Skip to main content

Subtitle: Or How China Just Pwned America thanks to twenty years of Republican policies.

For years now the GOP economic plan to outsource US jobs to other countries (also ably assisted by certain neo-liberal DLC Dems), such as China, while also relying upon China to finance our national debt was viewed by people like  -- oh, Republican presumptive presidential nominee, Mitt Romney -- as the greatest thing since sliced bread or the wheel, perhaps.  The lost jobs in the US of A, the growing income inequality between the super-rich and everyone else, the lowering standards of living for most Americans (heavily subsidized by an ever larger debt burden) -- well who in the Republican Party cared about all that?  Profits were up and Wall Street was making money in good times and bad (thanks to corporate welfare, bailouts, lower taxes and subsidies for companies that don't need them). Not the former head of Bain Capital or the current head of Goldman Sachs, that much is certain.  

They, like many of their comrades, just assumed that American military might would trump all other considerations when it came to American foreign policy goals (which for the most part are focused on helping -- surprise -- major American industries such and Big Oil and the Military Industrial Complex).

Today, however, our American Empire builders had to back down from a cherished policy, i.e., putting the screws to Iran by using sanctions to keep Iranian oil off the world market as much as possible.  You see, for the sanctions to be effective (and I don't especially mean effective in terms of obtaining leverage in our supposed negotiations regarding Iran's nuclear program), other countries have to abide by them.  America doesn't really doesn't obtain any of our oil from Iran.  We can't, by ourselves, affect Iranian oil revenues unless we are willing to impose a blockade, which, under international law, is an act of war.

Keeping Iranian oil off the market and and incidentally helping oil traders requires the cooperation of other nations if you don't intend to start another pointless war in the Mideast.  In order to obtain that "cooperation" America said it would impose sanctions on financial institutions in countries that continued to buy Iranian oil.  China, coincidentally, buys around one fifth (20%) of all of Iran's oil and gas exports.  So guess what happened today.  

China wasn't very happy about reducing its oil purchases beyond the level set by the American sanctions regime.  The Chinese government also happened to notice that the US government had already granted exemptions to its European allies, India and Japan, allowing them a "reprieve" from US financial sanctions even if they bought more Iranian oil than we would like them to do.  I'm just guessing here, but I think it is safe to assume that representatives of China's government had "discussions" with our State Department regarding this unequal treatment by the US government when it came to granting a similar reprieve from these US financial penalties.  And so voila!  Today, America's foreign policy with respect to Iran took a back seat to Chinese demands:

(Reuters) - The United States gave China a six-month reprieve from Iran financial sanctions on Thursday, avoiding a diplomatic spat with a country whose support it needs to try to quell violence in Syria and rein in Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

With Thursday's decision to grant exceptions to China, which buys up to a fifth of Iran's oil exports, and Singapore, which buys Iranian fuel oil, the Obama administration has now spared all 20 of Iran's major oil buyers from its unilateral sanctions.

When you destroy your country's manufacturing base and weaken its economy to the benefit of another, and when that one country owns more of your country's national debt than any other investor outside the Social Security Trust Fund and the Federal Reserve, all the military power in the world doesn't amount to a hill of beans.  I don't know what China threatened to make us back down and allow it to continue to buy Iranian oil, but I can imagine it had something to do with their growing economic power vis-a-vis our relative economic weakness.

Now I don't know what you think about America's Iranian sanctions regime, but it doesn't really matter.  China demonstrated today that anytime it believes our government's policies, foreign or domestic, impinge upon its interests, it can  demand we back down or weaken those policies, and our government has shown that we will accede to their demands.  For the more our economy continues its death spiral, one fueled by tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, increased taxes and financial burdens on the poor and middle classes, and other proposed "austerity" measures (that are doing such a bang up job in Europe at the moment to restore economic stability and growth over there) the greater China's influence worldwide and here in America - political, technological, and economic - will grow at the expense of our country, and in ways we cannot expect.  In short, the more we rely on China to prop up our economy, the more we adopt economic policies that benefit foreign powers such as China, the more the Chinese government and it corporate interests will influence our politics and foreign policy at the expense of the vast majority of the welfare of our people.

Sure, the Romneys and Hedge Fund managers and Wall Street kings will make out okay.  A "slash and burn" economic model can still be sustained for another 15 to 20 years and they'll make out like bandits, destroying America's manufacturing base and shipping it overseas, just like they have in the past twenty years.  It's funny, but for all the conspiracy theorists on the right who claim Obama is some secret "Manchurian" candidate, those politicians who  who are deepest in the pockets of foreign powers always seem to be Republicans, don't they?  And Romney certainly fits the bill.  

