The FireWire
 All Forums
 All FireSociety

Full Search Here
RSS Feed Subscribe to Topics

Mexican Official Says we need a North American Union Now

Forums Home | The FireWire | Breaking News
Posts 1-20 of 21 | Latest Post

First 1 2 Last
September 21, 2007 10:26 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007
Mexican official urges North American Union
Tells Denver trade conference EU is 'model we need to follow quickly'
September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

At a Denver conference on intercontinental trade corridors, a Mexican mayor called for a swift move toward a European Union-style merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Referring to Europe, Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna – a sister city of Del Rio, Texas – told the Great Plains International Conference, "It's a model we need to follow quickly."

Perez later told WND, "If only people know the benefits of opening the borders and working together, improving the quality of life for all, then no one would be opposed to the idea of a North American Union."

A spokesman for organizers of the conference – which began Wednesday and concludes today – rejected the Mexican mayor's view.

"This is not what the conference is about, it is not about a North American Union," said Joe Kiely, vice president of the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition. "It is about developing infrastructure and economic opportunities in the Great Plains. I am equally surprised the other items were brought up here."

Ports-to-Plains describes itself as "a planned, multimodal transportation corridor including a multi-lane divided highway that will facilitate the efficient transportation of goods and services from Mexico, through West Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Oklahoma, and ultimately on into Canada and the Pacific Northwest."

The conference, held at the Adams Mark Hotel, is promoted as an opportunity to "highlight the efforts of communities and citizens working together to bring the benefits of investment in transportation infrastructure and trade home to the Great Plains region."

Asked why he chose the conference to promote the idea of a North American Union, Perez told WND, "It's as good as any place and the right people are here."

"This is not a new idea," he said. "In fact when there are border meetings between border governors or border legislatures this is a topic that continually comes up."

Perez also affirmed the Ports to Plains Corridor is basically a NAFTA Superhighway and needs to be developed as such.

"We need to begin by building the infrastructure in the three countries, investing in Mexico, and then we can sell the main idea that Mexicans should stay in Mexico. We just need to create an equal level for all," Perez said.

Del Rio, Texas, Mayor Efrain Valdes told conferees he came to build relationships he hopes will last for decades to come.

"We are all North Americans," he said. "Three countries, but we are all North Americans."

Michael Reeves, president of Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition, kicked off the conference with brief remarks.

Eduardo Arnal, consulate general of Mexico in Denver, later provided numerous statistics documenting the strong economic relationship between Mexico and the U.S.

"Because of NAFTA, we are partners in the fight against terror and need to help ensure each other's safety," Arnal said.

Arnal later discussed with WND the relationship between Mexico and the U.S. and the issue of illegal immigration.

"The best and only way to stop illegal immigration is for the United States to invest in Mexico," he said. "A fence will not work. It's a simple equation of supply and demand – Mexicans go to the U.S. for work because the demand for their labor and wages is there."

Arnal said although Mexico must share responsibility for the immigration issue, it is the U.S. that really needs to step up and begin investing more in Mexico to help bring the country to a level playing field.

The Canadian perspective was delivered by Phillippe Taillon, vice consul and trade commissioner of the Canadian Consulate in Denver. Like his Mexican counterpart, Taillon presented statistics on the relationship between the three countries and told the crowd "NAFTA has been hugely profitable for all three countries."

He also expressed an interest in continuing to integrate rail, truck and air transportation networks as Canada looks to open new markets from Asia.

September 21, 2007 11:08 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 25, 2007
Why do WE have to 'bring Mexico up economically' - their politicians and elites are filthy rich!

Washington State
September 21, 2007 12:47 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 23, 2007
We are the United States of America, Not Mexico, Not Canada.
September 21, 2007 01:34 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007

Perhaps the mexican elites are beginning to get the message from the average American. 

They do want to get us linked up in this NAU to bleed off our wealth in order to protect their own personal wealth instead of having to use it to take care of their own people.

