Reviewing the GOP loss in the NY-26 special election, Chris Chicola over at NRO’s The Corner notes that the fake “TEA Party” candidate managed to siphon votes away from the GOP by campaigning against things like NAFTA – Chicola writes:
…One of Jane Corwin’s many problems was that she did not articulate a strong free-market message to voters that might have blunted the false scare tactics of Jack Davis. Corwin failed to convey a clear response to Davis’s position that protectionism and tariffs on China would protect American jobs. In fact, tariffs on Chinese goods are nothing more than a sales tax for upstate New York. Tariffs of any kind kill American jobs, and hurt our economy. Support for free trade is the principled position that’s supported by the facts, and yet the Corwin campaign didn’t seem to be in any hurry to stand on principle. In fact, in a TV ad released by the Corwin campaign at the end of March, Corwin said she would “oppose trade agreements that just aren’t fair.”
Maybe Jane Corwin really did believe in protectionism, and that’s her right. Either way, when Republicans nominate candidates who can’t articulate and won’t stand on free-market principles, they will continue to end up with the problems they are faced with in NY-26…
For all their wonderful work, it is this sort of thing coming from our more libertarian friends which makes me grind my teeth in frustration. Its all well and good to be on and on about the benefits of free trade but the fact of the matter is that there is not a bit of free trade anywhere in the world. There never has been, never will be. Each nation seeks to take whatever advantage it can. The only nation which doesn’t fully engage in this is the United States. Take, for instance, China: what does “free trade” with China mean? Well, it means that low-quality goods made by slave labor can easily enter in to the United States to crowd out higher quality goods made not only by free Americans, but by free people around the world. Additionally, it means that any American company which can offer superior bribes to Chinese government officials can open up a sweat shop in China (there is no business done in China which does not include bribery – it is as deeply ingrained in Chinese business as it is in Russian; they call it “gift giving” and “entertainment” in China…but it is just bribes to lubricate the wheels of commerce…and whomever does it best, gets the most).
In a pure world, free trade would be the way to go – if everyone out there was playing by the same rules (no bribes, no special tax or regulatory deals, may the best business win) then having no barriers to international commerce would be in our best interest. As it is not a pure world – indeed, it is a Fallen world – then a bit of prudence in trade matters is required. We can’t just allow everyone to come in to our market in service to a theory about free trade – nor can we afford to have big trading deals with all nations; some nations are enemies actual or potential and opening our market to them merely strengthens those who may wish us harm. Trade should be as free as possible – government can never decide economic matters because government has not the competence to do so…but in between the absurdities of “free trade” and “protectionism” there is a path where wise people can tread with safety. Access to the American market for foreign nations must be in relation to America’s economic and strategic needs – understanding that our economy must be strong and our national security fully protected.
In addition to the economic and foreign policy implications of trade, there is also the purely political aspect to be understood. We lost in NY-26 because a fake TEA Party candidate managed to appeal to that constituency which is not mush-mind liberal, but also not rock-ribbed GOP. There is a large – and, I believe, growing – constituency out there which is tired of America playing the sucker in world affairs. These are the people who don’t like us pouring out billions in foreign aid when our own schools are failing. Who have no problem with using the American military to crush our enemies, but have no desire for nation-building. Who are disgusted that American military and foreign policy has to be crafted in relation to the UN, or Europe, or any other foreign power or group. These are patriotic, hard working Americans who don’t go on welfare, don’t look for a disability dodge, who serve in our military and form one of the strongest supports for small, constitutional government. And they are not about to pull the GOP lever just because – they have to be given a reason to. And in NY-26 when the GOPer weakly answered the charges against NAFTA by saying she wouldn’t support agreements that aren’t fair, it wasn’t enough to swing those voters back to the GOP. What was needed was someone with a bit of Donald Trump in them to say, “you’re not going to F-ing do that!”.
If you want the support of all the people who will fight like mad for the United States of America, then you’d better show yourself willing to fight like mad for the United States of America. If you don’t – if we GOPers don’t – then some of the fighters for America will opt for a third party even if they know it means a Democrat wins…or they’ll just stay home on election day. What all this shows is that if we want to win in 2012, we’d better get our heads out of the clouds (or out of our nether regions, in some cases) and start to lay out a fighting campaign – in Can’s magnificent phrasing, we’d better become the Defending Fathers of the United States of America.
Do we want to win in 2012? Then we’d better come up with a better response to protectionism than “free trade is great”…because all some will hear is “10% unemployment and you can’t even find a pair of shoes made in the USA is great”; and those who translate it that way may well make the difference between Obama going home in 2013, or being sworn in for a second term.
Blogs For Victory 