellow of the Claremont Institute, where he served as president from 2002 to 2015. He has written widely on national security affairs and public policy, including in The Wall Street JournalNational ReviewInvestor’s Business Daily, and RealClearPolitics. He is the author of Communist China’s War Inside America.

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on September 29, 2020, in Rapid City, South Dakota, at a Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar.

We are at risk of losing a war today because too few of us know that we are engaged with an enemy, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), that means to destroy us. The forces of globalism that have dominated our government (until recently) and our media for the better part of half a century have blinded too many Americans to the threat we face. If we do not wake up to the danger soon, we will find ourselves helpless.

That is a worst-case scenario. I do not think we Americans will let that happen. But the forces arrayed against us are many. We need to understand what we are up against and what steps must be taken to ensure our victory.

Our modern understanding of Communist China begins during the Cold War, with President Nixon’s strategic belief that China could serve as a counterweight to the Soviet Union. This belief seemed to carry with it two great benefits. First, the U.S. wouldn’t have to take on the Soviet Union by itself: Communist China was a populous country that bordered the Soviet Union and shared our interest, or so we thought, in checking its global ambitions. Second, by engaging with China—especially in terms of trade, but also by helping it develop technologically—we would help to end communism as a guiding force in China. This second notion might be called the China dream: economic liberalism would lead to political liberalism, and China’s communist dictatorship would fade away.

At the end of the Cold War, pursuing the China dream appeared a safe course of action, given that the U.S. was then the world’s preeminent military power. The 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks reinforced the notion that superpower conflict was a thing of the past—that our major enemy was now radical Islam, widely diffused but centered in the Middle East. Later that same year, China was granted “Most Favored Nation” trading status and membership in the World Trade Organization. Little changed when the Bush administration gave way to the Obama administration. The latter’s “pivot to Asia” was mostly rhetoricala justification to degrade our military capabilities vis-à-vis China, integrate even further the U.S. and Chinese economies, and prioritize the Middle East above all else.

Under both administrations, the U.S. failed to build a military that could challenge Communist China’s aggression in the Pacificspecifically its building of a modern navy and its construction of military installations on artificial islands in the South China Sea—and acquiesced in the export of much of the U.S. manufacturing base to China and elsewhere.

 

History will record that America’s China policy from the 1970s until recently was very costly because it involved a great deal of self-deception about the nature of the Chinese regime and the men who were running it.

Communist China Today

(more…)

Share

TRUMP HAS ALREADY WON, WHATEVER THE ELECTION RESULTS

Monday, November 2nd, 2020

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Trump’s Already Won

A consequential presidency has enabled peace and prosperity.

By Maria Bartiromo and James Freeman   October 31, 2020

Win or lose, America’s 45th president deserves credit for a more competitive economy, a nation at peace and a secure rule of law. Donald Trump doesn’t trample Americans’ rights. He doesn’t start wars; he ends them. And he makes comments that offend people. The cost of supporting Mr. Trump is enduring awkward moments when he says things that presidents shouldn’t say. The benefit is that he champions U.S. liberty and prosperity, and a thriving America is a benefit to the world.

It may seem obvious that a president should prioritize the interests of his country. But when Mr. Trump arrived in Washington, too many politicians seemed to view America as one of the world’s problems. Barack Obama began his presidency with a series of overseas speeches in which he described American flaws. In 2016 he visited communist Cuba where he noted that the U.S. had once sought to “exert control” over the country. Many suffering Cubans wish that we’d succeeded.

Mr. Trump doesn’t apologize for America. When it comes to foreign relations, he thinks that in many ways the U.S. has been too nice. But he also brought the nicest news to the Middle East in decades, a series of historic peace agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors. In contrast with the expansive ambitions of the Bush era and the apologetic retreats of Obama days, Mr. Trump leads an America that is ready but not eager for war and that encourages former foes to engage in peaceful commerce.

The pursuit of commercial vitality at home has defined his presidency, as it defined his unconventional candidacy. “Is Donald Trump Serious?” asked a New York Times headline in September 2015. A columnist mocked him for seeking to sharply reduce the tax on corporate profits. The real mockery was the damage the levy inflicted. When combined with state and local taxes, the tax rate on corporate income amounted to nearly 40%, the highest in the industrialized world. U.S. companies were fleeing for business-friendly countries.

