In addition to the one cutting the country in half through the heart of Texas?
Posted on 06/29/2008 7:47:06 AM PDT by SandRat
It is a steel and concrete corridor that will run right through the Old Pueblo, connecting Mexico City to Edmonton, Alberta.
Its purpose is to facilitate trade among the three countries and minimize traffic and congestion for residents.
Or is it evidence of a move afoot to intertwine the three North American countries and blur the lines of sovereignty?
That's a matter of opinion.
(Excerpt) Read more at azstarnet.com ...
Oh cr*p! Right through the heart of Utah.
After eight years of George Hoover Walker Bush, this erstwhile supporter of his votes "Treachery".
In addition to the one cutting the country in half through the heart of Texas?
“Trade and globalization are a given,” he said. “The whole notion that globalization is something that can be reversed or avoided is not reality. The train has left the station.”
Total, self-serving BS. Stop all these “initiatives”, enforce our borders and our immigration laws and these “inexorable” forces will be seen for the political moves they actually are.
This line of nonsense is used to justify every free trade agreement, every refusal to enforce immigration laws, and every initiative of this sort where the will of the American people has to be ignored, and these initiatives pursued under every false pretense the spin doctors can make up.
All nothing but BS. The American voters can stop this if they wake up and decide to stop it.
That pickup truck with Mexican landscapers going down my street the other day was obviously finding another NAFTA Superhighway route. I quickly grabbed my tinfoil hat and called Ron Paul’s office.
Where am I supposed to move in order to spend my retirement years in America?
I miss America — living here in L.A. County — and would very much like to return there.
New Zealand?
(Helen Clark isn’t going to live forever)...
The lack of east-west connectivity is striking. Other than an arc around the gulf to Florida, and a short hop over from San Diego, there essentially is none. If there were to be a natural disaster or wartime attack in the continental US, I’d hate to be on the end of the line (Canada). Personally, being dependent upon a single foreign port of entry, no matter the supposed cost benefits, is unnerving. I’d rather keep it a spread out patchwork, even if it means union, so that any problem with shipping would remain regionalized.
Eisenhower built the Interstates as a military highway after observing how effective the autobahns moved the German army during WW2.
Our interstates pass by every major military base in the U.S.. Most go by the front gate of the base (witness Hill AFB).
By allowing the NAFTA corridors to use interstate highways, are we not opening our military bases to attack, weakening the security of the country in a major way?
I really do not have an answer to the above question, but, on the surface it appears pretty shaky.
....Bob
Yeah. It's clearly intended to divide, not unite, this country.
It’s easy to envision this being some sort of an invasion route, isn’t it? From an efficiency point of view, if you’re looking to cut shipping distance and are serving three countries, wouldn’t you want your west coast port and distribution point to be central to all three, meaning it would be in California? Is there no plan for the east coast, as far as port of entry? The whole thing is just curious.
.....there essentially is none.....
How about I 40 and I 80
> (Helen Clark isn’t going to live forever)...
God willing, with this year’s election (November?) we shall see the last of Helen Clark’s nasty arse and her Gummint of scolding socialist schoolmarms and lesbo-feminist lefty liberals.
New Zealand is poised to bring in a Conservative government by landslide.
Thereafter, if we can only foist Helen Clark on the UN our victory will be complete. The certain destruction of that thoroughly corrupted and discredited Institution can only be a matter of a few years hence, under her leadership.
They don't call most of America "Fly-over Country" for nothing.
Hmmmmm. The UN. It’s worth a try...
Since the interstate system was designed, there has been a significant population shift and north-south roads are lacking.
Plus, with NAFTA, there is more north-south freight traffic.
Having said that, earlier this year, several roads were designated as "Corridors of the Future" and included the entire length of I-10 and I-70 St Louis to KC.
This road has existed for some years - it is known to my knowledge, as the loneliest highway from Phoenix to Canada, Highway 95, but a wonderful drive for those who just like less city and more rural. I have read most of the SPP fact sheet, have a few questions but other than that this has been “on the books” for some time.
This is one of the major reasons the GOP lost here in Indiana in 2006. The GOP RINO governor has been pushing this roadway. Taking peoples land to please the global world was a loser at the ballot box.
When you’re planning to rule the world, the occasional sacrifice of someone else’s political career is just part of the down payment.
Yes, you have a good point there.
,,, but the results of her policy mix will. She's signed NZ up to the Kyoto Protocol and sorted out a free trade deal with China. That gives them a leg up... she's now a religious fundamentalist [Greenie]. The paradox is, China's the major polluter and all she talks about is global warming. I wonder how much she's been paid to shut NZ down.
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.