North American Union Threatens U.S. Sovereignty

HumanEventsOnline ^ | Aug 21, 2006 | Alan Caruba

[1rudeboy]

You nailed it!

[ThisLittleLightofMine]

Why would they pull it?

[Toddsterpatriot]

I prefer bolstering the American economy.

And free trade hurts the economy? Is that why countries that trade more have bigger economies? Do you claim that more protectionist countries do better than freer countries?

[varon]

North American Union Threatens U.S. Sovereignty

Wroooong!!! The NAU is not the threat. The threat lies with Presidents like George W Bush who promote these ideas and is already laying the groundwork with blatant disregard of our rights by flooding our nation with new NAU residents.

Maybe the only way to stop him, is to impeach and convict him!!!

[1rudeboy]

A patriot who fears free-markets. Well, I suppose there were Soviets who thought they were patriots as well.

[hedgetrimmer]

Built into the "free traders" premiere internationalist institution, the WTO, is the clear mission to "lift all boats" in the global economy with 'multilateral' trade agreements that give preference to developing (China) and third world countries. Read the website and trade agreements and see how the "free traders" use our tax money to build infrastructure in "least developed countries" so they can offshore and outsource what were once domestic industries. The "free traders" are inherently anti-American, they prefer to use our tax money to make slave labor nations the source of goods, and ultimately are forcing competition of free workers with slave laborers in their globalist economy.

[hedgetrimmer]

Rest assured, the "free traders" posting here 'get it' as well. They are committed to the globalist revolution, and if you took a look at the article "Toward a North American Union", you'll see a pretty good explanation of how they have accomplished the coup.

[1rudeboy]

I prefer bolstering the American economy. I could care less about the rest of the world's financial condition.
Even Adam Smith made convincing cases for some protectionism at times.

But not for protectionism as a means of "bolstering" the American economy. He understood that there might be a need for protecting industries vital to national security, and that the threat of protectionism can be used to open foreign markets. The notion that "protectionism is good for our general welfare" is definitely not his.

As for your comment that you "don't fear free markets," in a semantic sense you are correct. You simply fear people who believe in free markets, as evidenced by some of your comments on this thread.

[Toddsterpatriot]

I love borders and free trade.

[Mase]

For a guy (Alan Caruba) who made his name debunking the lies of environmentalists and consumer protectionists, it's unfortunate to see him so readily buying into this nonsense. Of course, it's been a long time since he's written a successful book so maybe he's got something more in mind.

[Mase]

Our sainted Founding Fathers warned us against getting involved in any "entangling alliances".

Political, yes. Economic, no.

[1rudeboy]

So do I.

[1rudeboy]

I have no idea. But I do know he's on the "list."