Don't take my word for it, just ask the good folks in Freeport IL (h/t to icebergslim) who Mittens cares about the most: the people of Freeport and their jobs or his buddies at Bain Capital's profits from tearing down and outsourcing Freeport's major employer, lock, stock and barrel to -- China?  They know who is the real Manchurian Candidate in this election and it ain't President Obama.

Originally posted to Steven D on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 03:19 PM PDT.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Manchurian, indeed. well said. eom (4+ / 0-)

    "I can't do it by myself. No president can. Remember: Change doesn't happen from the top. It happens because of you." B Obama, 2008

    by nzanne on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 03:31:23 PM PDT

  •  True Patriotism means not selling your country out (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steven D, judyms9

    for personal gain, as Romney and the Republicans have done. Democrats need to shout this from the rooftops this election year.

    We need to take the Patriotic pretensions of the Republicans and turn it on them and bludgeon them with it as we portray them as traitors to all but the .1% who are reaping big profits in outshoring, outsourcing, in downright collaborating in the ransacking of America.

    •  Well said, and I agree. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PeterHug, maybeeso in michigan

      Bain not only sold out their country....they sold out their fellow man.  This makes them not only non-patriotic, but HEARTLESS.  

    •  Human husbandry, the exploitation (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Steven D, NoMoreLies

      by humans of their own kind, is "kinder and gentler" than the behavior of other natural predators, which kill their prey and devour them on the spot. Letting them linger longer, as do the cattle and other herd animals humans breed and then lead to the slaughter, is presumed to be morally superior to the behavior of the beasts.
      However, that's questionable. Although deprivation of all rights, other than life, may be considered a lesser punishment in the law, from the perspective of the victim, some things are worse than death and abusive treatment is one.

      The culture of obedience has reason to be concerned about the animal rights agenda.  If animals have rights, can humans be far behind?

      Willard's forte = "catch 'n' cage" People to Wall Street, "let our money go."

      by hannah on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 05:01:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Steven, thank you for the courage to use (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steven D

    Manchurian.  

  •  The same party that so fears foreign people (4+ / 0-)

    coming into this country and making good lives for themselves by working on Mitt's lawn is the party that is willing to send our businesses to those foreigners' native countries and have native workers work for slave wages.  Now if our kids and grandkids want jobs they will have to emigrate to those foreign countries to find work.  The US is on its way to being a dense network of airports, ConAgra fields and GOP retreats.

    Romney went to France instead of serving in our military, got rich chop-shopping US businesses and eliminating US jobs, off-shored his money in the Cayman Islands, and now tells us to "Believe in America."

    by judyms9 on Thu Jun 28, 2012 at 05:09:55 PM PDT

  •  If China wanted to fund..... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lily O Lady, Steven D, PeterHug

    .....a Presidential campaign, nothing would prevent them from doing so. With the Mittster, they would be guaranteed a very good return on their investment.

  •  Very true. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steven D, PeterHug

    For the first time in American history, the economic elites of our country are in direct financial league with a hostile foreign power.  The closest analogy would be the 1930s German-American Friendship League, but even that was far more limited than the web of relationships that binds the Republican Party to the People's Republic of China.  The simple fact is that their agendas are the same: No worker rights, no environmental protection, no freedom, no humanity, no democracy.

    "I'm going to rub your faces in things you try to avoid." - Muad'Dib

    by Troubadour on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 03:53:41 AM PDT

    •  Predatory humans surface everywhere. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Steven D

      I suspect that predation is the default mode for individuals who have few if any practical talents.  Those that speak well can talk others out of what they need to survive.  Those that don't, just take (steal) what they want, until we incarcerate them in prisons and provide for their material needs automatically.  It's an ass-backwards way of dealing with incompetents.

      Willard's forte = "catch 'n' cage" People to Wall Street, "let our money go."

      by hannah on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 05:06:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Addelson - Manchurian Money (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steven D

    Sheldon Addelson is providing the Manchurian Money for the Manchurian Candidate.  Romney has absolutely no American Values that I admire in a Presidential Candidate!  

    Accepting money from people like Addelson emphasize that Mitt is in it for Mitt and not in the race to improve the life of ordinary American People.  Mitt's life is good enough.  I wish he would leave my life alone!

    "As long as Corporations control Government, there is no reason for Government to regulate Corporations!" John Roberts, Citizens United (SNARK)

    by NM Ray on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 05:59:14 AM PDT

  •  Those dasterdly Rethuglicans: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    superscalar, shaharazade

    Clinton, in 1994, renewed "Most Favored Nation Trade Status" for China.

