As President Bush met with leaders in Central and South America, spreading good will and talking trade agreements, he was greeted with a mix of native dances, protests and riots. Mayan priests “cleansed” their sacred ancient ruins in Guatemala after his visit.
It seems to be a case of too little, too late. If the United States had been working on being “neighborly” throughout Bush’s presidency, perhaps his reception would have been a bit warmer.
Posted by Patrice Hein
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- donndublin on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- Blaidd_Drwg69 on Too many exemptions
37 Comments
When Clinton went to Latin America the police had to provide extra security to protect him from all the people wanting to hug and kiss him. Now Bush needs protection to prevent violence. In just a few years Bush takes America to a nation that is beloved to one that is despised worldwide. Perhaps after Bush gets out of office a priest can perform an exorcism on the White House.
Your right Doug. Bush has made America hated. If another 9/11 happened today, the world would chuckle, instead of weep like it did in 2001.
Sad, very sad!
Bush has actually been very friendly to Central and South America.Bush was very slow to act against Illegal Immigration.Bush supports free trade, which has been very helpful to Central and South America.Corruption is the biggest problem in every country South of the Rio Grande.It is corruption and goofy socialism that keeps these people in poverty.Obviously, their leaders want someone to blame for their own problems.
Ginned up love fests for the “reprobate and Chief” and ginned up protest mobs for President Bush. Those South American Socialist dictators can raise up a mob almost as fast as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Especially when they get a call from George Soros or Howard Dean.
I’m sure Clinton DID hug a lot of folks. Especially porky Jewish girls.
lol
Bush is attempting to erase the American border and create a pan American slave labor pool.
A BETTER thread might be on how MR. Bush found packing lettuce “the height of my Presidency”. Good. We have found his next place of employment. Can he start immediately?
Glad to see it. South America is not the backward place everyone makes it out to be. They are very modern, huge agrarian base. Countries like Brazil have enormous high tech projects going and we could gain in further trade with them.
Perhaps in dealing with the Politics of the region, if the developed better relationships, the U.S. could deal with the likes of Hugo Chavez by having his South American neighbors put pressure on him economically and diplomatically.
Perhaps this is what Bush had in mind?
Most of our imported oil comes from Canada and Mexico, not Moslem countries. I don’t have the breakdown handy.Mexico is rich in resources.Mexico has two beautiful coasts.Mexico has a year-round growing season.Mexico is next to the most economically successful nation in history.Mexico is in bad shape because of Mexican corruption.No other reason.
Bush is the one that made Hugo Chavez so popular. Chavez hates Bush, the majority of the people hate Bush so naturally they prefer Chavez to Bush.
Bush supports NAFTA and free trade which increases poverty while Chavez is a socialist which increases the standard of living for so many poor. As a result more and more nations elect socialist governments. Perhaps Bush is dying to go the Reagan route and killed democratically elected leaders and install military dictatorships and call it “Bringing Democracy to the Middle East, err Latin America.”
“Bush supports NAFTA and free trade which increases poverty.” Posted by: Doug | March 14, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Interesting assertion Doug. Care to share how you make the leap of logic on this?
Uh no, because there’s no point in explaining common knowledge to morons. What else caused so many farmers to leave their land after the implementation of NAFTA provided for the influx of cheap, American subsidized corn to Mexico? Stop watching Fox News for a change and try getting informed. Is there anything conservatives have ever been right about? It’s about time you step aside and let the grown ups take over.
“As a result more and more nations elect socialist governments.”
For an idiot, Bush sure can make things happen.
So Fleet, you are saying Bush wants more socialist governments in Latin America? That’s moronic, even for you.
“Uh no, because there’s no point in explaining common knowledge to morons.”"Stop watching Fox News for a change and try getting informed.”"Is there anything conservatives have ever been right about? It’s about time you step aside and let the grown ups take over.”
More brilliant debating technique from our hold-out, dug. I kept waiting for a point that never came.
