posted
Even if this turns out to be not a big deal the Bush administration has still left a trail of destruction stealing powers away from Congress in a dozen other ways.
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"in absolute contravention of our law, of our Constitution..."
Lou Dobbs is a moron. There's NOTHING unconstitutional or illegal about what was done.
"Do you think maybe somebody should take a vote if we're going to merge Canada, Mexico and the United States?"
Wow - that's a strawman of epic proportions.
The statement about the plan being called the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" instead of the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of the United States" is absurd as a criticism of the framework.
The second link starts with a lie - that the SPP does away with borders and establishes the NAU - and then wanders farther from the truth as it goes on.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, the notion that such a thing has happened or has had any significant movement towards happening is about on par with the idea that pyramid shapes will sharpen blades put under them. Total nonsense.
And Lou Dobbs has a gigantic bully pulpit to speak to people about economics . . . no wonder the candidates seem to be falling over themselves to ruin the economy, he and numerous other people have told the voters that's the way to save the economy.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The second clip is a bit odd. It sounds like a blend of various end-time ideas. However, its actually from a much longer conspiracy movie called Zeitgeist which doesn't sound Christian either. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeitgeist%2C_the_MoviePosts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Although I have no idea of the merits of the plan, I must say that "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" does rather bring to my mind the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere". Presumably whoever named it hadn't read any history.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem with more cooperation with Mexico and Canada. If we could get Mexico to some kind of standard of living parity with the US and Canada, screening Mexico's southern border would be a hell of a lot easier than screening the US/Mexican border. But I think we're decades away from even the kind of cooperation that the Europeans have. And keep in mind, that the Europeans haven't even agreed on a Constitution yet, it keeps getting voted down, I think Belgium and France voted it down last time, barely.
I'm not even totally against some sort of greater governmental framework based on the Constitution, like having the three countries of NA act like states and have their own constitutions but with a greater North American constitution that'll govern all the states and ensure rights across all countries. My support would depend entirely on the content of such a document, and on a couple other things, like our voice in the United Nations, and on some sort of veto power that'd make it so two of us couldn't gang up on the third guy. I'm sure it'd involve some sacrifices of power, but there'd be some clear benefits for America, just as there would be for Mexico and Canada.
I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime though, young as I am, it's a century away.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry, the video player on my computer is coocoo, and won't play You-Tube videos, but if what you have there is the "Amero", well, I do have Snopes and they say False!Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I don't have a problem with more cooperation with Mexico and Canada. If we could get Mexico to some kind of standard of living parity with the US and Canada, screening Mexico's southern border would be a hell of a lot easier than screening the US/Mexican border. But I think we're decades away from even the kind of cooperation that the Europeans have. And keep in mind, that the Europeans haven't even agreed on a Constitution yet, it keeps getting voted down, I think Belgium and France voted it down last time, barely.
I'm not even totally against some sort of greater governmental framework based on the Constitution, like having the three countries of NA act like states and have their own constitutions but with a greater North American constitution that'll govern all the states and ensure rights across all countries. My support would depend entirely on the content of such a document, and on a couple other things, like our voice in the United Nations, and on some sort of veto power that'd make it so two of us couldn't gang up on the third guy. I'm sure it'd involve some sacrifices of power, but there'd be some clear benefits for America, just as there would be for Mexico and Canada.
I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime though, young as I am, it's a century away.
That's more or less my thoughts on the matter. I remember the first time that I talked with one of those people, and my first comment was something along the lines of "so what". In principle, I would like to see this sort of thing take place, although a lot of things would need to change in all countries involved before it became any sort of real possibility. Still, the EU would likely have been difficult for many to imagine a century ago, and North America is a lot closer now than they were then, so who knows what will happen.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
