ShareThis Page
Saturday essay: Perot’s disgrace |

Saturday essay: Perot’s disgrace

| Saturday, November 18, 2006 12:00 a.m

H. Ross Perot’s information technology company, Perot Systems Corp., is a new contributor to the “giant sucking sound” drawing U.S. jobs into Mexico.

Mr. Perot coined that well-known phrase, which resonates more strongly today because the “giant sucking sound” is he.

Some call this “irony” in light of Perot’s excoriation of the North American Free Trade Agreement as a thief of U.S. jobs. This newspaper endorsed him in 1992 for president, largely because he opposed NAFTA. As a blueprint for free trade, NAFTA builds a fancy facade without a foundation.

Perot’s company is establishing an operation in Guadalajara, “the Silicon Valley of Mexico,” where it plans to hire 270 Mexicans who work cheaper than U.S. engineers.

A company spokesman says the low wages aren’t the only factor; the move fits into the company’s strategic vision for a place where there is room to grow.

Perhaps the “Silicon Valley of the United States” and our nation’s other technology centers are all filled up.

The question is whether Perot was wrong then or is wrong now.

Perot is today chairman emeritus of the company run by his son. But he hardly is out of the picture.

When it came to standing for his principles, Perot sat down and looked the other way.

He’s wrong now. And it’s a disgrace of opportunism.

— Gery Steighner

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.