    Echoing the case made by George Bush when he was president, Clinton said he was convinced the Chinese would take more steps to improve human rights if the issue were separated from the threat of trade sanctions.

    "This decision offers us the best opportunity to lay the basis for long-term sustainable progress on human rights and for the advancement of our other interests with China," he said at a news conference announcing his decision to extend China's most-favored-nation (MFN) trade status.

    Clinton, 1993, NAFTA:
    The presence of three former presidents, two Republicans
    and one Democrat, to join President Clinton here today on this stage,
    is evidence of our country's ability to support what is in our
    nation's best interest over the long term without respect to
    partisanship
    .
    Obama did a Free Trade Job Outsourcing deal with Columbia in 2011.

    Obama promises a deal with Pacific-Asia countries larger than NAFTA, targeting end of 2012 for implementation.

    -----------------------------------

    The Rethuglicans love Free Trade Job Outsourcing.  But damn if our Dem Leades don't blow them away when it comes to delivering the goods for the 1%.

    Our Dem Leaders will only represent our interests if they are held accountable.  The 1% holds them accountable.

    Perhaps it's time the 99% did as well.

    Is it time to wake up yet?

    The 1% Feast on Results while the 99% Starve on Rhetoric They Can Believe In.

    by Johnathan Ivan on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 07:20:55 AM PDT

    •  You Forgot At Least A Couple Of Things (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Johnathan Ivan, Steven D, shaharazade
      U.S. Declines to Say China Manipulates Its Currency

      WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Tuesday declined to label China a currency manipulator after seeing recent increases in the value of the renminbi compared with the dollar.

      The decision angered some manufacturing groups, which have accused China of artificially holding down the value of its currency, the renminbi, to gain trade advantages. A cheaper renminbi makes Chinese goods less expensive when they are shipped to the United States. It also makes American goods more expensive in China. Both could increase America’s trade deficit with China, which is on pace to reach a record high this year.

      February 26 Democratic Debate - Clinton and Obama on NAFTA

      I don't believe either of these two individuals have even said the word "NAFTA" since the 2008 election. Barack Obama has certainly not said the word "NAFTA" and "illegal immigration" in the same sentence.

      I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

      by superscalar on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 08:06:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good points... thanks for sharing: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Steven D, shaharazade

        It will require education, education, education to break through the bullshit that keeps us from recapturing the Democratic Party from the 1%.

        Make no mistake - Obama, with Three Chiefs of Staff from Wall Street Banks, has no intention of reversing the 1%'s economic agenda.

        The 1% Feast on Results while the 99% Starve on Rhetoric They Can Believe In.

        by Johnathan Ivan on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 08:13:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You also don't hear (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnathan Ivan

        the words Trans-Asian treaty from the Democratic leaders very much either. For good reason, as this treaty basically gives the multinational's a legal status the trumps our sovereignty. National interests do not have much to do with either ensuring  our domestic tranquility, the economy we all live and work in, or 'foreign policy' that is billed at keeping us safe.  

  •  Mark Engler @ CD has an interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shaharazade

    article.  You can find it HERE.

    Some excerpts, if it please you:

    My concern back then was that a Democrat (either Obama or Hillary Clinton) would be elected to office and then abandon the overt militarism and “imperial globalization” of the Bush administration, but embrace a subtler, more multilateralist “free trade” neoliberalism—reclaiming the agenda of corporate globalization. I would have been pleased if this prediction had proved wrong. Sadly, Obama has provided irrefutable evidence that he has boarded the corporate globalist bandwagon.
    .....
    It didn’t have to be this way. It was not preordained that President Obama would become Corporate-Globalizer-in-Chief. The base of the Democratic Party has aligned itself firmly against the “free trade” agenda—so much so that both Obama and Clinton campaigned in 2008 against the NAFTA model and in favor of a “fair trade” alternative. In fact, going into the 2012 elections, there’s evidence that Obama’s betrayal of earlier vows could be a significant liability among voters and a bitter pill for key constituencies the president needs if his campaign is going to overcome the enthusiasm gap between progressives and the Republican faithful.
    And why shouldn't Democratic Presidents abandon Fair Trade in favor of "Free Trade Job Outsourcing"?

    Why not?  

    The 1% hold them accountable.

    Fear of the GOP & social issues will ensure that the 99% do not hold them accountable.

    That's the calculus.

    It worked for Clinton.

    It'll work for Obama.

    And on it shall go until people are economically desperate enough to say "ENOUGH!".

    Railing against the GOP will not stop corporate Dems from advancing the 1%'s agenda.  