In 2017 Mr. Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the top federal corporate tax to 21% from 35%. The law triggered an increase in business investment and a surge of optimism among employers, which turned out well for employees. The Trump economy was characterized by historically low unemployment rates, massive job openings, and rising wages for low- and middle-income workers. The Covid pandemic and shutdowns wrought historic economic destruction, but it’s now being followed by a historic rebound.

(more…)

Share

THE BIDEN CONTRADICTION

Sunday, November 1st, 2020

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The Biden Contradiction

He’s running on Covid and character, but his policies are the most left-wing in decades.

The Editorial Board   October 30, 2020

The Wall Street Journal hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate since 1928—Hoover—and we aren’t about to change this year. But we do try to sum up the risks and promise of the candidates every four years, and we’ll start today with the contradictory candidacy of Joe Biden.

The former Vice President is running as a reassuring moderate, a man of good character who can reunite the country and crush Covid-19 after the disruptive Trump Presidency. Yet he also is running on the most left-wing policy program in decades.

Voters have little idea about these policies because Mr. Biden mentions them only in the most vague, general terms. The press barely reports them. Americans may think they’re voting for Joe’s persona, but they will get the platform of Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

In Mr. Biden’s sunny telling, he will be the anti-Donald Trump. He won’t kick down, won’t trash norms and won’t alienate allies. He’ll work with Republicans to forge bipartisan policies, restraining the passions of his party’s left. In that sense he has been the perfect Democratic nominee to appeal to women and suburban Republicans tired of polarized politics. He has run a disciplined campaign on character and Covid that has made the election a referendum on Mr. Trump.

We too would like to believe Mr. Biden could govern in a less divisive way because it would be better for the country. Left to his own instincts, and if he were a decade younger, he might pull it off. Every Republican who negotiated with the White House over a budget compromise in 2011 told us they made progress when Mr. Biden was in the room, only to have Barack Obama take it all back when he joined the talks.

But what evidence is there today that Mr. Biden will restrain his increasingly radical party? Across his long career he has been the consummate party man, floating right or left with the political tides. As a presidential candidate this year he has put no particular policy imprint on the Democratic Party—not one. The party has put its stamp on him.

(more…)

Share

THE REVOLUTION IS WINNING

Friday, July 24th, 2020

 

A must read  !  Nancy

www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/the-revolution-is-winning/

NATIONAL REVIEW

The revolution is winning

By Andrew C. McCarthy  July 18, 2020  

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: 

The goals of the revolution have never changed. It has simply airbrushed its terrorist leaders into prominent public scholars and “activists” with a passion for “change” and “justice.” The revolution has lots of money, organization, control of the schools, support from one of the nation’s two major political parties, and the media megaphone. That is why the revolution is winning. The 1960s never ended, they just paved the way for today.

 

This is what the revolution looks like.

Weather Underground terrorists, who made no secret of being anti-Ameri[c]an “small-c” communists, are having more success than they could have dreamed of in the 1960s.

They are dominating the language. You know that whole “white privilege” nostrum that we’re paying universities $60K per year to drum into our children’s brains? It is derived from their lamentation of “white skin privilege.” In their ideology, the revolution to overthrow the capitalist, racist, imperialist system summoned them — lily white radicals — to abandon their privilege and embrace the armed struggle.

Among their most influential thinkers was Bill Ayers. He got a windfall from the government’s failure to prosecute him for the bombings he carried out and the mass murders he planned but was insufficiently competent to execute. It was a second career as a “Distinguished Professor of Education” at the University of Illinois. As Sol Stern relates in a 2006 City Journal essay that should be required reading today, this entailed designing curricula used by today’s hard-Left academics, based on what Ayers saw as a moral imperative to convert schools into social-justice indoctrination labs.

It worked.

Of course, in the days before they brought the revolution into the classroom, they pursued it on urban streets, prioritizing war on cops. To the avant-garde, the police are the pointy end of the oppressive government spear, enforcing its laws and imposing the racist society’s caste system. For the revolution to succeed, the police have to be discredited, defunded, and defanged. For the Weather Underground, that meant branching into such radical offshoots as the May 19 Communist Organization and conspiring with black separatists.