Since you neo-cons are completely clueless about the millions of job losses on both sides of the border and NAFTA has been going on for years, it’s reasonable to assume that you work hard to remain uninformed. That’s why Fox News is so popular, they don’t actually educate anyone. Don’t blame me because you are so ignorant, I’m just pointing out another obvious fact.
“That’s moronic, even for you.”
Ah, the whiff on intelligence and edification. You are the one who said that Bush was causing the socialist goverments, not me.
Looks like many of you have more in common than you thought with illegal aliens.
No, try a reading comprehension class idiot. Latin America is electing more socialist governments in spite of Bush, not because of him. You are the one who said that he accomplished more socialistic governments. Don’t blame me because you can’t create a coherent thought.
Let’s see…U.S. exports to Canada and Mexico support over 600,000 more jobs now than in 1993. U.S. exports to Canada support an estimated 1.7 million jobs, over 300,000 more jobs than in 1993. Exports to Mexico in 1998 supported almost a million jobs, up over 350,000 jobs from 1993. Jobs supported by exports pay 13 to 16 percent more than other U.S. jobs.
No job loss there.
I’m assuming the neo-cons here think NAFTA worked so great that the flood of illegal immigrants from Mexico is because they made so much money from NAFTA’s policies that they just quit their jobs to spend their millions in America.
This is why there’s no point in trying to educate a neo-con, they have no basis in reality. They still think the illegal occupation in Iraq is going well and the economy is surging.
Let’s examine NAFTA’s arrangement with the U.S. and Canada, Mexico and how it has affected our trade with the rest of the world.
“U.S. exports to our NAFTA partners increased 104 percent between 1993 and 2000; U.S. trade with the rest of the world grew only half as fast.”
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, “During 1993-1998, U.S. goods and services exports to the world rose by approximately 45 percent (goods exports increased by nearly 47 percent). During the same period, exports of goods and services supported an additional 1.6 million jobs (to a total of 11.6 million in 1998).”
Moreover:
* America’s NAFTA partners were Missouri’s top export markets in 1998, with exports of $1.6 billion to Canada and $1.2 billion to Mexico, according to the Commerce Department. They were also the top two export markets for Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania in 1998.* “Sales of U.S. corn to Canada increased more than 127 percent in volume between 1990 and 2000 and increased nearly eighteenfold to Mexico during 1993 to 2000,” according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which adds that “NAFTA partners purchase 27 percent of U.S. agricultural exports.”* U.S. exports to Mexico of motor vehicles in 1998 were 14 times greater than in 1993, rising to $2.4 billion. Exports of parts were 30 percent greater, reaching $9.5 billion.
“Bush supports NAFTA and free trade which increases poverty while Chavez is a socialist which increases the standard of living for so many poor. As a result more and more nations elect socialist governments.”
doug, put this into a logic equation and you will have your answer.
A million jobs lost in the first year after implementation of NAFTA in Mexico. That’s more than your number of job creation. Try looking at all the facts, not the ones Rush picks out for you.
Let’s examine the assertion from the left on how NAFTA’s supposable damage to the Environment:
# Since NAFTA was implemented, Mexico has taken the initiative to pass environmental laws similar to those of the United States andCanada.# The North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), NAFTA’s supplemental agreement on the environment, promotes development through mutually supportive environmental and economic policies. It also created the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) to protect, conserve, and improve the environment.# The NAFTA agreements also created the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADB). The BECC assists border communities in addressing environmental concerns and certifies environmental projects. The NADB uses private and public funding to finance BECC projects.# According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, since the NADB’s establishment in 1995, it “has approved a total of $105 million in loans, guarantees, [and] grants to help finance 14 environmental projects benefiting over four million residents on both sides of the [U.S.-Mexico] border.” 14# As a result of one BECC-NADB project in the Lower Valley of El Paso, Texas, 2,600 households will be connected to a wastewater treatment system this year, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. 15# Thanks to another wastewater treatment project in Mexico, 93 percent of the residents in the city of Ciudad Juarez will have sewage services. Without NAFTA, this probably would not have occurred.
Wages in Mexico declined 40-50%, cost of living increased 80%, inflation increased 51% in 1996 (and never dropped), the peso declined in value, and interest rates doubled. Signs of a good economy in neo-con dream land.
