Medved goes nuclear on “North American Union” conspiracy theorists
posted at 2:04 pm on December 28, 2006 by Allahpundit
Not a suitcase nuke, either. We’re talking Tsar Bomba:
This paranoid and groundless frenzy has been fomented and promoted by a shameless collection of lunatics and losers; crooks, cranks, demagogues and opportunists, who claim the existence of a top secret master plan to join the U.S., Canada and Mexico in one big super-state and to replace the good old Yankee dollar with a worthless new currency called “The Amero.” Another delusion usually associated with these fears involves the construction of a “Monster Highway” some sixteen lanes wide through Texas and the Great Plains, connecting the two nations on either side of the border for some nefarious but never-explained purpose…
The problem with the demagogues and exploiters is that they make it more difficult – vastly more difficult – for decent people to face the real problems involving our border with Mexico (which clearly, undeniably needs better security and more protection) and to correct the altogether unacceptable outrage of more than 12 million illegals who live and work in the United States in open contravention of our immigration laws.
Yes, we need immigration reform, but if substantial elements of the right become fixated on secret plans for “North American Union,” then they will make themselves irrelevant to the national debate framing and shaping that reform. Paranoia is paralyzing, and leads to powerlessness and marginalization…
Please – take careful note of anyone in politics (even some “reputable” US Congressmen) or media who gives even a moment’s credence to the “dangers” of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or the North American Union, or the Monster Highway. Write down the names of such people, and remember the names. And then when the fraudulent stories have been discredited or simply disappeared (like the brain-dead, laughableY2K scare, or the U.N. National Parks conspiracy, or the concentration camps and black helicopters that were supposed to menace opponents of globalization), or when the tall tales have morphed into some other attempt to paralyze the unsuspecting public with paranoia, please refer once again to the names on your list of fatuous fear-mongers AND TREAT THEM WITH THE DERISION AND CONTEMPT AND DISREGARD THEY SO RICHLY DESERVE.
U.S. Congressmen, eh? Whatever could he mean?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I knew there was a reason I liked Medved.
.
GT on December 28, 2006 at 2:07 PM
Gotta be Kucinich, right? Maurice Hinchey?
Pablo on December 28, 2006 at 2:20 PM
phew!
we can be grateful to the creator of all thinhgs that he at least didn’t go nukular.
jummy on December 28, 2006 at 2:22 PM
Michael Medved says it isn’t so? Oh good, now I can stop paying attention to this issue. Whew!! I feel so much better. But, can someone tell me why we have “working-groups” harmonizing our laws with those of Canada and Messico? Or, are these just the laws dealing with Avian flu? Medved has lost it. Maybe he has a stake in that super-highway.
CitizenJim on December 28, 2006 at 2:25 PM
I hope continued assults like this don’t discourage these conspiracy theorists. They’re just so much fun in that crazy-uncle-on-an-LSD-flashback kinda way. I’ll never forget the smiles and laughter they provided over the last few months. My 2007 just won’t be as much fun if they’re not around.
JaHerer22 on December 28, 2006 at 2:26 PM
Eh. Right after the 2004 election, when Bush announced his guest worker program, any one who dared to questioned it was called the same names by Medved.
EF on December 28, 2006 at 2:27 PM
IMO, he’s hitting and missing it in this article. He misses it on the “Monster Highway”. It’s planned and it’s real. It’s called the Trans Texas Corridor, heavily promoted by Texas Gov. Rick “The Hair” Perry. Check out the problems with it at http://www.corridorwatch.org.
The governor would rather you see the white-washed version of this beast at http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/.
Take your pick…
ricer1 on December 28, 2006 at 2:28 PM
Folks we might as well accept the fact that the Conspiracy theories are going to get more and more “out there” as time goes on. South park had it right when the said 25% of Americans are retarded. (and another 25% are easily influenced… I added that)that leaves us with about 50% of the poputation ready to believe whatever hairbrained conspiracy some attention whore is selling.
oy vey!
Its not even worth explaining why the whole “Amero” thing will never happen.
DarianCounts on December 28, 2006 at 2:35 PM
I think when an open borders character like Medved tries to bring the focus on this stuff, its purpose is to draw attention away from the real issue.
That’s some pretty sophistry but it means he wants amnesty for the illegals quickly so that they are no longer in “open contravention of our immigration laws”. Unless he’s changed his position 180 degrees since I last tuned in to his show 2 years ago, which I doubt.
Perchant on December 28, 2006 at 2:35 PM
well said.
One Angry Christian on December 28, 2006 at 2:36 PM
It wasn’t too long ago that people in Europe were worried about the sovereignty of their nations being taken away by something being planned at the time called the European Union, and having their currency turned into something called the euro. They were dismissed as crackpots; seems the crackpots were onto something anyway.
Not that I’m much of a conspiracy theorist myself, but with all that’s going on in the immigration situation, and all of the misinformation that is being presented on both sides, it would seem to me to be dangerous to quickly and flippantly disregard anything that’s mentioned on such matters simply because you don’t agree with it.
Sure, there’s a lot of nuts out there who can be quickly and easily dismissed. But again, to take the particulars and fine points of such an issue and reduce what’s legitimate and what’s conspiracy theory to such a simplistic thought process as you don’t agree with what the guy’s saying, or you just don’t like the guy,isn’t exactly taking a step towards a serious and intelligent debate.
Would anyone have believed 20 years ago, after the Congress supposedly took care of this issue, that we would be having such conversations and be in the situation we’re in today?
tomk59 on December 28, 2006 at 2:38 PM
I would give you PROOF that there is a North American Union planned, but I can hear the black helicopters over my house right now.
You didn’t see me here.
Carin on December 28, 2006 at 2:39 PM
He has in the sense that he and others have realized that condescendingly shoving open borders down people’s throats won’t work. He’s still very much open borders though he pretends not to be.
EF on December 28, 2006 at 2:41 PM
I have given Medved the “DERISION AND CONTEMPT AND DISREGARD” he “SO RICHLY DESERVES” for many years now.
Jose Chupacabra on December 28, 2006 at 2:41 PM
What? I thought Canada and Mexico were already part of the US. You know…the American Northern Nature Preserve and the American Southern Vacation District.
*duck*
flipflop on December 28, 2006 at 2:46 PM
You mean this?
Why is it that not a single person can point to even ONE example of something that is factually incorrect when discussing the NIU worries?
When we debunk the 9/11 conspiracy theories … it’s easy. Their facts and evidence are so easily proved to be incorrect or misleading that it’s actually embarrassing. But even on this blog, I’ve yet to see a single person debate the facts, other than to simply claim it’s a delusion.
Medved actually hurts his cause by calling an easily verifiable fact a “delusion.” Does Medved actually believe that active, sitting Congressmen know less about what is going on than he does?
Does Medved offer any evidence at all of his claim? Does he give us any reason for believing him, other than … just because?
I believe his the worst part of his tirade is this:
Please – take careful note of anyone in politics (even some “reputable” US Congressmen) or media who gives even a moment’s credence to the “dangers” of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or the North American Union, or the Monster Highway. Write down the names of such people, and remember the names.
So basically … if anyone from the government should come out and admit it’s true, then immediately write down their name and blacklist them as a nutjob? Even “reputable” US Congressmen?
