Mark says:

64. Good Point, scary thought, (covers going over my head.) Help.

Mark says:

“Your link goes to a US Department of Commerce page that has nothing to do with the Partnership.”

At http://www.spp.gov, in the top left hand corner , just under SPP.GOV it says :A North American Partnership”. I beleive this paves the way to open the boarders, Including the NAFTA superhighway they are currently building through the heart of America to Canada. They will be using recently passed Immenent Domain Legislation to seize property to accomplish this. A Mexican port of entry (as I have understood) is being built in Kansas City, and turned over to the Mexican Government. You wont find all of this on the web site, but it is occuring. Bush has no intention of enforcing the boarders, this deal has been in the works for years. Yes, I do believe the Bush family has been pushing the “New World Order/ One world govt” concept and we need to have a say in it. If the American People support it, so be it. I dont believe they do. But, dont we have a say in it?

Frank IBC says:

Too bad you didn’t check out the Myths & Facts page on that website.

Myth: The SPP was an agreement signed by Presidents Bush and his Mexican and Canadian counterparts in Waco, TX, on March 23, 2005.

Fact: The SPP is a dialogue to increase security and enhance prosperity among the three countries. The SPP is not an agreement nor is it a treaty. In fact, no agreement was ever signed.

Myth: The SPP is a movement to merge the United States, Mexico, and Canada into a North American Union and establish a common currency.

Fact: The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at http://www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.

Myth: The SPP is being undertaken without the knowledge of the U.S. Congress.

Fact: U.S. agencies involved with SPP regularly update and consult with members of Congress on our efforts and plans.

Myth: The SPP infringes on the sovereignty of the United States.

Fact: The SPP respects and leaves the unique cultural and legal framework of each of the three countries intact. Nothing in the SPP undermines the U.S. Constitution. In no way does the SPP infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States.

Myth: The SPP is illegal and violates the Constitution.

Fact: The SPP is legal and in no way violates the Constitution or affects the legal authorities of the participating executive agencies. Indeed, the SPP is an opportunity for the governments of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to discuss common goals and identify ways to enhance each nation’s security and prosperity. If an action is identified, U.S. federal agencies can only operate within U.S. law to address these issues. The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security coordinate the efforts of the agencies responsible for the various initiatives under the prosperity and security pillars of the SPP. If an agency were to decide a regulatory change is desirable through the cooperative efforts of SPP, that agency is required to conform to all existing U.S. laws and administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.

Myth: The SPP will cost U.S. taxpayers money.

Fact: The SPP is being implemented with existing budget resources. Over the long-term, it will save U.S. taxpayers money by cutting through costly red tape and reducing redundant paperwork. This initiative will benefit the taxpayers through economic gain and increased security, thereby enhancing the competitiveness and quality of life in our countries.

Myth: The working groups and SPP documents are a secret and not available to the public.

Fact: The SPP’s initiatives and milestones with timelines can be found by clicking the Report to Leaders link at http://www.spp.gov. The Web site contains a section to enable interested persons to provide input directly to the various working groups.

Myth: The SPP seeks to lower U.S. standards through a regulatory cooperation framework.

Fact: The framework will support and enhance cooperation and encourage the compatibility of regulations among the three partners while maintaining high standards of health and safety. Enhanced cooperation in this area will provide consumers with more affordable, safer, and more diversified and innovative products. Any regulatory changes will require agencies to conform to all U.S. administrative procedures, including an opportunity to comment.

Myth: The SPP is meant to deal with immigration reform and trade disputes.

Fact: Immigration reform is a legislative matter currently being debated in Congress and is not being dealt with in the SPP. Likewise, trade disputes between the United States, Canada, and Mexico are resolved in the NAFTA and WTO mechanisms and not the SPP.

Myth: The SPP will result in the loss of American jobs.

Fact: The SPP seeks to create jobs by reducing transaction costs and unnecessary burdens for U.S. companies, which will bolster the competitiveness of our firms globally. These efforts will help U.S. manufacturers, spur job creation, and benefit consumers.

Myth: The SPP will harm our quality of life.

Fact: The SPP improves the safety and well-being of Americans. It builds on efforts to protect our environment, improves our ability to combat infectious diseases, such as avian influenza, and ensures our food supply is safe through the exchange of information and cooperation ─ improving the quality of life for U.S. citizens. Americans enjoy world class living standards because we are engaged with the world.

Myth: The SPP creates a NAFTA-plus legal status between the three countries.

Fact: The SPP does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA. It creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.

Mark says:

Wow, because its written in black and white, it must be true then.

Mark says:

Mark, all you did was cut and paste the propaganda into your post. Do you think for yourself. What about the conservatives who think this is true, are they crazy too? This isnt Conspiracy. Its bi partisan. I am neither Dem or Rep. I look at issues and this concerns me greatly. If you can get by the Ann Coulter ads, you should read what Republicans are saying about it.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497.

Roc Rizzo says:

Frank IBC,
I don’t want to see Cheney, or ANY OTHER member of the Bush Crime Syndicate become president. They *ALL* should be locked up as far as I’m concerned.

OhForTheLoveOf says:

Going all the way back to post #50:
46. What in the hell are you talking about?

Here’s a Wiki primer on the FISA court. Please read up on it, understand what you’re talking about, then make your partisan remarks.
–WKW

True. The guy seems clueless… And he likely has no working undestanding of the English language, or why would he invent the word “neolib”?

On the other hand, NeoLib is kinda cute. I kinda like it. I am, after all, not my father’s liberal. 🙂

Mr. H. Fusion says:

On the other hand, NeoLib is kinda cute. I kinda like it. I am, after all, not my father’s liberal.
Comment by OhForTheLoveOf — 9/20/2006 @ 12:51 pm

You do have a point there, OFTLO. But as my wife always tells me, if you comb your hair a little differently, no one will notice your point. But, joking aside, wouldn’t coming up with a definition for neo-lib take up an entire topic post?

How about it Editor? How about a whole topic on the definition of a neo-lib. Then how do you spell it? One word, hyphenated, capitalized L, or whatever.

Richard Brill says:

/Rant on
/LOL on
Line 10 Go to coment
#55
Canada’s pop is more like
33,000,000

you left off a bunch of ,000’s
Line 20 Type “have a nice Day”
Line 30 Print
Line 40 Goto line 10

Frank IBC says:

#55, #82 –

Yes, as a matter of fact, I did accidentally leave off 3 zeros when I typed the current population of Canada. It is 32 million. Which as I said in my previous post, would very quickly get swallowed up by the USA’s 300 million.

AB CD says:

What about the people Clinton bombed in Iraq the day his impeachment vote was scheduled? Was Clinton lying that day, or was Saddam a WMD threat?