Folks need to understand we can either provide ourselves health care and social security or mexicans healthcare and social security but not both for both.

Lets take care of ours and let them take care of theirs...

SovereignMan
September 21, 2007 04:51 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 23, 2007

 The lack of action on the part of Congress is a disregard for their legal obligation, a danger to the country, and a disgrace.

Impeachment is NOT a Constitutional crises, but it is the remedy for one. And we are in need of that remedy now more than at any other time in American history

Without our Constitution and Habeus Corpus, what is left for Americans? By doing nothing, we are condoning their actions, and setting America up for failure.
 

We have to take our Nation back!

Deport the Illegal Invaders, and the Rogue Regime that has taken our Nation over.

Protect our Nation, Deportation!

WE HAFTA GET OUT OF NAFTA!!!


"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain
September 21, 2007 06:18 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007
Sheilah said:

 The lack of action on the part of Congress is a disregard for their legal obligation, a danger to the country, and a disgrace.

Impeachment is NOT a Constitutional crises, but it is the remedy for one. And we are in need of that remedy now more than at any other time in American history

Without our Constitution and Habeus Corpus, what is left for Americans? By doing nothing, we are condoning their actions, and setting America up for failure.
 

We have to take our Nation back!

Deport the Illegal Invaders, and the Rogue Regime that has taken our Nation over.

Protect our Nation, Deportation!

WE HAFTA GET OUT OF NAFTA!!!

 

The problem with impeachment at this point Shelia is that it would put anti-American arch socialist elitist like Nancy Pelosi in power (if you can get Bush Cheney would have to go to, right) and that would be really dangerous to say the least. 

Nutty Nancy is a NAFTA & North American Union Queen who does not need to be crowned.   I do think she needed to be speaker of the house though.  The American people can see that she is aligned more with the North American Man-Boy love organization than Mr. & Mrs. Mainstreet.  Just look at the legislative agenda that she is pushing in the House. 

ENDA and Hate Crimes legislation does not demonstrate a respect for the Religious freedom and equal protection under the law.  It does demonstrate a total disrespect for the Constitution and the average person. 

Lets elect a truly America First President next time.....

SovereignMan
September 21, 2007 06:28 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 5, 2007

Lets elect a truly America First President next time.....

 

And may I ask when do you think this person will make their grand entrance. I have not seen that person yet.



TEXAS: One of the few states that can secede from the Union.
September 21, 2007 06:39 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 23, 2007
SovereignMan said:
Sheilah said:

 The lack of action on the part of Congress is a disregard for their legal obligation, a danger to the country, and a disgrace.

Impeachment is NOT a Constitutional crises, but it is the remedy for one. And we are in need of that remedy now more than at any other time in American history

Without our Constitution and Habeus Corpus, what is left for Americans? By doing nothing, we are condoning their actions, and setting America up for failure.
 

We have to take our Nation back!

Deport the Illegal Invaders, and the Rogue Regime that has taken our Nation over.

Protect our Nation, Deportation!

WE HAFTA GET OUT OF NAFTA!!!

 

The problem with impeachment at this point Shelia is that it would put anti-American arch socialist elitist like Nancy Pelosi in power (if you can get Bush Cheney would have to go to, right) and that would be really dangerous to say the least. 

Nutty Nancy is a NAFTA & North American Union Queen who does not need to be crowned.   I do think she needed to be speaker of the house though.  The American people can see that she is aligned more with the North American Man-Boy love organization than Mr. & Mrs. Mainstreet.  Just look at the legislative agenda that she is pushing in the House. 

ENDA and Hate Crimes legislation does not demonstrate a respect for the Religious freedom and equal protection under the law.  It does demonstrate a total disrespect for the Constitution and the average person. 

Lets elect a truly America First President next time.....