According to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, “we trade $1.8 billion a day with our NAFTA partners–that’s $1.2 million a minute.” 16 As U.S. government data indicate, without NAFTA, the United States would have lower-paying jobs and would export less, and Mexico and the United States would have lower environmental standards.
My compliments to Sara Fitzgerald for provided valuabe insight on how NAFTA actually functions and is successful.
Sara J. Fitzgerald is a Trade Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and Economics at The Heritage Foundation
US corn exports more than doubled to Mexico. The corn, subsidized by American taxpayers, cost less than production costs. As a result of being unable to compete or raise tariffs to prevent corn dumping, Mexican corn farmers couldn’t find a market for their product and loss their farms. Guess where they headed?
It’s cute to present a bunch of figures but pathetic when you can’t even comprehend them.
The problem that currently resides in Mexico is that a large portion of their work force migrates to the U.S. for employment.
Why is this?(1) Because the Mexican Government encourages it as it does not have any economic solution for the working class in Mexico.(2) Mexico tends to keep its educated workers and panders to them. (educated meaning high school on up.) On the other hand, Mexico turns its back on the rural, small village and cities separated from Mexico City geographically. It provides zero to little education assistance to its poorer citizens.(3)There is enormous corruption in Mexican government, military and generally how they distribute funds. The rich and wealthy end up with the major piece of the pie. The working poor are forced to exist in near starvation environments or risk crossing the border scenarios to the U.S. experiencing all those hazards.
For me, I see no problem with allowing a worker program from Mexico in the U.S. It will allow Mexican citizens who do not have an opportunity in their own country because of the “caste system” imposed by their own government.
It will also provide an economic boon to both countries in the way of cash flow. The U.S. already sees that cash flow effect.
Whether or not the Mexican migrant worker can trust the Mexican Government enough with the cash they earn, remains to be seen.
Despite the claims of increased exports to our NAFTA partners the amount of imports increased even more leading to a trade deficit of $100 billion (2003 figures). It should be quite obvious to anyone other than a neo-con that when you send manufacturing jobs to Mexico to produce cars that decreases the number of exports and increases the imports.
It’s simple economics but if the neo-cons knew that then they wouldn’t have seen the explosion of trade deficits that we see under the Bush regime. But if you ask a neo-con they’ll insist that our economy has been the best ever.
The Mexican government encourages NAFTA, ’nuff said.
Chavez is a socialist which increases the standard of living for so many poor
Doug, are you sure your name isn’t “drug” because no straight person could make such an assinine statement? About the only thing socialism has ever done for the poor is make them dead. Do you really think Chavez is going to share his countries oil wealth with the people? Of course not. Only Hugo and his band of ruling elite will partake in that. Why do you think he is attacking the President so much. Like any good commie knows, you must have an enemy to divert the attention of the masses away from their pitiful plight which you have caused.
Doug is a socialist Nuff said..
Man, the fascists are out in force today. Can’t handle the fact that Slick Willy is INFINITELY more popular, both here AND abroad, than your Dear Leader?
Pathetic trolls that you are.
I see ddub, Doug was the one who brought up Clinton. Is he the facist you are talking about?
I agree on Clinton’s popularity, he is very popular World-wide. Doesn’t mean the rest of us have to accept his politics just because he’s “popular.”
What about the 20 billions or more dollars that the illegal immigrants are sending back home?All NAFTA has done for me is that it has made my life harder, now I have to worry about job security more then ever, disappearing benefits, wages and being discarded as a throw-away consumable item by my own fellow countrymen and that BS line that I am getting lower prices on things because it, is just an out-right lie.The only thing NAFTA is doing changing out the guards, who will be the rich and who will be the poor.
The mayan priests had to remove the lingering sulfur stench after Bush’s visit! They know Diablo when they see him!
I’m with Thunderchild.
I want a thread about bush packing lettuce in Mexico calling it the highlight of his Presidency!
To quote conservative commentator Michael Savage.
“I can’t believe this, the man is a certified idiot. Well at least we’ve found bush’s next job!”