What’s sad is how many people just accept Medved as a “reputable source.” He’s obviously been sitting in on all government meetings and he’s researched it all out. I’m sure he’s even sat down with George Bush, or Carl Rove, or Dick Cheney and asked him these questions. He must have, right? Of course.
Has Medved spoken to a single person in any capacity to have any first hand knowledge?
But hey! Thank God we have him around to let us all know that everything is going to be fine.
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 2:52 PM
The problem with the demagogues and exploiters is that they make it more difficult – vastly more difficult – for decent people to face the real problems involving our border with Mexico
The problem with Medved is that he is a typical Banana Republican who supports a
guest workerpermanent resident program and an amnesty so strongly that even though he may be right about the cranks on the other side, it buys him no credibility with people who aren’t merely feigning concern with the potential disaster illegal immigration poses for our society.tommy1 on December 28, 2006 at 2:58 PM
What about the neocon conspiracists, e.g. Medved, promoting WMDs as a reason to occupy a country and NOT take their oil? Isn’t this more harmful than vigilance about Mexican trucks on our new superhighways and a strong desire by those in power to open the borders regardless of the consequences?
As a kook who never trusted big government, I have to wonder why Senator Lugar introduced S.853, the North American Cooperative Security Act, for taxpayer-funded security of Mexico’s Southern border! Fortunately, it died with the last Congress.
The problem with this “conspiracy” is that the CFR actually put it to paper and world events seem to be heading in that direction. Is it planned? I don’t give a damn, but don’t like the implications around pieces of the North American Union that seem to be implemented left and right.
Valiant on December 28, 2006 at 3:03 PM
I’m not a big believer that we’re headed toward the “Amero.” The name “Amero” was a name given to a concept. There is no reason to believe we’re going to actually use the name, but the idea of merging our currency into one is again easily verifiable and well documented.
There are also many examples of why it WOULD happen, including the European Union and recently Iran moving to the Euro. To ignore history is to be blind.
You write …
Its not even worth explaining why the whole “Amero” thing will never happen.
Trust me. It’s worth it. But I doubt you have anything to actually write. I’d love for you to prove me wrong and give us all some really solid reason why our government would never move to a common currency shared by Mexico and Canada. And using the fact that Mexico’s economy is too far below ours is not an accurate argument, being that our current leaders have publicly acknowledged moves to dump major money into Mexico in an attempt to bring their economy up to our level.
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 3:07 PM
I am utterly amazed at the people so eager to label the whole thing a conspiracy theory. There are so many things at play here that are VERY REAL, labeling it all a conspiracy and dismissing it, makes the people doing so look very foolish and or biased.
RE The Amero:
Did anyone happen to see the news today on the rise of The Euro and the corresponding decline of The Dollar? How about the UAE announcement that that they would be diversifying their reserves to Euro’s. How about Venezuela’s doing the same thing. You know Iran has already asked for Petro Dollars to be Petro Euros. What happens to the dollar when OPEC does the same?
What do you think will happen down the road if all of these things aggregate? Can you not see our Government telling us that to remain viable we have to follow the lead of the EU. That it might be the only way to stay competitive.
How can anyone seriously claim that the Amero is absurd in light of the above?
If the Amero is a possibility, and a Guest Worker Program with amnesty for all, plus open borders is almost a reality, how is that not a North American Union by default? Under the weight of just those two issues, how long would it take for the rest of the stuff to come on line?
Calling the whole thing a conspiracy is like calling anti illegal immigrationists, racists. It is not accurate, and prevents anything meaningful from being discussed and more importantly, getting done.
America1st on December 28, 2006 at 3:09 PM
What is it with so many of our notable Jewish conservatives supporting de facto open borders? David Horowitz, and a few of the folks over at VDARE, seem to be about the only significant Jewish conservatives that understand the problem. Are most of the rest of our Jewish conservatives suffering from a case of Tamar Jacoby Syndrome? Are they all as misty-eyed about the Hispanic invasion of our borders as Jacoby is? Can they see beyond their own Ellis Island nostalgia and look squarely at the multi-generational ramifications of Hispanic immigration?
I’m really disappointed in the way that both Jewish liberals and neo-cons seem to be so patently dishonest when it comes to the immigration issue. What in the world is going on?
tommy1 on December 28, 2006 at 3:13 PM
I’ve been researching this in all my free time and have not been able to disprove the “conspiracy” claims, but I’m still a big skeptic about the whole thing. I’d like to have each “conspiracy” debunked, in the same way the 9/11 conspiracies have been, just to settle my retarded, delusional, scientific mind. Until then, the jury’s out and lobbing names just weakens the premise.
NTWR on December 28, 2006 at 3:18 PM
Tommy, Jewish ain’t got nothing to do with it. Elitism is the problem.
Valiant on December 28, 2006 at 3:20 PM
I would love to see just once a person that calls the NAU a conspiracy to address the evidence, just one time. JUST ONCE!!
You post this Allah for it’s value in generating comments but if you have an opinion share it, throw in a few facts and a little evidence that the NAU is preposterous. Please?
Theworldisnotenough on December 28, 2006 at 3:23 PM
Excellent post.
I would also like to add how ridiculous I find these people who seem to believe there are NEVER any conspiracies. To them … a belief in ONE conspiracy is a belief in ALL, making the believer a certifiable whack job.
I can’t remember the last “conspiracy” that I believed in, other than a few fixed sporting events. But conspiracies DO happen. While there are many completely moronic theories such as 9/11, there are also those which are quite obvious.
It’s also interesting to not how many of these people who label us as nutjobs and conspiracy theorists had no trouble believing that Clinton was conspiring with the Chinese, or that Kennedy conspired with the Russians.
I believe it was Bryan who posted the story on Kennedy and Russia. Is Bryan a nutjob conspiracy theorist? Are all of those who ripped Kennedy “nutjobs?”
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 3:24 PM
Heh.
(Whoa, easy Gregor! I’m not messing with you and I know absolutely nothing about any of this. It was just too Goode to pass up… Doh!)
Jaibones on December 28, 2006 at 3:24 PM
http://www.judicialwatch.org/5979.shtml
Sep 26, 2006 Contact: Press Office
202-646-5188
Newly Uncovered Commerce Department Documents Detail “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America”
U.S. Government Working Groups & Business Leaders Seek to “Harmonize” Regulations with Canada and Mexico
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch, the public interest organization that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law, today released records obtained under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) from the International Trade Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce concerning the “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.”
On March 23, 2005, heads of government Vincente Fox, George W. Bush, and Paul Martin launched the North American partnership at a meeting in Waco, Texas, with the expressed goal of “a safer, more prosperous North America.” According to the documents, the partnership’s “working groups” include government and business leaders from the United States, Mexico and Canada, who are addressing a variety of topics, including movement of goods between countries, traveler security, energy, environment and health. Proponents of the partnership claim its purpose is to increase security and prosperity for all three nations through enhanced cooperation. Critics maintain the partnership will sacrifice U.S. sovereignty by establishing a “North American Union,” with open borders and a common currency.
The Commerce Department also provided substantial documentation concerning the North American Competitiveness Council. The council consists of 30 members, 10 each from the United States, Mexico and Canada. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Council of the Americas “agreed to jointly lead the U.S. Secretariat.” Documents describing the North American Competitiveness Council’s launch, its recommendations, and meeting minutes were also uncovered by Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, which was filed on August 15, 2006.