SovereignMan

 

I believe that Impeachment is the only option. Nancy Pelosi would not have the time to do more harm than is being done while we wait. It would at least get 2 down! If they were to be tried for treason, which shouldn't be too hard to prove, both in America and abroad, It might slow down much of the Cancer infectiong America.

Then perhaps an honest American might have a chance.

To sit and watch and hope, doesn't seem to be doing much good.



"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain
September 21, 2007 06:42 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

Go RON PAUL!!!!  I think Mexico is in for a surprise!  They don't run this country and they will find that out!  They haven't met with much resistance but they will if they try to push this crap on us!

 

Anyone have this dude's address?  Maybe it's time to send him a few letters to let him know how the American citizens feel about what is going on!  We must always remember to send Bush and the Congress, House and everyone else a copy of whatever we send so they know we are communicating with him to! 

 

Mexico can stay south of our border forever more! 

September 21, 2007 06:50 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

It's bigger than we think, folks...when you read this you can see all of it fit into place. And the reason Congress has NOT made a stink about it is the fact that it's the PLAN and will be fully in place by 2010. Unless we stop NAFTA, the Trans-Texas Corridor, we will not be able to stop the snake that is the NAU. Just look to the E.U. and understand that the illegals are just one of the steps to turn us into a NORTH AMERICAN UNION!

Immigration Deception Reveals SPP Threat to America
Family Security Matter : July 19 , 2007 -- by John Lewandoski
   
"It is hoped that the reader is stirred enough to contact Washington legislators to demand accountable, limited government in America, and complete uncovering, inspection, and removal of the SPP."      
When the common sense approach to a public issue is conspicuously avoided by Washington power brokers, it's a good time to suspect ulterior motives. Such is the case with our Mexican border and why it "can't" be secured. Bottom line: border control is not designed to remedy the security problem. Rather, the border is designed to be eliminated.
 
Unnoticed by much of mainstream America, there is an unholy cabal that's slithering past them. Among the geo-economic power elite in Washington, with our President at the core, is an effort that if not averted will, by 2010 or thereabouts, lead America into a hardened amalgam of tri-national partnership, and eventually into international organization. The result of this could, and more likely will, be the abolishment of our Constitution and national sovereignty; i.e., America in name, but a "nation-less" country. It appears that Mr. Bush doesn't want a common border between Mexico and the U.S., and thus is doing his best to win and maintain favor with the Mexican government and its people, who have everything to gain by border dissolution.
 
A recent and firm clue that the President is willing to go to extreme ends to maintain this Mexican favor is the Ramos/Compean border agent case that has slapped two U.S. Border Agents with federal penitentiary terms of over a decade each, all as a result of a flagrant miscarriage of justice perpetrated against them by the Bush Administration. Just ask any of the 70 congressmen who signed legislation in January 2007, introduced by Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), calling for a reversal of the outrageous convictions, and that the two agents be freed from jail immediately. As of July 2007, no public action whatsoever has been taken by the President to comply. Worse, facilitating the convictions were the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, the total machinations of which produced the sham case and trial resulting in the sentences. [For much more detail, do a "Ramos Compean" Google-search or see <>-- article "Invasion USA Ignacio Ramos reported in 'emaciated' condition."
 
What is it that makes this President defy common-sense conduct...
 
* by not wanting border security tightly (and easily) implemented, especially in a post- 9/11 environment?
 
* by pandering to corrupt, ill-run Mexican administrations when he should be protecting America from such things?
 
* by going to inexplicable lengths to use his power to facilitate incrimination of U.S. Government Border Agents in favor of Mexican appeasement?
 
Answer: largely, it's the Security Prosperity Partnership (SPP). You may have heard the term SPP, but my guess is that unless you frequent credible alternative news sources, this may be your first exposure.
 