    The 1% Feast on Results while the 99% Starve on Rhetoric They Can Believe In.

    by Johnathan Ivan on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 07:51:26 AM PDT

  •  The Outsourcing was on the tip of the iceburg.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steven D, shaharazade, NM Ray

    ... the real key money making scheme for these operators was STEALING PENSIONS and leaving the US taxpayer on the hook for the fraction the federal insurance program reimburses.

    The crime and tragedy here is that Congress and every president since Hoover has NOT made it illegal to play games with workers pensions.

    You pension is part of your SALARY, your pay, it is YOUR MONEY not some gift from gracious employers. Yet somehow this nation has never given your pension money the legal protections it requires so the company or some future PIRATE (Romney) can't come along and steal it from you.

    Until this abomination is fixed, people's pensions will continue to be fodder for thieves and pirates.

    The core of Bain's profits came from STOLEN PENSION money. They are thieves and scumbags and belong in jail.

    •  RIGHT! What's the Price to the US Government (0+ / 0-)

      of Romney and Bain's plundering the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation?  How much Money from US Government Treasury went to Romney and Bain?  I have not seen that issue addressed in any story or article!

      "As long as Corporations control Government, there is no reason for Government to regulate Corporations!" John Roberts, Citizens United (SNARK)

      by NM Ray on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 03:41:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Look in the mirror (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    superscalar, shaharazade

    If you shop at Walmart - the person you see in the mirror is responsible for outsourcing.  As long as we continue to demand products priced so low they cannot possibly be made by workers earning a living wage, then this will never stop.  It's not just Walmart, it's Target, Old Navy, and on and on.  Blame Mitt, Baine or anyone else you choose.  But, it's naive thinking.

    •  Well Said (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shaharazade
      Blame China, blame us 2005

      The question of blame comes down to this: Do we want cheaper products or are we consumers willing to pay more for American-built goods? So far the answer has been clear.

      It's kinda' like saying that you are going to stop illegal immigration by simply 'going after the employers', or you're going to stop drug use by 'going after the drug cartels'.

      If you don't do anything about demand, you can't tilt at the windmill of cutting off supply all you want ... it ain't gonna' work.

      I won't be coming home tonight, my generation will put it right - Genesis 9:3

      by superscalar on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 08:31:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Or, to put another way: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shaharazade

      All you poor people who have been downsized into oblivion and can't afford to NOT shop at Walmart...

      It's your fault!

      Let me posit an idea:  The cheap shit in Walmart could NOT have come about without MFN / Free Trade Job Outsourcing.

      You want to hold people accountable?

      Hold those accountable who elected Presidents that implemented laws that allowed the cheap shit from China to get here in the first place.

      Why did Clinton pass NAFTA?

      Because he knew he wouldn't be held to account.

      Why did Clinton renew China's MFN status?

      Because he knew he wouldn't be held to account.

      Why did Obama pass Free Trade Job Outsourcing w/ Columbia in 2011?

      Because he knew he wouldn't be held to account.

      Why is Obama promising more Free Trade Job Outsourcing, rivaling NAFTA in size?

      Because he knows he CAN and will NOT be held to account.

      Because, at the end of the day, enough people will choose to blame the GOP rather than hold a DINO accountable.

      The 1% Feast on Results while the 99% Starve on Rhetoric They Can Believe In.

      by Johnathan Ivan on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 09:19:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't shop at Walmart (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shaharazade, NM Ray

      I shop at Goodwill.

      "If you tell the truth, you'll eventually be found out." Mark Twain

      by Steven D on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 09:21:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's not entirely that simple... (0+ / 0-)

      if you're just some simple shmoe like me, where do you go to find the consumer item (whatever it might be) that is NOT made in China (or wherever)?

      We shop at WalMart, or Target, or any of the similar stores because that's all we have as options.

      I agree that rebuilding a real manufacturing industry in the United States is critically important, as is re-creating the retail network that used to exist.  But it doesn't right now, and I'm not sure how we might go about doing that.

  •  Otsource / Offshore what's the difference? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PeterHug, maybeeso in michigan

    I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death.

    by cobaltbay on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 11:38:45 AM PDT

  •  Sheldon Adelson's Manchurian Money (0+ / 0-)

    Sheldon Addelson is providing the Manchurian Money for the Manchurian Candidate.  Romney has absolutely no American Values that I admire in a Presidential Candidate!  

    Accepting money from people like Addelson emphasize that Mitt is in it for Mitt and not in the race to improve the life of ordinary American People.  Mitt's life is good enough.  I wish he would leave my life alone!

    "As long as Corporations control Government, there is no reason for Government to regulate Corporations!" John Roberts, Citizens United (SNARK)

    by NM Ray on Fri Jun 29, 2012 at 03:34:29 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site