(more…)

Share

USMCA – HOW IT HELPS OUR FARMERS

Wednesday, December 18th, 2019

 

This is the first article that I have read that  clearly discusses how the USMCA will help American  farmers. It also points out the differences between NAFTA and the USMCA.   Nancy
 THE WALL STREET JOURNAL 

Got Trade? Dairy Farmers Stand to Gain From the USMCA

The newly signed deal is sweet relief to farmers in rural districts like mine in North Carolina.

By Ted Budd    Mr. Budd, a Republican, represents North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District.  December 14, 2019

The trade agreement negotiated in 2018 by the U.S., Mexico and Canada languished for more than a year as congressional Democrats pressed the Trump administration to extract concessions from Mexico on labor regulations and pharmaceutical patents. The amended USMCA, successor to the North American Free Trade Agreement, was signed this week, putting an end to 14 months of political wrangling. But to those of us who live in farm country, the pact means a lot more than politics.

To Sam Dobson, whose farm in Statesville, N.C., has been in his family for 150 years, the USMCA represents hope. He is a seventh-generation dairy farmer, and the USMCA boosts the chances that his son Chase will be the eighth. “In agriculture, your goal is to leave a legacy and not a liability, and the No. 1 goal for us on our farm is to leave our farm and our legacy just a little bit better than we found it when we got it,” says Mr. Dobson.

Since Nafta came into force, U.S. agricultural exports to Canada and Mexico have quadrupled, from $9 billion in 1993 to $39 billion in 2017, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. But dairy farmers were left behind as other agricultural exports boomed. U.S. milk prices are in the fourth year of a slump due to chronic oversupply. Canada has historically restricted how much U.S. milk it imports, putting U.S. dairy farmers at a disadvantage.

Farmers in Iredell County, N.C., which I represent in Congress, produce more than 3 billion gallons of milk a year, according to the American Dairy Association of North Carolina. In the 1970s, there were more than 200 dairy farms in Iredell County. Now there are 22. This is a trend that goes far beyond North Carolina. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that 2,731 dairy farms across the U.S. closed last year due to a combination of low profit margins and a gradual decline in milk consumption. “Without these agreements,” Mr. Dobson says, “you’re going to see a disappearance of the industry.”

(more…)

Share

COUNCIL OF FOREIGN RELATIONS – MORE MIGRATION, BIGGER WELFARE STATE

Thursday, October 24th, 2019

 

This  is the first article  that I have read on the influential  Council of Foreign Relations which is promoting a bigger role for government with increased immigration.  Nancy

THE NEW AMERICAN
Wednesday, 23 October 2019

CFR: U.S. Needs More Mass Migration, Bigger Welfare State

Written by  Alex Newman

Alex Newman is a foreign correspondent for The New American. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com or through Liberty Sentinel Media. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook

Under the guise of keeping America “competitive” in the looming high-tech future, the globalist Council on Foreign Relations is urging policymakers at all levels to dramatically expand the size and scope of government. The bloated welfare states in Sweden and Denmark are cited as examples of the “advantages” of massive government programs to take care for people. Without the sort of fundamental transformation of America envisioned by the CFR, the nation will supposedly be left behind in the emerging new paradigm, the organization claimed. Critics, though, blasted that idea.

In its new report, dubbed “The Work Ahead: Machines, Skills, and U.S. Leadership in the Twenty-First Century,” the CFR Task Force offered a broad array of policy recommendations for federal, state, and local officials. These range from ever more immigration and a greater role for government in various facets of the economy, to a dramatic expansion of the welfare state modeled on Big Government schemes from Northern Europe. The CFR’s demands regarding education, which are a key component of the report, will be covered in an upcoming article.

Some of the leaders involved in creating the CFR report told The New American that without implementing the sought-after changes, America would be left behind as the world moves toward a globalized future of fast-moving technological progress. But experts and legislators invited to participate in the scheme who spoke to The New American sounded the alarm about the CFR’s vision. Among other concerns, they warned that the controversial CFR report and outreach efforts selling it to policymakers reveal a hidden plan to push a dangerous agenda and bring state and local officials into the establishment’s globalist orbit.

