Tuesday, January 29, 2008

State of the Union

Boz already has a post up on the SOTU. There is nothing very remarkable about it, with regard to Latin America or anything else. I would just highlight the passage about free trade agreements.

These agreements also promote America's strategic interests. The first agreement that will come before you is with Colombia, a friend of America that is confronting violence and terror, and fighting drug traffickers. If we fail to pass this agreement, we will embolden the purveyors of false populism in our hemisphere. So we must come together, pass this agreement, and show our neighbors in the region that democracy leads to a better life. (Applause.)

The question of an FTA Colombia certainly deserves debate on its own merits (beyond platitudes like "trusting" American workers to compete). What bugs me, and I mentioned it last October when the administration made the same argument, is bringing Venezuela into the picture. The overall message is that even if you don’t like the agreement, you have to pass it because Hugo Chávez will benefit otherwise. Can’t we come up with a more persuasive argument? If Chávez did not exist, what would the argument be?

The other problem with the passage is that we’re going to “show our neighbors that democracy leads to a better life,” but an FTA is about trade, not about democracy. So what we’re really hoping to show is that free trade leads to a better life.

9 comments:

Anonymous,  9:50 AM  

Well it's an irrational position but it's obviously appealing at an emotional level.

Indeed, this may be the only way he can get that FTA passed in the short term, by making it a matter of national security.

Is he right? No.

Does he have a shot? A long one but he does.

Paul 10:34 AM  

"..even if you don’t like the agreement, you have to pass it because Hugo Chávez will benefit otherwise."

That may not be the ultimate reason, but it's still a good reason to consider passing it. Chavez is a thug and he's busy trying to implement his retarded revolution across Latin America.
If the package is good, and it appears to be, the added benefit of a Hugo ribkick is even more of a sweetener.


"If Chávez did not exist, what would the argument be?"

Colombia will benefit overall from foreign investment and increased trade, as all nations do. We owe this to Colombia since their country has nearly been torn apart by the drug trade that's fueled by selfish Americans. The United States will benefit too, overall, though not nearly as much. This is pretty much a no-brainer, unless you're a guerilla.

Justin Delacour 4:06 PM  

This is pretty much a no-brainer, unless you're a guerilla.

Either you're a free trader or you're a guerrilla. Got that?

Colombia will benefit overall from foreign investment and increased trade, as all nations do.

Ah, yes. As long as we repeat that mantra to ourselves enough times, it must be true. Who needs evidence? Evidence is for "guerrillas."

Anonymous,  8:54 PM  

Wasn't Paul worth it your time?

Justin Delacour 12:56 AM  

Wasn't Paul worth it your time?

No.

Bosque 2:36 AM  

Sure sink billions down the drug lords pit ... and again watch cocaine production RISE.

Pablo Escobar was Uribe's uncle and the Ochoas are his cousins. Get a clue.

Bosque 2:38 AM  

My comment was for Paul.

Paul 11:32 AM  

"Either you're a free trader or you're a guerrilla. Got that?"

Ok, you're right, I left out Dorm Room Revolutionaries.

"Ah, yes. As long as we repeat that mantra to ourselves enough times, it must be true. Who needs evidence?"

The evidence is abundant and everywhere. Perhaps you should take a gander at non-Marxian websites and books and you might find a little.


Evidence is for "guerrillas."

no, Justin Delacour is for guerillas. Makes him feel like he's part of the heroic struggle from his warm cocoon in the United States.

Paul 11:33 AM  

"Get a clue."

From the guy who says Pablo Escobar was Uribe's uncle.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP