Anybody remember Perot's "giant sucking sound" of jobs fleeing the US?

[Skip Intro]

Was he right?

[NYC_SKP]

1. Yes. (nt)

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Yep. nt

[Nye Bevan]

3. Did anyone on DU watch the Gore-Perot debate on NAFTA, conclude that Perot was correct,

and vote for Perot? I'm curious.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. I concluded that Perot was correct

but did not vote for him. But wasn't the debate after Perot lost the election?

[Nye Bevan]

8. Yes, but he did run again in 1996 (nt)

[MannyGoldstein]

9. Oh, I'd forgotten.

Didn't vote for him that time around either.

Smart guy, very skillful - but nuts.

[Nye Bevan]

7. dupe

[Mojorabbit]

23. I voted for him. God that was eons ago. nt

[Indydem]

4. No.

It was more of a drip, drip drip.

The sucking sound came when we gave China free trade.

[TheKentuckian]

13. This is correct.

[slipslidingaway]

20. Yes - HR 4444 China Relations Act of 2000

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h106-4444

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Is water wet?

[RKP5637]

10. Yep!!! n/t

[Arctic Dave]

11. And yet we have a president willing to keep doing it.

US jobs are nothing but bargaing chips for their quest of world imperialism.

[GreenPartyVoter]

12. Unfortunately.

[Skip Intro]

16. And you know, that kinda strangely overlaps with the rw "world gov" fears, in a way, doesn't it?

You know - there is a reality happening around us, with thick, thick buffers of bullshit to obscure what is really transpiring. I've said this before, and I'll say it again - I'm not so sure tea partiers, nor the paranoid rw fringe, are that far separated from our own core ideals. Something is going on, our input little more than a charade. I suspect the worst, and I wonder if the only viable solution rests on the awake and concerned among both the left and right to come together, because a defense with just one of us may well be just not enough.

[Arctic Dave]

17. I really don't think what we are saying is fringe.

Now there are some strange theories that people cling to but in general I thing there is a lot of agreement between people.


Reminds me of my friend who is part of the state libertarian party, I can say we agree on about 90%.

[Skip Intro]

18. I have a libertarian friend with whom I agree more than disagree as well.

Yet I can't help feeling things have been decided, a behind-the-scenes system unaffected by elections. Surely there are agendas to which Obama, and other recent presidents, are not privy, at least in detail. That seems clear to me. Extrapolating from that, it is easy to suspect other agendas in play, removed from, and perhaps hidden from, our apparent governing bodies.

I look to the state of our nation. And further to the state of the world. Things are being done by our supposed representatives, in governments around the world, and it seems we only take steps further down into a basement of darkness and less and less for the common people. And the effort seems to foster a malaise, rather than present a staircase up and out of it. Because maybe there is no staircase up and out of it.

And in the back of my mind I can't help but think there must be commonalities between the tea partiers and the Occupiers. We both see the nation, the world, sinking into some economic abyss. We both know something is very wrong. We can see it in our daily lives. We both point fingers in different directions, but we're also both from the real world, the real America, and we both see our futures and our fortunes dimming to obscurity. Bla bla bla...

I guess I'm rambling on again....

[Skittles]

14. he and his son pimped of PLENTY of jobs

[woo me with science]

15. Yes. He scared the two corporate parties so much that they seized control of the debates after that

We used to have at least a semblance of real debates until Ross Perot ran for President and scared the hell out of the two corporate parties.

From the mid-70's until 1988, the League of Women voters ran the Presidential debates, and a real effort was made to provide a fair format and substantive questioning. When the RNC and the DNC saw how well Perot was doing in the campaign, they took quick action together to seize control of the debate process, including the entrance rules and the format and substance of the debates. The League of Women voters withdrew in disgust and issued a strongly worded press release in October 1988. Their warning was absolutely on target:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_debates

"The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."

The same year the two major political parties assumed control of organizing presidential debates through the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The commission has been headed since its inception by former chairs of the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee.

Some have criticized the exclusion of third party and independent candidates as well as the parallel interview format as a minimum of getting 15% in opinion polls is required to be invited. In 2004, the Citizens' Debate Commission (CDC) was formed with the stated mission of returning control of the debates to an independent nonpartisan body rather than a bipartisan body. Nevertheless, the CPD retained control of the debates that year and in 2008.

Seizing control of our political discourse through debates is just one example of how the corporate parties have worked together to restructure our election process in order to ensure that the corporate-chosen candidates do not face serious scrutiny or challenge. Put that next to corporate take-over of the mainstream media and restructuring of the election finance system, and they have created a monopoly together, a facade of choice, that most people don't even realize. These days we are given the option of the corporate candidate versus the other corporate candidate.

We have to reform the entire damned system. Support OWS.

[Populist_Prole]

24. Yes it was so obvious.

Obviously the GOP being the most corporatized of the 2 parties expectedly hammered him ( as they did Pat Buchanan on trade ) but what really ticked me off was seeing Gore's debate against him. Gore acted like a total condescending pro-free trade douchebag. Really smug. It was then I knew Gore was totally in the thrall of the 3rd way.

[stevedeshazer]

19. That's a big 10-4

Hell yes he was right.

Too bad it took 20 years to point it out as obvious.

+1, Skip.

[MADem]

21. He was right about a lot of things. Problem was, he was wrong about stuff too.

That said, I have to admire they way he 'left no child behind' in Iran in 79. When he was running E Systems, he did NOT phuck around but his employees enjoyed excellent benefits and quality of life.

It's why his employees were so loyal to him.

[frylock]

22. i voted for perot

[NNN0LHI]

25. Perot and NAFTA came along about ten years after my job was off shored

Perot was late.

Don

[Downwinder]

26. Right about GM, too.