The council’s recommendations to the North American “partnership” include advice on how to handle an international disease outbreak: “It is also essential that throughout a pandemic all borders and major roads remain open…” With respect to border enforcement, the council recommends that, “A reasonable grace period should be established at border crossings, during which time people lacking documents are educated about their options and allowed to pass.” The council also makes recommendations on energy issues such as the “…enhanced integration of the Mexican [electricity] grid with that of the United States.”
“Many Americans are interested in where this North American partnership process is going,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Given all that is at stake, the federal government has a responsibility to make sure this process is transparent and open to public scrutiny — so the release of these documents is an important step forward.”
The newly released documents include contact lists, meeting agenda and minutes, recommendations, fact sheets, speakers’ quotes, action items, and procedural guidelines. The records are available on the Judicial Watch Internet site: http://www.JudicialWatch.org.
Connie on December 28, 2006 at 3:26 PM
Canadian patriots are not amused by these events and have provided a timeline.
Valiant on December 28, 2006 at 3:26 PM
This is the original CFR report that sparked off much of the current controversy. Read it for yourself, think about it, and decide what it means and how much significance we should be attaching to a proposal coming from the CFR.
tommy1 on December 28, 2006 at 3:34 PM
America1st wrote:
Open borders are almost a reality? Somehow I missed that angle when reading things like this.
Maybe the Amero is a possibility, but I don’t think the slippery slope argument about the “rest of the stuff” coming on line is very likely. Yes, I do know what happened in Europe. We’re different.
MamaAJ on December 28, 2006 at 3:56 PM
When is Hotair going to deal with the available evidence honestly?
Bush would never conspire to make our border just a line on a map would he?
Theworldisnotenough on December 28, 2006 at 3:58 PM
Medved can pack sand. There’s several websites cited in the comments here and elsewhere that have pointed out why it’s at least a possibility. I guess we’re just to be called names because we believe it’s a possibility. I’ve yet to see any substantial evidence that this ‘North American Union’ idea is completely out of the question, even though it’s pretty much a reality already because we effectively have no border with Mexico.
PRCalDude on December 28, 2006 at 4:06 PM
Um how long do you think the National Guard will be on the border? Hmm? Just long enough to get “comprehensive” immigration reform done? Yeah I was thinking the same thing.
The Amero is more than a posibility. It is likely. How do you propose mulitnational companies with multinational assets make international sales when the buyer wants to trade in Euros? Um a 4th curency that combines the dollar Canadian dollar and the pathetic peso. Yes I’d say a 4th currency is likely.
Theworldisnotenough on December 28, 2006 at 4:09 PM
JaHerer22 on December 28, 2006 at 2:26 PM
You’d have so much more credibility if you’d say/write something like “most all conspiracy theories are crazy”. But I could almost bet that you watched and at least in part believed Michael Moore’s craziness, to name just one from your side.
Also, I’ve been smiling since Nov. of 1980. No stopping it in sight. Your ilk contribute greatly to my amusement.
Entelechy on December 28, 2006 at 4:10 PM
Does this now mean I don’t get my own offramp? But it was promised! I invested in the first “Bueno Moose Taco” shop sponsored by Molson!
CBarker on December 28, 2006 at 4:12 PM
“What is it with so many of our notable Jewish conservatives supporting de facto open borders?”
It’s the JOOOOOOZ!
rightwingprof on December 28, 2006 at 4:24 PM
Why private funding for a road that clearly would be in the purview of Congress? I don’t get it. Let Congress buy the land from the states, build the road, and then we won’t be paying tolls to use it.
Woody
Look at your rights and freedoms as what would be required to survive and be free as if there were no government. Governments come and go, but your rights live on. If you wish to survive government, you must protect with jealous resolve all the powers that come with your rights – especially with the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Without the power of those arms, you will perish with that government – or at its hand.
woodcdi on December 28, 2006 at 4:25 PM
Medved:
How does he know this? Amazing! He’s also able to simultaneously read the minds of the entire Bush administration.
Is there a “record” of this somewhere?
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 4:26 PM
WOW! Shocking. Imagine this.
Say it aint so! Not the UAE getting into the act too?
Anyone who would think the U.S. would switch to a common currency is obviously brain dead. Errrr
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 4:38 PM
Check, please!
John from WuzzaDem on December 28, 2006 at 4:39 PM
“Another delusion usually associated with these fears involves the construction of a “Monster Highway” some sixteen lanes wide through Texas and the Great Plains, connecting the two nations on either side of the border for some nefarious but never-explained purpose…”
It’s certainly no illusion.
http://www.nascocorridor.com/
On top of that, this guy has some balls accusing people of being “lunatics” for questioning the complete inaction of the government in stopping the flow of illegals into this country.
If these clowns in government don’t realize that their lack of action will inevitably lead to Americans taking matters into their own hands, then they’re the lunatics.
darwin on December 28, 2006 at 4:41 PM
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
I am NOT going to interject myself in this one.
georgej on December 28, 2006 at 4:48 PM
Most all conspiracy theories are crazy. Michael Moore is fat and annoying and distorts the facts to make his point. I appreciate where his heart is but he is a moron and does more harm than good by giving conservatives easy fodder to rip apart.
Does that clear things up a little for you? I hope so.
JaHerer22 on December 28, 2006 at 4:49 PM
JaHerer22, no need to clear things up for me. These items are mostly clear in my sometimes confused head. If they’re not clear at first, usually research and facts solve them…
If you weren’t sarcastic, you made my day. If you were, that’s your right too :) Regards,
Entelechy on December 28, 2006 at 4:53 PM
“Elitism is the problem.”
No, populism is the problem. It always has been.
When Mexicans start flying planes into buildings, setting off bombs, and declare their intention to spread jihad, then I’ll reassess my priorities. Sorry, I’m not drinking the Pat Buchanan “evil brown horde” kool-aid.
rightwingprof on December 28, 2006 at 5:00 PM
rightwingprof,
I’m concerned about the invasion from the south for the following reason:
A recent interim report from the House Committee on Homeland Security, A Line in the Sand: Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border details the criminal activity and violence taking place along the Southwest border and notes that the region has been experiencing “an alarming rise in the level of criminal cartel activity, including drugs and human smuggling…” , and further says, “The border also is the site of violent criminal enterprises. These enterprises are carried out by organized crime syndicates and include the smuggling of drugs, humans, weapons, and cash across the US-Mexico border.”
In addition, I just heard some astounding figures about the number of people killed daily by illegal aliens, not to mention the rapes, child molestings, drug dealing, fatal drunk-driving accidents, etc. This invasion is doing more harm to our country IMO than the terrorists could ever hope to do.
CitizenJim on December 28, 2006 at 5:27 PM
Medved can keep repeating..
It’s only a movie…
It’s only a movie….
But maybe he would be better to spend his time catching up on the facts,
LA is already a suburb of Mexico, as is Chicago,
Phoenix as well,………Boston not far behind with Deval Patrick promising to harbor Illegals instead of dumped over tea.
The American people by a huge majority want the border secured…. It isn’t!(Those who believe Chertoff’s claims of success I have some swampland you might like!)