Back on March 23, 2005, in Waco, Texas, President Bush, then-President Vicente Fox of Mexico and Paul Martin, then-Prime Minister of Canada, met at a summit meeting to enter into an agreement between the three countries that is designed, trilaterally, to bring "security, partnership, and prosperity" to these three North American land masses. Critics, however, believe that the agreement will do nothing more than join these lands commonly together, erase northern and southern U.S. borders and form a North American continental perimeter instead. They further believe that the idea is to proceed rapidly forward as the next step in the process of NAFTA and CAFTA, both of which propel these three countries toward the North American Union (NAU) and some say ultimately to integration with the overarching New World Order or One World Government.
 
This isn't an Orwellian novel. It appears the idea here, via the SPP, is to make this transition gradually, incrementally and generally unnoticed, for were it to be revealed as it should be, I'd suspect there'd be civil uprisings nationwide. When it does come under scrutiny, the SPP firmly denies its aims are ultimately toward the NAU, but the framework and underlining implications of the SPP scream otherwise.
 
Nonetheless, the SPP has a dedicated following and support, as revealed in Marcela Sanchez's recent Washington Post column, all of which indicates SPP is doing a fine job of convincing some of its "public-spirited" intents. In short, the SPP is so well crafted it appears to promote altruistic "progressive" outcomes no one in his right mind would refute - that is, if one believes the hype. Columnist Sanchez points out, after all, SPP goals such as "...leaders (President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and Mexican President Felipe Calderon) are expected to announce an integrated strategy to combat pandemics..." ; and "...trilateral regulatory cooperation framework, meant to enhance competitiveness, while maintaining high standards of health and safety". She also states the SPP makes "...no mention of erasing borders and establishing a separate legal system, (or) adopting a single currency..." Well, of course it doesn't, even though those tenets are clearly inferred. Has Ms. Sanchez reviewed the European Union's (EU) structure lately? The parallel between it and what's brewing here in Washington is strikingly similar.
 
Why is the Washington Post promoting SPP support while other qualified journalists counter the Post's position diametrically, stating that through cunning and design, the SPP is actually an evolving press conference which has already produced signed documents that constitute an agreement (although the SPP indicates no "agreement", per se, was ever signed. The SPP is carefully not a law or treaty, because those actions must involve Congressional approval and ratification. So, it appears that our president knowingly side-stepped constitutional protocol by operating a deception to avoid exposure to the other arms of government and, of course, to the American people...at least at this stage of the game.
 
A good "home" for this new agreement between the three countries then was found in the U.S. Dept. of Commerce. From there, the White House manages many working groups, and according to distinguished historian/writer, Dr. Jerome Corsi, the groups are within the Department of Commerce (DOC); exactly what the relationship is to the DOC, however, is unknown to the general public. The DOC highly refutes direct DOC oversight, stating SPP is a "...White House-led initiative...". But it is interesting that the "big three" directly responsible for SPP development under the President are Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary of Commerce, Condolzeza Rice, Secretary of State, and Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security.
 
Something of a counter-constitutional stench is wafting out of Washington if we start connecting dots the mainline media are ignoring by ignorance, bias, or neglect. Even the SPP's own website provides their organizational framework of the SPP. Included are the Departments of Energy, Transportation, Health & Human Services and more-- all cabinet level reporting groups that report to aforementioned Gutierrez, Rice, and Chertoff. And paralleling the US team, assisting in this overall developmental effort, are the parallel governmental bureaucracies of Mexico and Canada.
 
So what we have metastasizing in Washington, unbeknownst to the general public, are policy making groups, appointed officials, committees, advisory boards and essentially trilateral, parliamentary councils all hard at work in restructuring (destroying, actually) our U.S. constitutional way of American life to create a new world order, pure and simple. Too bold a statement? Although the SPP denies any infringement on our Constitution, the ultimate and inevitable outcome of any combined, tri-lateral/national construct, by definition, can mean nothing less than a re-written tri-national document.
 
