A guest column, from Michelle Galanter Applebaum, Lecturer-Economics and Business, Lake Forest College, Lake Forest, IL... The Wall Street Journal says it "speaks for free markets and free people [and] . . .for free trade," but betrays those very principles by attacking every person or entity which dares to speak out against China's blatant intervention in free markets and trade as in the paper’s September 15, 2010 editorial, "Obama's Outsourced Trade Policy."  While the Journal does explicitly acknowledge that China "does offer a lot of support to its green-tech industry," which "probably runs afoul of its WTO obligations," nevertheless the paper continues to bash the administration and anyone else who tries to do something about this. By attacking the green-energy complaint we believe that the Journal continues to work hard to force-feed the notion that trade enforcement is simply union-pandering. By doing so the paper is trying to politicize an economic issue that threatens the very heart of the domestic economy's attempts to restore some semblance of normal growth. It’s inconceivable to us that the Wall Street Journal can continue to claim to be an advocate of free markets and free people and free trade while supporting China's blatantly mercantilist policies by attacking every individual or entity which protests against them as "protectionist."  Rather than continuing to follow the simplistic approach of labeling anyone seeking a level playing field as a protectionist, the Journal should be re-examining the difference between free trade and the predatory mercantile beggar-thy-neighbor economic warfare that's been a big part of the fuel firing the Chinese economic miracle. Even the normally ever-so-diplomatic and behind-closed-doors Japanese, were quoted in the WSJ  last week saying "foreign companies have faced problems in China that are unthinkable in a normal business environment." This is NOT about politics, this is about our economic future.