See you all in ten years and you WILL know Spanish!!!
Mellen on December 28, 2006 at 5:30 PM
Did Buchanan really say that? I mean, you being some kind of professor and all, I guess I should believe you.
I don’t know about “evil” but it’s certainly as much of a brown horde as it was a white horde from the perspective of the Indians when my ancestors came trucking through. They put up a pretty good fight against the white horde.
Perchant on December 28, 2006 at 5:30 PM
More Ecoli anyone???
Mellen on December 28, 2006 at 5:32 PM
MAMAJ “Open borders are almost a reality? Somehow I missed that angle when reading things like this.”
Check the Headlines the day after X mas.
NY Times Article http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/26/washington/26immig.html?_r=1&bl=&ei=5087&en=6869c3908c520a7d&ex=1167368400&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
December 26, 2006
Bipartisan Effort to Draft Immigration Bill
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
WASHINGTON, Dec. 25 — Counting on the support of the new Democratic majority in Congress, Democratic lawmakers and their Republican allies are working on measures that could place millions of illegal immigrants on a more direct path to citizenship than would a bill that the Senate passed in the spring.
The lawmakers are considering abandoning a requirement in the Senate bill that would compel several million illegal immigrants to leave the United States before becoming eligible to apply for citizenship.
The lawmakers are also considering denying financing for 700 miles of fencing along the border with Mexico, a law championed by Republicans that passed with significant Democratic support.
Details of the bill, which would be introduced early next year, are being drafted
America1st on December 28, 2006 at 5:34 PM
I’ll stop worrying about the NAU when our government builds a wall on the border and actually starts enforcing all of our laws against illegal immigration. It’s just that simple.
Buzzy on December 28, 2006 at 5:40 PM
It’s the JOOOOOOZ!
Oh, knock it off and stop being childish or just go hang out with the KosKidz. I mentioned that Jewish conservatives seem to be much more open to pro-immigration measures than non-Jewish conservatives typically are. I didn’t claim that “the Jews” were behind anything. For you to insinuate otherwise is ridiculous.
When Mexicans start flying planes into buildings, setting off bombs, and declare their intention to spread jihad, then I’ll reassess my priorities. Sorry, I’m not drinking the Pat Buchanan “evil brown horde” kool-aid.
Between drunk driving accidents and murders we’ve lost far more people in the last decade than we’ve lost to terrorism, 9/11 included. But hey, those people are largely invisible, so who cares, right?
What I’m not buying is the idea that America will remain a First World country in 2100 with a majority population of people with an abysmal educational track record even four generations into American life (and with few signs of substantial improvement over those four generations). A Third World distribution of skills cannot maintain a First World economy. Landscapers, fast food employees, and meat packers are not going to keep us competitive.
Anyone who believes otherwise is a fool, IMO.
tommy1 on December 28, 2006 at 5:46 PM
A piece of the puzzle?
The rest of the story HERE
News2Use on December 28, 2006 at 5:47 PM
I’m astonished that the people who actually believe that a NAU is upon us are just dismissed as kool-aid drinkers.
The government has shown no interest in protecting US sovereignity. Anyone who disbelieves me should take a trip to LA sometime. You don’t feel like you’re in the US anymore. That’s why it lends more than a little credibility to the NAU argument. If the government is so worried about a lack of workers, they can ban abortion. We’d be 50 million more populous by now.
PRCalDude on December 28, 2006 at 7:31 PM
No need to go as far as LA, unless you’re already on that side of the Mississippi – Ohio is another shining example, state-wise, of how illegals have found a new home. The NBC Special just a couple of nights ago was also rather instructive – NBC apparently can find illegals and those who assist them faster and more accurately than ICE, etc..
The right makes so much of the “fact” that the left uses name calling, etc.. to discredit those they disagree with – apparently the right uses the same tactic, as this article proves.
I have another name to add to describe those who dare ask questions and do the research……..
Concerned Americans!
Way to go! Because I never thought that I’d ever say that I
But it is so – Just for fun, why don’t everyone who has seen these problems (influx, overburdened law enforcement, bi-lingual everything, derpession in local hiring because illegals work cheaper, special laws, etc.) with illegals in their communities post their states here after this post – I wonder how many states out of 50 we could come up with. Here’s a start – Ohio!
Then ask yourself if this facilitation in re the Highway and more is fact or fantasy.
I think that you’ll be surprised by the answers.
Or not.
Emmett J. on December 28, 2006 at 8:07 PM
I seriously doubt that the problem is nearly as bad as the “NAU” scaremongers think… but similarly rightwingprof and his ilk have almost as bad a problem —- an overabundance of certainty that there is NO chance of ANY threat at all.
The RCP article on “scapegoating” he references (original article here) is pretty well written, but just like his response to this post it forgets one VERY important thing. That key issue is that just because one person who is “anti-immigrant” is a lunatic does NOT make ALL people who are “anti-illegal-immigrant” into lunatics as well. It’s just the reverse. He says that lunatics can marginalize people by calling them “open borders advocates”, well he is guilty of the same by lumping all “anti-illegal-immigrant” people into the same class of loons as the “North American Union” scaremongers.
And even IF illegal immigration was NO problem at all, not a threat of any sort (to hospital budgets, to civil society, to job availability, etc etc etc), that STILL would not discount the fact that as soon as the illegals at that meat-packing plant were rounded up and sent home there were literally lines OUT THE DOOR for people applying for the jobs opened up.
If we would make a simultaneous serious effort to get people off welfare and evict illegals the economy AND the federal budget would be GREATLY helped, not hurt as many “illegal immigration apologists” presume. If we get to the point at some point in the future that the available workforce (including the current deadbeat ablebodies on welfare) is less than what the economy could support THEN come talk to me about a guest worker program. But when we have millions of people in this country who are here legally who could fill the jobs currently taken by illegals then the cries of “scapegoat-monger” sound just as stupid to me as some other retards’ cries of “open borders advocate” sound to them.
RH
RobertHuntingdon on December 28, 2006 at 8:24 PM
The federal government, in its unamended design, was planned as if someone intended, in the end, to tile the whole Earth with federated states. That federalism was the thinking man’s multi-culturalism, in contrast to this present, empty pap. The original federal government was the thinking man’s world government, in contrast to this present camp of useless vagrants in New York City. Federalism was even the thinking man’s religious pluralism, in contrast to this present, obtuse secularism.
The many features of the contemporary “federal” order of the United States that make the incorporation of new states into the Union unattractive, to both those inside the Union and those outside it, are alien features it has acquired through the dim insight and low ambition of the thinkers and actors in whose hands the Founders had to leave the United States. The mere stability of the United States, as long as it lasts, is mute testimony to the mediocrity of past and contemporary intellectuals and politicians. It mocks the notion of necessary and permanent progress.
Kralizec on December 28, 2006 at 8:25 PM
Regardless of whether Medved is right about this or not, the people on his side of this debate endanger legitmate immigration reform just as much as he fears Tancredo et al do. Medved consistently downplays the real concerns voiced by opponents of ‘comprehensive immigration reform’.