One reason why the CFR’s pronouncements are so important is because of the key role they play setting policy. Indeed, looking at its membership and influence, many analysts consider the CFR to be a key Deep State hub in America. The late U.S. Admiral Chester Ward, a CFR member for almost 20 years before defecting and blowing the whistle, explained that this enormous power is used for neferious purposes. In fact, Ward said, the main objective of the organization is to undermine U.S. sovereignty and facilitate the merger of the United States into what he described as an “all-powerful one-world government.”

The way it advances its objectives was explained by Admiral Ward, too. “Once the ruling members of CFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition,” he said. “The most articulate theoreticians and ideologists prepare related articles, aided by the research, to sell the new policy and to make it appear inevitable and irresistible.”

“By following the evolution of this propaganda in the most prestigious scholarly journal in the world, [CFR mouthpiece] Foreign Affairs, anyone can determine years in advance what the future defense and foreign policies of the United States will be,” the respected admiral warned after ditching his membership at the CFR. “If a certain proposition is repeated often enough in that journal, then the U.S. Administration in power — be it Republican or Democratic — begins to act as if that proposition or assumption were an established fact.”

While that may not be true in the Trump era, when voters and their president have openly rejected globalism, it certainly has been true for decades, if not generations, regardless of the party formally in power. Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted publicly that the CFR told her what she should be doing and how she should be thinking about the future. Former Vice President Joe Biden, meanwhile, joked that he worked for CFR boss Richard Haass. Even many top “Republicans” are involved.

Of course, the latest CFR agenda starts with a kernel of truth. As anybody with common sense can see, the economy is changing and will be undergoing further changes in the years ahead. As a result of technological developments, the future of work will look very different in 30 or 40 years than it does today. Many Americans will lose their jobs. All that is true. Of course, it would be difficult to sell enormous policy changes if the entire premise behind them was nothing but fiction, obviously.

But the agenda being pushed is another matter. Under the pretext of responding to the obvious changes coming in the years ahead, the CFR — a leading Deep State institution in America that has dominated foreign policy for generations — is pushing what critics warned was a dangerous scheme to expand the power of government. The plan also advances globalism at every level of society, a key goal of the CFR dating back to its founding. In short, it is a massive and dangerous power grab that should be resisted, critics told The New American.

Policy Proposals

(more…)

Share

C-SPAN VIDEO DONALD TRUMP SPEECH 2013

Wednesday, September 25th, 2019

 

You have got to see this amazing video of a speech given by Donald Trump in 2013 !   Thanks to Anthony Bruno for sharing with us.  Nancy

I wonder how many people were aware of this.
I came across this 30 minute video that was recorded at the Family Leadership Summit
in August, 2013, two years before he announced he was running for the presidency.
Trump’s message six years ago remains the same today….
C-SPAN VIDEO

Speech: Donald Trump Delivers a Speech in Ames, IA – August 10, 2013

Share

AMERICA’S SECOND CIVIL WAR – DENNIS PRAGER

Tuesday, August 27th, 2019

 

 
America’s Second Civil War – Published in Jewish World Review August 12, 2019   www.jewishworldreview.com/0117/prager012417.php3
Written by Contributor Dennis Prager.
America's Second Civil War
It is time for our society to acknowledge a sad truth: America is currently fighting its second Civil War.

In fact, with the obvious and enormous exception of attitudes toward slavery, Americans are more divided morally, ideologically and politically today than they were during the Civil War. For that reason, just as the Great War came to be known as World War I once there was World War II, the Civil War will become known as the First Civil War when more Americans come to regard the current battle as the Second Civil War.

This Second Civil War, fortunately, differs in another critically important way: It has thus far been largely nonviolent. But given increasing left-wing violence, such as riots, the taking over of college presidents’ offices and the illegal occupation of state capitols, nonviolence is not guaranteed to be a permanent characteristic of the Second Civil War.

There are those on both the left and right who call for American unity. But these calls are either naive or disingenuous. Unity was possible between the right and liberals, but not between the right and the left.

Liberalism — which was anti-left, pro-American and deeply committed to the Judeo-Christian foundations of America; and which regarded the melting pot as the American ideal, fought for free speech for its opponents, regarded Western civilization as the greatest moral and artistic human achievement and viewed the celebration of racial identity as racism — is now affirmed almost exclusively on the right and among a handful of people who don’t call themselves conservative.

The left, however, is opposed to every one of those core principles of liberalism.
(more…)
Share
Search All Posts
Categories