These working groups compose a "shadow government", or a parallel of our Founding Father's constitutional bureaucracy that includes bureaucracies of the other two North American countries in the process. The eventual result of this new, comparable, trilateral bureaucracy is the fear, and some say certainty, that our U.S. laws and regulations will be rewritten to harmonize with those of Mexico and Canada -- and all this, now, being accomplished in the Executive arm of U.S. Government, all without congressional oversight or review!
 
Our continually eroding Constitution, in Article 1, Section 1, declares that all legislative powers shall be vested in the Congress of the U.S. But Congress has abdicated its responsibility by allowing the Executive branch, by means of the SPP, to steal law-making authority to which it's not entitled. Just recently, as the Senate's immigration bill bit the dust, inserted in that bill -- by parties unknown -- was an after-the-fact endorsement of the SPP scheme.
 
The credible journalist/editor, Cliff Kincaid, of www.aim.org states, "... The White House was most likely behind this stealth attempt to get Congress to approve SPP, which forms the basis of the North American Union (NAU)." (aim.org report, July 9, 2007). This ram-through legislation is precisely what seasoned constitutional journalists all along have predicted would precipitate SPP congressional approval. Although the SPP maneuver was included in the now dead immigration bill, don't remotely assume it, too, is dead; it's only in a coma, certain to be revived for another stealth presentation snow-job by the same "parties unknown" who placed it there this time around.
 
Thus is the general overview of the SPP currently buzzing in our Department of Commerce. It is hoped that the reader is stirred enough to contact Washington legislators to demand accountable, limited government in America, and complete uncovering, inspection, and removal of the SPP.
 
Your national sovereignty is at stake.
 
 
 
 
   


Our children and grandchildren are depending on what we do right now!
September 21, 2007 06:56 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 23, 2007
John Conyers for Congress
 


 White House in Contempt

Dear XXXX,

I wanted to take the opportunity to update you on the status of the contempt of Congress resolution in the House of Representatives. 

As you may know, the Judiciary Committee passed a resolution before the August recess holding the White House and Harriet Miers in contempt of Congress for their failure to provide documents and appear before the committee as legally required by subpoena.

The information we have received to date from the Justice Department from our U.S. Attorneys investigation indicates the White House played a central role in the firing of the nine federal prosecutors. Yet, the White House has stonewalled and consistently refused to cooperate with inquiries into this matter.

At the heart of our investigation is the evidence uncovered suggesting that the nine U.S. Attorneys were fired for politically-motivated reasons, while others may have been retained because they were pursuing partisan investigations.

We have also discovered that job candidates' political contributions and affiliations were considered in hiring decisions for nonpartisan positions in the Department of Justice. Our job has been made more difficult by apparent misleading testimony from the Attorney General and other Department of Justice officials.

This politicization of our judicial system cannot be tolerated.  Our citizens have a right to expect that federal prosecutions will be conducted in a fair and nonpartisan manner. 

There are many steps we can take in this confrontation with the White House. Some are more extreme than others. What we must first do is get the facts that show who made these decisions in the White House. Only once we have this evidence can we adequately pursue justice.

What is now required is for the House to pass these contempt of Congress citations and pursue legal action against the White House and Harriet Miers for their failure to meet the requirements of the subpoenas. Hopefully this contempt of Congress resolution will soon have a vote on the floor of the House. I am not prepared to allow this administration to operate above the law.


Thank you for your continued support for a better democracy.

Your Friend,

John Conyers, Jr.  

__________________________________________________________________________

They are in contempt, they are attempting to operate above the law -and in violation of the Constitution, as they have been all along.  As sitting presidents are immune from prosecution, there is only one answer: IMPEACH!



"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain
September 21, 2007 07:27 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 18, 2007
Sheilah said:
SovereignMan said:

The problem with impeachment at this point Shelia is that it would put anti-American arch socialist elitist like Nancy Pelosi in power (if you can get Bush Cheney would have to go to, right) and that would be really dangerous to say the least. 