Some weeks ago, a caller to his show mentioned the obvious national security implications of an unsecure border. Medved responded by saying that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are those who came legally, but let their visas expire; implying that to worry about Islamofacists creeping across the border is silly. This reminds me of the people who claimed that since 9-11 was an attack using jetliners, missile defense was a waste of money. Since most illegals aren’t terrorists, we apparently shouldn’t worry about it.
On his radioshow the other day, he was taking caller nominations for the ‘Golden Turkey’ of 2006 award. One caller nominated him for reliably parroting the ‘jobs Americans won’t do’ line and being proved dead wrong with the recent bust at Swift Meats. Instead of admitting that he was wrong and facing the fact of the negative economic consequences illegal immigration, he changed the subject to whether using the thousands of agents involved with the bust was a wise allocation of resources – given the ratio of number busted to charges brought. In other words, it took too much time and money to enforce the law, so let’s just wish the problem away with amnesty.
He is usually skeptical of government, as most conservatives are. But when it comes to illegal immigration, his faith in government is through the roof. Despite DHSs gross failure and unwillingness to handle its current caseload or enforce the law as it currently stands, he has no doubts that DHS will be able and willing to handle the enormously more complex task of managing the proposed anmesty program.
Medved is a good conservative, but there are a few issues, immigration being one of them, where his normally meticulous intellect just takes a vacation.
wombatty on December 28, 2006 at 8:30 PM
I think we’re once again at the point of taxation without representation. The illegals have representation in the form of corporations and La Raza, etc. The corporations, of course, have plenty of representation. The monied interests have plenty of representation. Your average American does not, which is why we still have this illegal immigration problem.
When we passed prop 187 here in California, I breathed a sigh of relief, which was short-lived. Now we have two parallel societies here in California, with the Mexican rapidly overtaking the American. This is coming soon to a state near you.
Oh well. Time to go home to see if I can do anything about the stolen car and the illegal immigrant that accosted my wife in front of and living in the apartment complex behind mine.
PRCalDude on December 28, 2006 at 8:50 PM
I noticed recently that Medved, whom I used to listen to regularly, has stopped being thoughtful and mostly respectful to callers and to those with whom he disagrees.
He attacked The Constitution Party and its leaders, calling it “The Constipation Party.” I found the whole program highly distasteful. Now he is resorting to name-calling of people who are sincerely concerned about moves to consolidate our economies, security, etc., done in secret committees outside our representative government like was done with the EU. It reminds me of the cries of “Sexist” when we objected to Harriet Meiers or “Racist” when we object to the out-of-control invasion of our country by citizens of another.
I have now stopped listening to Medved. I don’t like it when a radio personality goes ballistic on air. If he can rationally disprove what has been aired about the SPP negotiations, he should do it, but not resort to name-calling.
Margaret McC on December 28, 2006 at 9:00 PM
I thought the Internet was the “Super Highway”
.
Silly me.
seejanemom on December 28, 2006 at 9:00 PM
MICHAEL MEDVED IS A LYING SHILL FOR THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!!! And his association with some wacked out quasi nutbag Jewish groups should be considered before paying attention to him on anything, especially this issue. HERE IS THE LINK. See for yourself. Intestingly enough they just added a new ‘myth’ section that purports to refute some of the “misinformation” being distributed about the North American Partnership. The only thing I can say is BALDERDASH! When you read what these nutbag neocons want it’s all for Mexico’s benefit and very little of it will help the U.S. get rid of their waste which keeps drifting over the border!
Soothsayer on December 28, 2006 at 9:02 PM
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT WOMBATTY! He has been shucking and jiving REAL HARD in a desperate attempt to trivialize any terrorist related concerns in the Immigration issue. In fact, he’s now resorted to just plain lying. He has NO WAY to know how many OTM’S (other than Mexicans) are crossing the border now, but he certainly knows it’s an ALARMING NUMBER and the number of OTM’s from TERROR LIST STATES HAS ONLY BEEN GROWING. Contrary to what this lying shill wants you to believe. George Bush’s feckless leadership on the Immigration issue, not to mention his staggeringly stupid position on the matter, namely, that we need millions of non-english speaking high school droupouts in order to be a successful country. But when you take Bush’s strangeness on the issue into consideration AFTER reading all the stuff from the GOV’TS OWN WEBSITE (SPP.GOV), it all starts to make sense….Now, the quotes below come from a 2004 article, it’s up to you to judge whether you think the situation has gotten BETTER or WORSE since then.
Now if 44,000 OTM’s snuck into the U.S. in 2004, what the hell is this lying piece of feculent waste talking about? He’s been shaky on Immigration ever since the issue first came up and he was openly ridiculing anyone who didn’t share the “oh, let’s give them citizenship” view.
Soothsayer on December 28, 2006 at 9:17 PM
After the initial posts on this thread, I was afraid there were no conservatives left on this site. You all make me proud. It is not only lunatics and losers; crooks, cranks, demagogues and opportunists who think big government should be watched. The Trotskyite neocon shills are the most dangerous of all because they pretend to protect our freedom via massive government.
Valiant on December 28, 2006 at 9:26 PM
Collectively, silly us!
We also used to think that we were the United States of America, not Tres Estados Unidos de Americas!
Again, silly us.
He’s not the only one who is shaky on illegal immigration and the break that it gives buisinesses.
In the final analysis – Who made Who? and Who benefits?
So far, Ohio and California, andy other states? add them to this post here.
Only 48 left.
Emmett J. on December 28, 2006 at 9:32 PM
You “seriously doubt?”
Based on what? Just your gut feeling?
You see? This is the quality of reasoning we get.
Still … not a single person has attempted to offer evidence that any of the facts or information is incorrect.
They simply … “doubt it’s true.”
What an amazing world it would be if life were so simple.
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 10:11 PM
I hope Medved goes out driving and gets sideswiped and almost killed by a guy with a fake Green Card. Just like what happened to me, a good five years ago.
Do us all a favor, Mike, and stop sucking Mexican cock.
mikeomatic on December 28, 2006 at 10:16 PM
I don’t like to wish harm upon others, but I can’t help but imagine the irony of people like “there is no terrorist threat” Michael Moore being blown up in a suicide bombing, or Juan Hernandez being run over by an illegal alien, or Kim Basinger falling victim to a disease which relies on animal testing for a cure, or Cameron Diaz finding out that her daughter had been yanked out of school at age 12 and given an abortion without her knowledge, or San Francisco being attacked by enemy subs (U.S. Subs would actually fit that description).
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 10:29 PM
The Gulf coast has been flooded with illegals since Katrina. New Orleans’ Tulane Univ. did a study six months ago and reported over 30,000 in the New Orleans area alone. Everything here is getting very Latino, from the taco trucks, to signs in Spanish, to the ER wait that was so long my husband and I left when we found out it would be at least another 18 hours – and he was pre-admitted by our family doctor! My daughter and mother were rear-ended by a drunk driver – I have no way of knowing whether he was illegal but he didn’t speak English. All those high-paying “Katrina construction” jobs have evaporated and local contractors have to choose between hiring illegals or charging too much to be competitive. The grocery store I used to shop in started to carry products labeled only in Spanish. I really sympathize with people in the border states; I often feel like an outsider in my own city.
But then, as you pointed out, Emmett, it’s not just border states anymore.
Laura on December 28, 2006 at 10:47 PM
Yeah, I had read where there are bus loads of illegals arriving each day in New Orleans. Construction companies are busing them in for the cheap labor.
