Abolishing the USA

The New American ^ | October 3, 2005 Issue | William F. Jasper

[Carry_Okie]

I don't consider the published views of the John Birch Society to be mainstream conservatism.

Sometimes they are right.

As far as your assertion that I stand against national sovereignty, I'll refrain from expressing my opinion right now, because up until that moment I considered you a friend.

Given that you attacked a poster and anyone who agreed with him for putting up an article that exposes a plan to seriously weaken national sovereignty, what was I supposed to think?

[inquest]

I don't consider the published views of [blah, blah, blah]

Talk of "views" is just a diversion. This article contains facts, and it's hardly the only one presenting them. If you're happy with these facts, that's your prerogative, but it definitely does not put you in the mainstream of public opinion in this country.

[Dog Gone]

Sometimes they are right. It doesn't make them mainstream and it doesn't make those who disagree with them inconsequential.

I attacked that assertion and anyone who would make it. You can attack me all you want and label me someone who opposes national sovereignty. I guess I don't care, because you've completely missed the point of my reply that you're whining about.

[staytrue]

Liberal democrats (who are internationalists and support free trade and market economics)

Are you nuts ? Liberal democrats are opposed to free trade and market economics. They like govt. control of everything

[Carry_Okie]

It doesn't make them mainstream and it doesn't make those who disagree with them inconsequential.

Those who disagree with the President about open borders and "trade agreements" are not mainstream? I beg to differ. Those who disagree with the content of an article (about open borders and degraded national sovereignty being a matter of policy) are not inconsequential? Anyone who would agree with the article would certainly not think so, but might offer as much to console the poster for the baseless and ignorant drubbing he was getting, without support of fact I might add. As to who constitutes "them," I assume you mean the Birch Society but that was by no means clear in your post. How much do you really know about them, as opposed to what you have heard?

I attacked that assertion and anyone who would make it.

Oh, you attacked far more than that. By "fringe lunatics" your post included anyone who agrees with the concerns expressed in the article about the President's lack of concern for national sovereignty and control of who enters this country, which includes me and that was how I took it, especially considering that a great many others offered precisely the same vitriolic spew in defense of that policy and in very similar vein as yours.

I guess I don't care, because you've completely missed the point of my reply that you're whining about.

That figures. Even if you don't care (which I don't think, despite your petulant post, is true), I suggest you read the article, much of which is undeniable fact. There is a plan to entangle this country under international "law." It is the same means by which environmentalists have put this country in the position of cutting ugly deals with foreigners to gain access to energy. That plan is published. Its biggest advocates are not inconsequential and most of them are players in the petrochemical energy business (our "friends" funding the NRDC). There are Republicans in favor of it (mostly RINOs) but the bulk are the corrupt corporate socialists we both know and love, altruists though they believe themselves to be.

With noblesse oblige droit de seigneur inevitably comes.

[Southside_Chicago_Republican]

For later.

[whenigettime]

Conservative Fringe Lunatic This is one of the Great reasons for signing up with Freerepublic Bump

[Designer]

"I don't consider the published views of the John Birch Society to be mainstream conservatism. If they were, a majority of Congress would share their views.."

A majority of Congress are politicians, but not necessarily educated conservatives.

Actually, I think most people in the U.S. are conservative, they just don't think of themselves that way. So why aren't Republican Congressmen real conservatives? I think it is because they actually believe the BS coming from the MSM about conservatives being "out of the mainstream" or some such, therefore they would like to be seen as "moderate". But we know from experience that moderates have, by definition, conceded the argument before it has even started. (Meeting the Liberals "half way" from a position of starting at the halfway point.)

And since you apparently don't read The New American, may I suggest you give it a try?

[jmc813]

You fringe lunatics are inconsequential.

I really don't think that being concerned with this "North American Community" bull$hit makes one a fring lunatic. The vast majority of freepers are vehemetly opposed to such a scheme.

[Paul Ross]

Excellent points!

These are too reasonable for DG, I'm afraid...