Nutty Nancy is a NAFTA & North American Union Queen who does not need to be crowned.   I do think she needed to be speaker of the house though.  The American people can see that she is aligned more with the North American Man-Boy love organization than Mr. & Mrs. Mainstreet.  Just look at the legislative agenda that she is pushing in the House. 

ENDA and Hate Crimes legislation does not demonstrate a respect for the Religious freedom and equal protection under the law.  It does demonstrate a total disrespect for the Constitution and the average person. 

Lets elect a truly America First President next time.....

SovereignMan

 

I believe that Impeachment is the only option. Nancy Pelosi would not have the time to do more harm than is being done while we wait. It would at least get 2 down! If they were to be tried for treason, which shouldn't be too hard to prove, both in America and abroad, It might slow down much of the Cancer infectiong America.

Then perhaps an honest American might have a chance.

To sit and watch and hope, doesn't seem to be doing much good.

Well one thing about if, if both bush and cheney were impeached over this due to voter demand and outcry, it certainly WOULD make the rest of them, including that shamesty Pelosi, wake up and smell the coffee!!  They really do need to find out who rules the country, they are not rock stars, they are CIVIL SERVANTS!!



If you have to hyphenate your race--you are NOT an American!! This from a French-German-English-Irish-AMERICAN! See how silly this can become?
September 21, 2007 08:05 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
September 12, 2007
Will somebody tell God we said Mexico not New Orleans?

"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
September 21, 2007 08:12 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 22, 2007
SovereignMan said:
Mexican official urges North American Union
Tells Denver trade conference EU is 'model we need to follow quickly'
September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern

 

Perez later told WND, "If only people know the benefits of opening the borders and working together, improving the quality of life for all, then no one would be opposed to the idea of a North American Union."

The only ones to benefit from open borders is Mexico, and at the expense of the United States.  Canada is finding that out. It is just beginning up there and already they don't like it.

Leveling the playing field means we get less and they get more.  We have already invested much when our manufacturing moved south of the border and hundreds of thousands of Americans lost their jobs. 

 http://www.conservativeusa.org/images/NAULogo100pix.jpg

 

 

 



GET CONGRESS ATTENTION! CHANGE YOUR W-4 AT WORK AND CLAIM 10 DEPENDENTS SO NO TAXES WILL BE TAKEN FROM YOUR PAYCHECK. WHEN THE MONEY STOPS COMING IN MAYBE THEY WILL REMEMBER THEY ARE SERVANTS TO WE THE PEOPLE.
September 21, 2007 09:03 PM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 15, 2007

Alan Keyes for President Website: 

North American Union / SPP

We are in a situation now — let me put it this way — where a lot of people are realizing we are being betrayed.

As a people, our sovereignty is being betrayed. Our borders are not being defended. Immigration policies are being proposed and implemented willy-nilly. Policies toward a North American Union are being done in such a way as to undermine our sovereignty as a people, destroy our borders, utterly subvert the demographics that sustain the identity of our people.

And it's being done by folks who are elected by us, and who profess to be of us, and yet who seem to be serving something else, not the American people. And I think the sense that we have an elite that has abandoned its allegiance to the Constitution, to government of, by, and for the people, and to the best interest of the liberty of this people — that's pervasive now. A lot of people are waking up to it.

Some of them, sometimes, try to intimidate you, and say, "Oh, it's a conspiracy theory," or something similar. And I say to them, "Go back and read the Founders." Hamilton and others were absolutely clear on this fact — that throughout human history, there has been a struggle between the principles of justice that respect the equity and justice for the whole of the people, and the ambition of those who believe that they're superior, that they should make the decisions, that they should get the benefits, and that everybody else should be cut out. That's an old story, and it's still with us.

As for denials that plans for a North American Union exist — it reminds me of that old saying: the smartest thing the devil ever did was to convince people he didn't exist. And these people think that they're going to convince us that nothing's going on, so that we'll ignore the evidence of our own eyes.