This is definitely true, but misleading. If the illegals were not there, then NONE of the construction companies would be able to hire them, and they would be forced to pay normal construction wages for the work. The “competition” would all be forced to pay higher wages in order to actually do the job. This would cause all of the bids to go up, which would in turn cause the government to pay more.
This is of course, the reason our government refuses to enforce it. MONEY! It has nothing to do with the poor innocent Mexican families.
Gregor on December 28, 2006 at 10:55 PM
Violent home invasion in Webster,MA today…ah yes again, 4 Hispanic men…..oops the media reported it!! Someone is gonna get fired for that!!!
Mellen on December 28, 2006 at 11:09 PM
Laura,
didn’t you read the story about the new baby boom thanks to Katrina??? Hispanic baby boom of brand new American citizens courtesy of imported workers in New orleans…putting the hospitals out of business!
Mellen on December 28, 2006 at 11:11 PM
Just doing a job Americans don’t want to do………..
Search On For Home Invaders
Man Injured In Home Invasion
POSTED: 12:19 pm EST December 28, 2006
UPDATED: 12:49 pm EST December 28, 2006
Email This Story | Print This Story
Sign Up for Breaking News Alerts
WEBSTER, Mass. — Webster police investigated an overnight home invasion that left an Upland Avenue man injured after four intruders broke in and threatened the homeowner and his family.
NewsCenter 5′s Steve Lacy reported that the unidentified victim lives at 38 Upland Ave. with his wife and two children, both under the age of 10.
Officials said when the family arrived home about 11 p.m. Wednesday night, four armed Hispanic men were waiting for the homeowner. They blocked his car in the driveway, barged into the home and tied up the man and his wife.
“(The intruders) put a bag over his head, escorted him into the house, brought him and his wife into the basement, tied them up, and proceeded to torture the male with a hot instrument,” said Webster Police Sgt. William Keefe.
Police said the couple’s two children were sleeping upstairs during the incident. They were not hurt.
Police said the victim finally told the intruders where the family kept cash and jewelry. After the intruders left, the woman was able to free herself and ran to a neighbor’s house for help.
“Somebody tried to rob her and tie her up,” the neighbor, Paul, told a 911 dispatcher.
“OK. We’ll send someone down, thank you. Are they there now Paul, do you know?” the dispatcher asked.
“No, they just left. They attacked her husband,” the neighbor said.
“Stay on the line with me, Paul,” the dispatcher said.
By the time police arrived, the intruders had fled the scene, but officials said the incident was not a random attack.
“The family is, I believe, of Columbian descent, and all of the four suspects, they informed us, were Hispanic. So that leads us to think it might have been a single incident and that they knew the people,” Keefe said.No arrests have been made. Police were searching for four Hispanic males who left the house in a small white sedan with chrome wheels.
The victim was treated and released from the hospital.
Copyright 2006 by TheBostonChannel.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Weymouth, MA becoming a haven for Brazilians as is Framingham,MA and with Deval Patrick putting out the welcome mat get ready for an influx from Georgia and other states that are cracking down on the lawbreakers!!
Overcome Workplace Boredom
You can only play online games for so long. Find out how to overcome boredom while biding time at your desk.More
Looking For A Date? Try Online Dating
Been pondering taking the plunge into online dating? All it takes is registering with an e-mail address and completing a
Mellen on December 28, 2006 at 11:18 PM
I’m not a big believer in any NAU “conspiracy”, and I don’t think a superhighway equates to a loss of national sovereignty, but having an open-borders whore/pro-illegal immagrant shill like Michael Medved carrying this message is like a plea from David Duke for better race relations and more tolerance of Jews.
Except for a few spineless cowards that can easily be shamed by what he’s sellling, Medved is more likely to convince people of the opposite of what he’s saying.
thirteen28 on December 29, 2006 at 12:48 AM
Gregor, you might want to check the glass content of your home before you start throwing stones there buddy. I might be wrong, I might not be. I still don’t think it’s AS bad as they claim it is. Yes some of it is “gut feeling”. Some of it is just instinctive distrust of ANY conspiracy theory — which isn’t such a bad thing when you consider just how many 911/iraq/etc conspiracy theories are out there these days. And some of it is just the fact that even if every claim of the “scaremongers” (as I called them) turns out to be absolutely true I don’t see the this country taking it lying down. It might not turn out all that great in the end but we fought one war for independance already and at least four more (depending on how you count them) to prevent being conquered by imperialist outside powers. I seriously doubt anything could stop us from fighting another to defeat another imperialist conspiracy — IF it truly becomes necessary — to the bloody end, no matter what that might be.
However, even if the danger is as great as they claim, I don’t think that mass hysteria with unproven allegations is the key to fighting it.
RH
RobertHuntingdon on December 29, 2006 at 12:48 AM
Laura,
Thank you for sharing your experiences – your site is very interesting, too. My wife and I send our thoughts and prayers to you and your family with hope that all goes well for your daughter and mother, as well as that justice is done to those that were responsible.
We also have the rolling taco trucks (as far as I know unregulated), groceries, etc.. here in Ohio as well. My wife and I have also observed this sort of thing in Kentucky – even in the smaller towns.
We, too, also often feel strangers in our own land.
So, let’s see –
Ohio, LA, MA, KY, CA, MS, and GA – seven states down and only 43 left!
Are there more who wish to add their state to those listed? If so, add them to this post.
Emmett J. on December 29, 2006 at 1:07 AM
Huh? The glass content of my house? Don’t have a clue where you’re going with that one bud, but you managed to bloviate without mentioning a single reason for your “serious doubts.” Your entire stance on the possible future of this country is based on … “a gut feeling.”
In other words … you don’t have a microbe of a clue, yet you feel comfortable commenting on the subject. Sad.
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 1:40 AM
The line that confused you was a deliberate attempt to see if you were smart enough to figure out a less-than-blindingly-obvious reference to an extremely common (and wise) proverb. Obviously not.
If your deductive ability is so poor as to be unable to recognize such an extremely common proverb as “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”, then why should I be worried about how “sad” you find my opinion?
RH
RobertHuntingdon on December 29, 2006 at 2:44 AM
I don’t think Medved is a liar or a shill; his overall behavior is, I believe, testimony against that. I just believe that, for some odd reason, his brain takes a hike on some issues. He also apparently doesn’t believe that the serious crimes that illegals commit (e.g. murder, rape, drunk driving deaths, ID theft, etc) at high rates proporitonal to their numbers is a reason to tighten the borders either. Gotta break a few eggs I guess.
By the way, he has called the Libertarian Party the ‘Losertarians’, the Constitution Party the ‘Consitipation Party’, etc. for some time now. I think he sounds like a petulant little child when he does this. I stopped listening to him for about a year and a half and only recently started listenting again.
One of the reasons I stopped listening to him is that he reliably calls Republicans who ‘stray off the party reservation’ in the conservative direction demagogues while he will hold his nose and support those who stray in the liberal direction. Sometimes, I just have to turn him off.
wombatty on December 29, 2006 at 5:34 AM
Something else just came to mind. Though Medved loves to name-call (see above), he’s not an ‘equal opportunity’ name-caller. He absolutely loathes the term RINO to refer to liberal Republicans. Sometime before I had stopped listening to his show, a caller called McCain a RINO and Medved almost lost it for a minute. He said (paraphrase) ‘I don’t like that term, I hate it! Stop it!’ Of course, when he gets in that mode, he sounds like a snot-nosed kid who’s had his toy taken away.
