Marion Jones 'Announcement'

[doping avocate]

Re: To talk,in public?

God forbid you fellas talk politics ...

http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/tfn/di ... hread=5532

[Asterix]

Re: To talk,in public?

<<America does this, forcing "Free Trade" agreement down weaker countries throats.>>

That's why the US has a big trade deficit, right?
http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/ustrade.html

<<Collecting royalties?>>

Yes, you obviously didn't grasp my previous message.

[doping avocate]

Re: To talk,in public?

><<America does this, forcing "Free Trade" agreement down weaker countries
>throats.>>

That's why the US has a big trade deficit,
>right?
http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/ustrade.html

<<Collecting
>royalties?>>

Yes, you obviously didn't grasp my previous message.


You have no grasp of reality. The Trade deficit exist because American companies are greedy. Fire American employees, and out source the jobs to Asia.

[Asterix]

Re: To talk,in public?

<<You have no grasp of reality.>>

Quite likely. It has been mentioned to me before on occasion. I'm open to someone with an economics background showing where I'm wrong.

<<The Trade deficit exist because American companies are greedy. Fire American employees, and out source the jobs to Asia.>>

So given that, how do you justify your earlier position of the US "forcing "Free Trade" agreement down weaker countries throats"?

If the US government is so big, mean and nasty, brutalizing poor, defenseless countries, why are they then ensuring thousands of US jobs are being sent their way?

"Ha! We are big and strong! We are the US of A! Take our lopsided trade agreement, whether you like it or not. Oh, and here, have some more jobs and money while we're at it. That will really crush you now!"

[doping avocate]

Re: To talk,in public?

><<You have no grasp of reality.>>

Quite likely. It has been mentioned to me
>before on occasion. I'm open to someone with an economics background showing
>where I'm wrong.

<<The Trade deficit exist because American companies are
>greedy. Fire American employees, and out source the jobs to Asia.>>

So given
>that, how do you justify your earlier position of the US "forcing "Free
>Trade" agreement down weaker countries throats"?

If the US government is
>so big, mean and nasty, brutalizing poor, defenseless countries, why are they
>then ensuring thousands of US jobs are being sent their way?

"Ha! We are
>big and strong! We are the US of A! Take our lopsided trade agreement,
>whether you like it or not. Oh, and here, have some more jobs and money while
>we're at it. That will really crush you now!"


I'm sure the thousands of Americans who lost there jobs due to out sourcing are relived " America is ensuring jobs over seas". I hate to break it to you , these employees would prefer that Americans were more loyal to "American Made" products and jobs be kept in America. Free trade has not worked for the American manufacturer. Your dead wrong on this one , the PROUD American Olympic team walked into the 2000 Assie stadium with USA on the front , and made in China labels on the back.

[Asterix]

Re: To talk,in public?

<<I'm sure the thousands of Americans who lost there jobs due to out sourcing are relived " America is ensuring jobs over seas". I hate to break it to you , these employees would prefer that Americans were more loyal to "American Made" products and jobs be kept in America. Free trade has not worked for the American manufacturer. Your dead wrong on this one , the PROUD American Olympic team walked into the 2000 Assie stadium with USA on the front , and made in China labels on the back.>>

But this is what I don't get. You obviously have a beef with the US government. First you claim they are evil because they force debilitating free trade agreements on weak countries.

But then you make the case that US companies are ditching USAnian employees to move those jobs (and tons of money and other goodies) overseas, presumably to those same weak countries who they screwed in the first place with the free trade agreements.

I really fail to see how any government, evil or otherwise, can hope to maintain public support and get re-elected if they piss-off all the people getting laid-off, so surely they would use their dark powers to not implement free trade agreements that make it easy to ship capital and jobs overseas.

I don't know which side of the arguement is right, but I believe you've let your rage at the US government cloud your ability to differentiate between two different points of view.

[tafnut]

Re: To talk,in public?

well, at least this is correctly situated in the 'Dope' board, so we got that going for us.

[Mel]

Re: To talk,in public?

"how is it that da is still here?"

because da is a read herring.

[Jefferson Buffalo]

Re: To talk,in public?

But he's obviously not a well-read herring.

[MJD]

Re: To talk,in public?

>But he's obviously not a well-read herring.


Look at gh's post about the subscriber. I would guess that is who he is referring to. My other guess is that da=coach=yoogan and what is really embarassing is the guy is probably a canuck.

[Mel]

Re: To talk,in public?

"what is really embarassing is the guy is probably a canuck."

MJD he may be one of 31 million people, is Courtney Love any reason for Americans to feel collective guilt? Well, maybe....

[RMc]

Re: To talk,in public?

>"what is really embarassing is the guy is probably a canuck."

MJD he may
>be one of 31 million people, is Courtney Love any reason for Americans to feel
>collective guilt? Well, maybe....

Canadians have a sufficent sense of self propriety to be embarrassed by such behavior. We Americans enjoy being recognized as world-class boors. Witness our President...

[MJD]

Re: To talk,in public?

Canadians have a sufficent sense
>of self propriety to be embarrassed by such behavior. We Americans enjoy being
>recognized as world-class boors. Witness our President...

First of all it's "behaviour". Secondly, this is where I always have to jump in. The reason there is a guideline about politics is that not everyone agrees with that statement but it's usually made as if it is a self evident truth. I constantly have to remind people of that and I come from a country where only about 3 of us would vote for GWB-very close to half of your country will. We have an election going on up here btw and everybody is running to the left of Ralph Nader.

[ycn]

Re: To talk,in public?

Correction: Canadians spell the word like the British as "behaviour". Americans spell it "behavior".

We also don't have umlauts or accents or whatnot in our alphabet, which consists of 26 uppercase and 26 lowercase characters.

It is the pressure of the internationalist minority that insists on adding characters to the English language. As of right now, I think the "internationalist" English alphabet may contain more characters than any other Latin-based language in the world.

[tafnut]

Re: To talk,in public?

OK - trivia question - I just learned this last summer - WHY do we spell it color, honor, etc.?