Thank God, Americans are waking up.

I think, however, we need to realize that this isn't just about our borders. It's not just about the Superhighway. It's not just about this action or that. We are in a situation where the sovereignty of the American people — a phrase you don't hear them say very much anymore — is being utterly subverted, and we must act across the board to assert and restore our sovereignty, in both a constitutional and a physical and geographic sense. 

Comments from Alan Keyes on the NAU.  This is a great vehicle to get the word out folks!



Our children and grandchildren are depending on what we do right now!
September 22, 2007 12:07 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007
blaze77535 said:

Lets elect a truly America First President next time.....

 

And may I ask when do you think this person will make their grand entrance. I have not seen that person yet.

 

Come on Blaze Tancredo, Hunter & Paul foot the bill as America First candidates.  

If you are going to screw up, do so in America's favor.....

SovereignMan
September 22, 2007 12:30 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007
Sheilah said:

I believe that Impeachment is the only option. Nancy Pelosi would not have the time to do more harm than is being done while we wait. It would at least get 2 down! If they were to be tried for treason, which shouldn't be too hard to prove, both in America and abroad, It might slow down much of the Cancer infectiong America.

Then perhaps an honest American might have a chance.

To sit and watch and hope, doesn't seem to be doing much good.

This seems to be the story in recent times.  When either party is out of sorts with the American people the other one has nothing better to offer. 

Dole was more old school, back room deals and general status quo than people could stomach so Clinton got to continue his pathological lying way through office. 

Kerry was such a pathetic candidate that he literally caused Bush to be reelected because so many Americans could not accept national emasculation. 

Pelosi, Reid et al are not a viable alternative and that is exactly why we have what we do.  The American people are punishing the Republicans but they are not willing to give total control of the Government to the The Socialists Democrats and there are not enough traditional Democrats left to run a hot dog stand at the local little league park.  

Democrats need to get serious and offer an alternative that is not so radical and offensive. They have become so intolerant that they cannot be trusted to protect the civil liberties of the Average American much less defend the Constitution.  Seriously we are talking about a party that embraces the fairness doctrine, a party that will not allow a pro life candidate to speak before it, who celebrates anti-Christian aclu facists and who in general support the North American Man Boy Love Association in favor of the Boy Scouts etc and so on. 

This is one reason why I like Rep Tancredo.  The Bush Administration doesn't like him, Nutty Nancy and the Man-Boy crowd doesn't like him, the illegal aliens don't like him, IRS doesn't like him, islamofacists don't like him and he would end the rein of the teachers union.  Seriously he is the only candidate to be burned in ephigy by pigheads in pakistan.  That tells me they respect his strength and know he stands for America First like no other candidate.

Tancredo for a better America....

SovereignMan
September 22, 2007 12:33 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 13, 2007
Lady Jane said:

Go RON PAUL!!!!  I think Mexico is in for a surprise!  They don't run this country and they will find that out!  They haven't met with much resistance but they will if they try to push this crap on us!

 

Anyone have this dude's address?  Maybe it's time to send him a few letters to let him know how the American citizens feel about what is going on!  We must always remember to send Bush and the Congress, House and everyone else a copy of whatever we send so they know we are communicating with him to! 

 

Mexico can stay south of our border forever more! 

Does the mexican postal system work well enough or would you have to send it western union disguised as a Texas State welfare payment?

Good idea, write it up....

SovereignMan
September 22, 2007 08:27 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
February 23, 2007

Our Government for the politicians had best realize, The American People are ready to

TAKE OUR NATION BACK!!!

A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." --George Washington


"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." Mark Twain
September 22, 2007 09:20 AM    View printable version     Link to this comment   
Member Since:
May 23, 2007
I'm going to start e-mailing all over again today.

First 1 2 Last

You must login to discuss this item.


  Sponsored Links