Medved also regularly tries to use the recent elections to show that the ‘tough on illegal immigration’ position is a loser for the Republican party. This is nonsense, of course. John Hawkins over a RightWingNews has written a few posts and columns debunking this popular open-borders argument. When it comes down to it, Medved is just unreliable on this issue.
Incidentally, Hawkins has also dealt with the ‘North American Union’ extensively on his blog and in columns for Human Events. He’s with Medved on this issue and columns/posts have largely been in reponse to Jerome Corsi, who got that whole ball rolling. I have not read all of Corsi’s or Hawkins’ columns on the subject, so I can’t take sides. But it’s out there for those interested.
wombatty on December 29, 2006 at 7:03 AM
I’m no fan of Al Gore, but I hate when Medved seriously tries to convince people that Al Gore is mentally ill. That’s disgusting. It’s what the soviets did to people they didn’t like and what the left did to Whittaker Chambers. I also hate when Medved comes across as elitist as in your example about his position on crime or his rant against all student loans. Again, after the 2004 election when Bush announced the guest worker program, it shocked me how vicious Medved and Hewitt treated listeners who just mildly broached the subject.
EF on December 29, 2006 at 9:32 AM
I agree that Medved has an elitist attitude on some issues, though I might disagree with you on particulars. I think one can reasonably questions Gore’s mental stability given the ‘fire and brimstone’ sermons he delivered in the years after the 2000 election. I do agree that Medved goes overboard on the subject though. As for federal student loans, I don’t believe they have any place in our constitutional system (state loans are a different matter).
Another area, and by no means the only one, where his ‘elitism’ shines through is on the issue of marriage. I agree with him that traditional marriage is a good and necessary thing for society, but he can’t seem to comprehend that it’s not for everyone.
A typical example happened a couple of years ago he had Dr. Bella DePaulo on talking about her book ‘Singled Out: How Singles are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After’. One of her main points is that discrimination against singles (e.g. taxation) is not only widespread and sanctioned by society. Medved, of course, largley defended this status quo and then asked her if she was married. She said no. He then asked her if she planned on getting married. Again, she said no. There was then a pregnant pause (you could almost see the words ‘Does Not Compute’ flashing on Medved’s forehead|). He then said O.K. in a bewildered tone and changed the subject.
All this is not to endorse what DePaulo has to say (I haven’t read her book), but I think it’s pretty illustrative of his elitism in this area; he just can’t or won’t grasp the other point of view and thus has no problems with the disparate treatment singles endure in some arenas of society.
wombatty on December 29, 2006 at 12:12 PM
I’d like to add to what Mellen said. 10 hospital emergency rooms have closed in Los Angeles. Now why might that be? Coming soon to a state near you….
I’ve still yet to understand why this post was even added. The past 3 posts on this topic have been bashing NAU believers as conspiracy theorists, yet very little actual substance is used as rebuttal. Granted, I believe an overt move by the government to merge the three countries is out of the question. No, it will be done through incrementalism.
Already, we’ve seen illegal immigrants flaunt American sovereignity during the Mayday rallies, and yet the government does nothing. Why? I think the government is trying to subdue the legitimate population of the United States by instilling fear in us. We’re not protected from crime done by illegals, nor are we allowed to protect ourselves in most instances. The police who shoot illegals in the line of duty are often subjected to police brutality lawsuits and scrutiny, especially here in Los Angeles. So we’re somewhat left hoping the government will eventually act and start doing its job. We have no other recourse. Who knows how bad the problem will get? I’m feeling like a lobster in a pot, however.
I agree that the big corporations are mostly responsible for this present debacle, but I think that there are ulterior motives as I’ve outlined above, that MM has commented on frequently.
PRCalDude on December 29, 2006 at 1:04 PM
Hey goofball …
I know exactly what the “proverb” means. I am yet at a loss as to where you thought you were going by using it. My comment to you was to ask you if you have more reason to “seriously doubt” the desire by our government to move toward an NAU, other than a simple “hunch.”
I have an abundance of evidence and recent history which supports the theory, yet you refuse to offer any argument on the accuracy or validity of the actual evidence. Instead you mock those who have spent a great deal of time and effort in researching the actual facts.
So tell me! Where does your famous “proverb” fit in with that? In this particular debate … my house is made of reinforced steel, as opposed to yours, which is evidently made of straw.
As for the original debate … I’m still waiting for a single factual example of where you have found the NAU theory to be false, other than “you just don’t think so.”
Waiting ….
Still waiting …
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 1:40 PM
The NAU may be a possibility, but only after Congress amends the Constitution to expand the territory of the United States to include both Mexico and Canada. This amendment would then have to be ratified by the states and their respective governments. Mexico and Canada would also have to amend their respective constitutions as well.
Can anyone imagine that all three countries would actually do this? And just how long would this process take? Hell, it takes most of the year, and sometimes more than a year, just for Congress to agree on a budget. In the case of the States, that process usually takes even longer. If such a proposal would be submitted, the process would literally take decades to debate, revise, debate again, revise again, and finally be submitted to a vote, and that’s just in one committee in the House, which then would be repeated in the Senate, before being summited to the floor for another debate, more refinement, etc. Now repeat that process for each State and both Mexico and Canada and you can see just how difficult this would be. Do you really think people would be willing to give up the sovereignty of this nation, or to adopt a new currency? Look how may people complain when our currency is changed even just a little bit.
RobertHuntingdon is right, there would be far too much opposition to such a proposal and it would never be accomplished.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 1:50 PM
Red, although the EU constitution has not been ratified by most EU members, there is still one currency, no border control, and “harmonized” laws and courts. The EU was created incrementally, starting with trade agreements decades ago.
Laura on December 29, 2006 at 2:06 PM
Laura, yes, and that’s Europe and this is America. To completely different continents with two completely different ideas on sovereignty rights and ideals. Do you believe that Congress would actually try to amend the Constitution to allow for such a union to take place here? What do you think would happen to those that propose such a Union? They’d wouldn’t be reelected, that’s what.
Any such union would require a major amendment to the Constitution and would have to follow the amendment process. The courts would enforce that requirement and the people would never allow it, not in this country anyways. This isn’t Europe and the States would not allow the amendment process to be ignored or abandoned so easily.
Can you imagine the numerous lawsuits that would be generated by such a proposal? The whole process would be challenged in the courts, both on a federal level and on the state level.
There is a way around the amendment problem tho, and that is if both Canada and Mexico would abandoning their constitutions and become territories of the US. Mexico may be willing to do that, but I am sure Canada would not. So we run into the same problem, that of each country’s constitution and the unwillingness of the citizens to allow such a union to be created.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 2:25 PM
False!
There is no need to officially “expand the territory of the United States.” Simply opening the borders, “allowing free movement of people” (which Bush has publicly acknowledged as his wish, by the way), and creating a common currency would in effect create the North American Union, with no treaty needed, no ratification needed, no expansion of territory needed, and no approval of Congress needed.
