Posted on 08/22/2007 7:13:57 AM PDT by ckilmer
Do you support the Partnership for Prosperity agreement (with Mexico)?
Do you support the New Alliance Task Force?
Do you support the Social Security Totalization Ageement with Mexico?
Do you support the Bilateral Strategic Plan agreement?
You do realize that Ronald Reagan would never have been the nominee of the Republican party had he not accepted the premise of NAU or whatever they called it back in the ‘70’s, don’t you? I don’t believe he was trusted to carry out their orders, and I don’t believe it was his idea to make George the Elder his VP, but we have not had a President since at least the second half of the 20th C. who didn’t sign on to the agenda and make his appointees from the CFR provided list. After working hard to get Reagan elected, there were plenty of old conservatives like Viguerie who instantly realized they had been sold out before he was ever sworn in.
I bet he was thinking that too.
Let's talk about what Bush has actually done during his administration.
Do you support the Partnership for Prosperity agreement (with Mexico)?
Do you support the New Alliance Task Force?
Do you support the Social Security Totalization Ageement with Mexico?
Do you support the Bilateral Strategic Plan agreement?
What we need to demand, through our Congressional representatives, is a full disclosure of the contents of the meetings.
How can we demand congress to give full disclosure when most don’t know or ignore what is going on since they will have no vote on the agenda?
Still I agree we should fight it like we fought amnesty.
yeah I know its pretty discouraging. what’s at play is not a communist dictatorship but rather a north american superstate.
the problem with this is that it exposes the american middle class to unlimited liabilities in exchange for nothing.
the whole program is being driven by the super rich. these are guys making say +-50 million & up annually. They have become nomads. They don’t really live anywhere. This is the backside of what used to be called world citizens.
The guys on the board who think of themselves as party loyalists don’t quite understand that the top of the republican party (like the top of the democratic party serves the interests of the superrich — who are not loyal to the USA.)
Denial of a conspiracy is only further proof that a conspiracy exists. Right?
We better hope God helps us, cause if he don’t, the guns will.
Think about it. There are way more cameras above red lights in America waiting for somebody to slip through so they can nail him for a couple C-notes than there will EVER be watching the border. And cargo inspection of things coming into the country? Can’t do that, it would take too many people and WalMart might suffer.
How many peace officers whose duty it is to protect and serve these days DON’T have a taser? Probably not many, and getting less all the time.
God forbid your grandma would want to get on a plane and fly somewhere since there’s somebody waitin to look in her panties. Meanwhile, some turbaned dude just waltzes by with a stupid smug look on his face...
Shrub didn’t cause it all. But he could stop it. But he choses to expand it. Sad to say, but that’s the way it is.
So the talking heads on TV aren’t silly little people?
At first glance I thought the titles was “Bush denies SUPERSTAR rumours”
There is no comparing what President Bush says with one of Clinton’s Biggest Lies! If your comments are intended to turn Canada and Mexico into Venezuela’s allies instead of our best friends, your doing the work of Hugo Chávez.
/////////////////
This is overwrought. You are trying way too hard.
Let’s fight it together.
A few years ago bush mocked and ridiculed anyone who was concerned about
the invasion of this nation by Illegal Aliens calling them "vigilantes".Now bush mocks and ridicules anyone concerned about supranational unions
as conspiracy theorists.We know now that this country has been invaded by over ten million
members of AZTLAN, MEChA and MS-13 murdering more Americans than those lost in IraqWhat does that say about his statement about the destruction of this Republic
and the creation of the North American Union?
There is also no denying that there have been times when the government has tried to do via treaty what it was constitutionally prohibited from doing with legislation.
“I’m amused by the difference between what actually takes place in the meetings and by what some are trying to say takes place, . . .” (GW Bush)
I haven’t been amused by anything W has said for a couple of years now. All his smart assed replies to this issue remind me of some of his more inane statements during immigration debate. Any time he starts romancing Mexico again, all US citizens who place any value on our sovereignty should take notice of everything that happens.
Everything about this process needs to be in the open, but it’ll take freedom of information and other tactics to bring this into the daylight.
“Family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande.”
“Do you support the Partnership for Prosperity agreement (with Mexico)?”
Yes. Create some decent jobs in Mexico and maybe they won’t flood in here.
“Do you support the New Alliance Task Force?”
No, not really. Too easy for illegals to abuse.
“Do you support the Social Security Totalization Ageement with Mexico?”
Yes. I’m against dual taxation on SS benefits.
“Do you support the Bilateral Strategic Plan agreement?”
Sure. We do it all anyway.
Either way, if I had said yes or no to all those, it doesn’t even begin to constitute a “North American Union”.
Interesting how folks come to FR, supposedly opposed to the socialism in Canada, and the corruption and poverty on Mexico, but if Jorge says “Let’s bring it all together” they just hang on his every word like he was the second coming or something...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.