Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (211962)	7/13/2007 3:41:18 PM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793990

The difference was nicely defined in a couple of posts, so it would seem you believe that the distinction, regardless of the given definition and its apparent logic, isn't a valid one for you. I am curious why not He says, for example, that he is for open and free trade. And yet he is opposed to the very vehicle that makes the modern global system of trade possible. The multilateral trade and finance treaties that he would argue are unconstitutional and undesirable are the rules that make modern global trade uniform, predictable, and dependable. In other words, he likes the result, but not the means to get there. He would propose removing the U.S. from all these treaty obligations, like the WTO, and that is as clearly isolationist as you can get.