Once we stop enforcing immigration and entry laws at the border … we are in effect a three country union.
I keep seeing this argument that Congress won’t approve, or the people won’t approve, or that it will take a constitutional amendment.
None of that is needed, and none of it matters.
Currently, 85% of Americans are against amnesty and want the border completely sealed. 85% of Americans want businesses to stop hiring illegals.
Is that stopping it from happening? How many times in the last six years have you seen the American people vote overwhelmingly in favor, or against a particular subject … only to have a judge strike it down and over-rule the wishes of American citizens. This – in itself – is against the U.S. Constitution, yet they do it anyway.
The will of the people doesn’t seem to mean much anymore, and American citizens have yet to stand up and fight. When I see the streets of our cities filled with illegals waving Mexican flags, hauling upside-down American Flags up flag poles, and holding banners that tell Americans to “get out of their country” – and not a single American reacts – then I have to wonder if Americans have become so lazy that they will allow this country to be physically invaded while they sit at home watching the Simpsons.
I’m not sure what some on this thread are basing their opinion on that “Americans will not stand for it.”
They already are.
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 2:38 PM
As Laura already pointed out … there is no amendment to the Constitution, and not ratification required for a North American Union. Not if it is not an official merging or an official treaty, which nobody is suggesting.
It is being done through elimination of various restrictions, and the creation of smaller agreements which in effect eliminate the function of borders. Free movement of people, free trade, and a common currency. None of which need the approval of Americans, or Congress.
As for Canada agreeing … they’re currently having the same arguments we are having. Canada is a willing and active participant. You have obviously not followed all the links throughout this thread. I would urge you to do so. Canada is a willing participant in what is going on, and it is public knowledge. There are links in this thread to articles and documents regarding Canada’s participation.
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 2:46 PM
There is no attempt to have Canada and Mexico become “territories of the U.S.”
A “Union” does not mean we merge into one country. The European Union did not merge various countries into one country, and there is absolutely no suggestion that this is happening here.
Canada would still be Canada. The U.S. would still be the U.S. And Mexico would still be Mexico.
Just like Germany is still Germany. France is still France. And the U.K. is still the U.K.
By the way …
There’s many who argue that the name for the “North American Community” – which is the title of the official public government document – is different from a “North American Union” simply because it says “Community” instead of “Union.”
It might interest those using that argument that the “European Union” was initially named the “European Community.”
For those who have yet to do any research on this subject …
Try googling Robert A. Pastor. He sits on the task force of the North American Community and happens to have worked with Clinton, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr.
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 3:08 PM
Gregor, to allow such a union to occur, the US would have to change it’s Constitution to allow a multinational authority to make laws and set policy. That is not going to occur. If it is just a trade agreement, as happens quite often, then there is no problem with sovereignty and that would not require a change in our currency as each country would still retain it’s own laws on what constitutes currency and doesn’t require each country to change it’s constitution to allow for a multinational authority to make laws and set policy.
America is not bout to abandon it’s sovereignty rights to some form of multinational authority so easily, This country doesn’t even allow the UN to make laws and set policy for the US and they’ve been around for 60 years and we have trade agreements with most of the participating countries within the UN. some of which goes back several decades and even centuries.
This country has it’s own sovereign laws and territories and no multinational authority can enforce it’s laws upon the US without Congress adopting such laws nationally as per the constitution.
What would happen if America decided to change it’s currency to some form of NAU designed bill as is suggested? It would require Congress to approve such a change, and the Administration to make the change, followed by a multi-billion dollar investment by business and the banking industry to change all the bill readers to accept such a major change. And this is after all the court challenges that would occur Do you believe that America would actually spend tens or even hundreds of billions ob dollars just to accomplish something as simple as a change in it’s currency? I doubt that very much.
This idea of a NAU is just that, and idea with little chance of actually becoming a reality.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 3:17 PM
Okay, I know I seem to be taking over this thread, but it’s important that I post these facts.
I just wrote on how the European Union was previously named the European Community. It gets worse. Initially, it was called the The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC).
Via Wikipedia:
I believe this is extremely important to note, being that our leaders are currently using the excuse that the plans for the North American Community, the SPP, and the NAFTA Superhighway, and NASCO Super Corridor are simply an attempt by the three countries to better our resources and security.
It’s interesting to note that it is the same exact explanation that was given to Europeans at the time.
Follow the links. Debate the information if you wish. But don’t just rely on “gut feelings.”
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 3:25 PM
So, your worried that in 50 years there might be some form of NAU like the EU despite the constitutional limitations and requirements such a union would require? Who’s now going on ‘gut feelings’ and who’s basing their opinions on US law?
Is Congress currently debating any of these proposals and submitting them for a vote? Has any of these ‘plans’ actually been carried out? Or is all this just speculation?
Each of the ‘plans’ you provided are just suggestions and none are actually being implemented by Congress and the Administration. When you have a definitive proposal submitted and debated by Congress for a vote, then I will be concerned about some NAU.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 3:37 PM
I urge everyone to read the North American Community plan which was given to George Bush. If you don’t have time to read it all … start on page 33 where suggestions are made on what steps need to be taken toward full implimentation.
Read through it, and ask yourself if ANY of these “steps” are not already in effect. It reads like a Bush Administration step-by-step historical account.
From page 49:
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 3:38 PM
RedinBlue … have you even bothered to read any of the documents or links on this thread? Your questions are all answered.
As for this last question … read the above comment. They are ALL being carried out. There is no denying it, if you actually bother to read the plan.
And no … none of my feelins are based on “gut feelings.” They are based on open eyes, government documents, court decisions, and current events. Facts. Reality. Not wishful thinking.
Gregor on December 29, 2006 at 3:43 PM
Gregor, you made my point for me just as I hoped.
That’s very telling isn’t it? What your submitting for an argument is a general proposal and not something that is actually being debated, let alone implemented. I’m sure every president throughout the history of this country has received hundreds of such proposals during their terms and most have been rejected. That’s what proposals are; something that someone proposes should occur, not something that is actually occurring. It is not certain that such proposals will ever be seriously considerer, let alone implemented.
Once again I ask you, is Congress actually debating on the possibility of implementing any of these proposed ideas as a part of policy or law; or are you reading too much into any trade agreements as if they are some form of subversion to the Constitution in an attempt to create a defacto NAU without the required constitutional amendment such a union would require? My guess is the latter.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 3:52 PM
The biggest reality your ignoring is that any such union would require an amendment to the Constitution and the creation of a authority supplanting the Constitution and that’s not going to happen.
But I give up trying to allay your fears in this matter as you seem to be convinced that America will soon cease to exist and some radical form of multinational government will take it’s place.
I, for one, do not share that fear and will not loose any sleep worrying about it.
RedinBlueCounty on December 29, 2006 at 3:58 PM
SCOTUS is beginning to reference other countries’ laws and the “international community” in decisions – notably Laurence v Texas and Atkins v. Virginia. In this age of judicial activism, for example the Mass. SC dictating to the legislature what laws it will write, it’s entirely reasonable that SCOTUS will interpret something into law that the American people do not want. That’s just one way we may find ourselves subject to laws our reps didn’t vote for. If you think that’s a bizarre point of view, consider how abortion became legal in all 50 states.
Laura on December 29, 2006 at 4:01 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »