Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Despite media downplaying of this as the stuff of conspiracy nuts, Cathy Adams and the Texas Eagle Forum have solid conservative credentials anchored in reality and referenced facts.
1 posted on 08/21/2007 9:42:14 PM PDT by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

TTC ping


2 posted on 08/21/2007 9:43:27 PM PDT by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

The traffic here in SA is always congested and the politicians’ solution is to build a highway to Mexico. Wonderful.


3 posted on 08/21/2007 10:19:02 PM PDT by billybudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Czar; Borax Queen; WorkerbeeCitizen; janetgreen; hedgetrimmer; potlatch; processing please hold
NAFTA has created a U.S. trade deficit of $725.8 billion, 26% of that, almost $233 billion, is with China. The deficit is not only unsustainable, the Chinese government is now threatening to liquidate its $1.33 trillion of foreign reserves, including about $900 billion in U.S. treasury bonds, as a political weapon if the U.S. imposes trade sanctions to force revaluation of the Chinese currency, the Yuan. Such a move would cause our dollar to collapse!
ping!
4 posted on 08/21/2007 10:26:22 PM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

>>When Congress approved NAFTA in 1993 with a simple majority of both chambers in a lame duck session, they ignored the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the international treaty be approved by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate. Setting aside our U.S. Constitution has destabilized our borders with Mexico and Canada and created new and mounting crises.<<

1. NAFTA is not a treaty. Its legislation regulating international trade. Thus it is not co-equal with the constitution as supreme law of the land.

2. The appeals court judge who threw out the argument made in this article (which is a re-hash of the Steel worker’s union’s lawsuit) said even if it was a treaty it had been ratified under Fast Track while President Bush41 was in office.

3. The Supreme court declined to hear the appeal. This is settled law.


8 posted on 08/21/2007 11:14:05 PM PDT by gondramB (Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

When Congress approved NAFTA in 1993 with a simple majority of both chambers in a lame duck session, they ignored the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the international treaty be approved by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate. Setting aside our U.S. Constitution has destabilized our borders with Mexico and Canada and created new and mounting crises.

If it is unconstitutional, why isn’t there some constitutional, conservative lawyer taking this on? Or as I fear they are all liberals and don’t care about the Constitution.


13 posted on 08/22/2007 2:01:37 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1 - Take no prisoners))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: TxDOT; 1066AD; 185JHP; Abcdefg; Adrastus; Alamo-Girl; antivenom; AprilfromTexas; B4Ranch; B-Chan; ..

Trans-Texas Corridor PING!


14 posted on 08/22/2007 3:23:15 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Will I be suspended again for this remark?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

“• Produce our own food; • Manufacture our own military equipment; and • Prevent foreign powers from obtaining access to our heartland.”

These SHOULD go without saying. How did We get to this point? Did We sell ourselves out?


17 posted on 08/22/2007 5:07:44 AM PDT by wolfcreek (2 bad Tyranny, Treachery and Treason never take a vacation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
"referenced facts"

When anyone writes about this subject, they have to have a degree of qualification and knowledge of the issue. Otherwise, they have no credibility.

In the case of this article, you only have to read as far as the second paragraph to realize that Cathy Adams doesn't know what the Texas Mobility Fund is and is not qualified.

Then you read down to the fourth paragraph and you see that Cathie Adams doesn't know the difference between a Public Private Partnership and a Comprehensive Development Agreement.

This woman/organization has money and staff. Whay doesn't she get her facts straight and write something credible?

18 posted on 08/22/2007 5:13:18 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

The TTC would raise the cost of commuting in Texas to the point that it would become the single greatest expense of a household, after housing costs.


19 posted on 08/22/2007 6:35:26 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer (I'm a billionaire! Thanks WTO and the "free trade" system!--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse

Americans know that our roads have become busier, but few recognize that most of that traffic is due to the fact that we are importing goods that we used to manufacture. Even fewer are aware that as much as 60% of our food is now being imported or that much of our military equipment manufacturing has moved offshore. Yet federal and state lawmakers seem more committed to enabling elitist global interests, than fulfilling their constitutional responsibility to protect citizens from outside threats.


Another recycled Schlafly story. Bits and pieces of ramblings from across the spectrum, a sentence here, an event there, a statistic or two, etc. etc. thrown together.

The above para from the article makes it sound like that imports are the reason for our transportation problems in the US. Yes imports have to be transported via some method.

But if all these imports would be manufactured within the borders of the USA they still would have to be transported across the fruited plains. Thus the transportation structure would the same stress it has today, overcrowding, no money to expand and land requirements were expansions were to occur.

The days of the Conestoga wagon and mules are long passed as the major transportaion mode for the USA, like it or not. People have to deal in reality, current needs, abilities to finance, impact upon society at large, etc.


21 posted on 08/22/2007 6:58:44 AM PDT by deport (>>>--Keep your powder dry--<<< [ Meanwhile:-- Cue Spooky Music--])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
They can't even fix a pot hole. What makes them think we want to pay to have this behemoth built by foreigners?

It will take approx 50 years to complete this thing!! I would hope that in 50 years we will have a better means of transportation.

Friggin idiots.

22 posted on 08/22/2007 6:58:58 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
Members of the Texas Senate Transportation & Homeland Security Committee met on August 7 to discuss this funding dilemma. Committee Chairman John Carona suggested a new constitutional amendment to protect the two existing highway funds from future abuses. He also recommended linking the state gas tax to inflation, in order to keep pace with the economy. Both ideas could be helpful in the future, but do nothing to remedy our current state of affairs.

As usual, the first instinct of a Texas legislooter is to raise taxes.

They've been stealing this money from our highway funds for years, and the remedy is to raise our taxes!

Bunch of thieving looters.

23 posted on 08/22/2007 7:03:12 AM PDT by zeugma (If I eat right, don't smoke and exercise, I might live long enough to see the last Baby Boomer die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: anymouse
President Bush agreed to a Security and Prosperity Partnership ( http://www.spp.gov ) with Canada and Mexico without Congressional approval or debate in March 2005. He then directed the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Transportation to begin merging their bureaucracies with their counterparts in Mexico and Canada. In 2006 he met with the presidents of Mexico and Canada in Cancun, Mexico, and this year he took time from his vacation in Crawford to attend another closed-door meeting with them in Quebec, Canada.

BTTT

26 posted on 08/22/2007 7:24:40 AM PDT by Borax Queen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson