SHAFTA?

Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Last night, at Acton’s 15 Year Dinner in Grand Rapids, former president of El Salvador Francisco Flores gave a reason for his county’s great economic success: it stopped blaming others. Compare this with another statement yesterday by another politician, Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm. In a bid to the federal government to help the ailing Michigan manufacturing industry, she said (among other things) that “a crisis is upon us and the Federal Government needs to step up and do its share” presumably because “NAFTA and CAFTA have given Michigan the shafta.”

Now, I may be a sucker for semi-witty wordplay, but the reason I bring this up is simply to point out the following: one politician, whose state was once in a financial ruin Michiganders cannot imagine, pulled his country to increased prosperity with a “don’t blame others; take responsibility for yourself” mentality (to read another speech he gave along these lines, click here); another politician, whose state is on the economic slide, blames the policies of the federal government for it and then demands that the same federal government fix the problem. The irony that these two politicians made these two statements on the same day in Michigan evokes in me--well, lafta.
Bookmark SHAFTA?  at del.icio.us Digg SHAFTA? Bloglines SHAFTA? Technorati SHAFTA? Bookmark SHAFTA?  at YahooMyWeb Bookmark SHAFTA?  at Furl.net Bookmark SHAFTA?  at reddit.com Bookmark SHAFTA?  with wists Bookmark using any bookmark manager!

Trackbacks

  1. Witty Wordplay... but little else

    In other words, what Michigan gets from the Granholm Administration. Over at the Acton PowerBlog, Dave Phelps sees Granholm's wordplay and raises her. Touché...

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

  1. marc says:

    Excellent wordplay, Mr. Phelps. With regard to Granholm, well, let’s just say she’s not known for making intelligent discourse a hallmark of her administration to begin with.

  2. Jordan says:

    Marc,
    Since when was politics ever about “intelligent discourse”?

    As Lord Acton wrote, “All partisanship depends on concealment. Mere strong language and special pleading take in nobody.”

  3. marc says:

    Good point, but one can dream...

  4. Josh the Michigander says:

    Hmm. Did any government above Ecuador’s have full control over Ecuador’s imports and exports (as the Federal government has with its power to regulate interstate commerce)? Did any government above Ecuador’s impose costs on the Ecuadorian government (as the Federal government is doing with the No Child Left Behind Act and the Real ID Act)?

    If we’re going to talk responsibility, then maybe the Federal government should start funding its own mandates, and maybe it should think about the economic effects its trade agreements will have on its citizens before it implements them. Just a thought.


Add Comment


Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.