Posted on 08/30/2006 6:02:42 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
PING!
That ought to give you as much security as we have now if not more, and certainly no Mexicans will be driving vehicles directly onto that road from Mexico.
In the meantime I suggest that all the funding that would otherwise be made available to Texas to build this monstrosity be transferred to Indiana for the completion of I-69. By diverting the money from Texas then the evil Mexicans will not get their hands on it Fur Shur.
This thing is one big terrorist target.
Joint Stewardship of our Environment
That's all we need: trilateral environ-MENTAL-ism!
The merits of the project aside, my objection is the anti-democratic nature of having something that affects the country so much not being the subject of congressional oversight, or even free and open discussion of the plans, goals, and participants in the plan. No matter what the project, we the people should have government in the sunshine, with a chance to see what it is we are paying for, and what will affect our lives.
BTTT
Interesting. Perhaps we should build a stealth road that no one will use, much less find? It would be safer.
Puting telcom, pipelines, electrical lines and a road down the same right of way is a tempting target
Purhaps we should do it in the open and publically, if it is so harmless an idea.
Why do you support secret policy making? Are you afraid the light of day will hurt our democracy? What is your stake in all of this that you find secrecy so appealing?
Furthermore, I favor Mexico for Mexicans and policies that make them want to stay home.
bump.
You realize, of course, that you refer to organizations that have their own websites, opposition organizations that have their own websites, and a Representative of the U.S. Congress that sits on the committee that could hold hearings on this matter if it so chooses.
As long as said policies are debated and ratified by the legislature rather than implemented by regulatory agencies, I'll back you on that.
I don't believe taht the private organizations are sufficient to keep the faith with anything other than their own interests. I would prefer that the administration not force people to beg for information. ALl it does is creates suspician when no suspician is warranted, or it creates confidence that the government can do know wrong, when in fact it certainly can.
Where is the opportunity for public imput into what is at least being alleged as one of the most significant policies to affect American commerce in many years?
Private organizations, no matter what they publish for or against, are not a protection of the public. There is no guarantee that what is published by them is true, accurtate and complete, and being private, they have no oversight.
I don't think this constitues public involvement in the decision making process at all.
I don't trust any government that says,, "Hey, if you nwant to know what's going on, demand a hearing in congress!" Maybe we'll hold a hearing before this all becomes a fait accompli. Yeah, right...government in the sunshine by true men of the people...
After all, we're all to stupid to vote and run the country, right?
How many of those "tempting targets" do you think exist already? Heck, how many better targets exist?
I agree with most of what you wrote, but underneath your comment runs what appears to be a preference for government by direct democracy.
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.