..........................................................
And now, a word from the Christian Right...refreshing, actually.
NewsWithViews.com
February 6, 2007
h/t to Deanna Spingola
By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
Looking at the potential presidential frontrunners for both the Democrat and Republican parties reveals that virtually everyone of them would surrender America's borders. Not one of the presidential frontrunners from either party would protect our borders against illegal immigration. Just the opposite. They would continue George Bush's policy of wide open borders, including his determination to grant amnesty to illegals. In other words, when it comes to protecting our borders, there is not a nickel's worth of difference between the two major parties' leading presidential contenders.
Democratic presidential frontrunners include John Edwards, Barak Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Republican frontrunners include John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani.
In fact, virtually every Democratic candidate, and even the vast majority of Republican candidates, would provide no relief to America's border problems. And, yes, that includes Sam Brownback and Newt Gingrich. Notable exceptions include Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, and Tom Tancredo, with Tancredo at the head of the class.
Obviously, should Hunter, Paul, or Tancredo miraculously win the White House, the push for a North American Union (NAU) complete with a NAFTA superhighway and a trilateral, hemispheric government, would be stopped dead in its tracks. For this reason, the GOP machine (and the insiders who control it) will never allow someone such as Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, or Tom Tancredo to obtain the nomination.
It's time the American people faced a hard, cold reality: no matter who the two major parties nominate in November 2008, the push for open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, and the NAU will continue unabated. In other words, anyone who believes that unimpeded illegal immigration (and related issues) just might be the biggest threat to our national sovereignty and security (and count me as one who does) will not be able to vote for either the Republican or Democratic nominee in 2008. It's time to start preparing for that reality now.
It's time the American people faced a hard, cold reality: no matter who the two major parties nominate in November 2008, the push for open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, and the NAU will continue unabated. In other words, anyone who believes that unimpeded illegal immigration (and related issues) just might be the biggest threat to our national sovereignty and security (and count me as one who does) will not be able to vote for either the Republican or Democratic nominee in 2008. It's time to start preparing for that reality now.
Does that mean that Republicans should not do everything they can to help Tancredo, Paul, or Hunter gain the nomination? Of course not. If the vast majority of the GOP rank and file would get solidly behind these three men, one of them might have a chance of succeeding. However, the track record of the GOP faithful is not very reassuring.
Instead of supporting principled, uncompromising men of integrity, such as the three men named above, Republican voters will doubtless buy into the party mantra of pragmatism and help nominate another spineless globalist such as currently occupies the White House, which will leave us exactly where we are now.
So, here is the sixty-four million dollar question: What will principled conservative voters do in 2008? My hope and prayer is that after failing to receive their party's nomination, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter (or at least one of them) will leave the party and bring their (his) followers to the Constitution Party (CP). In all likelihood, the CP will have ballot access in over 45 states. It is already the third largest political party in the country and is currently the fastest growing political party in the nation. A national leader such as Paul, Tancredo, or Hunter would provide the CP with a very attractive alternative to the globalist candidates being offered by the two major parties.
By nature, I am not a single issue voter. However, I am sensible enough to realize that there are currently a handful of issues that will literally make or break America's future. And right now, the illegal immigration and emerging North American Union issues are at the very top of the list. Further failure on these issues will mean the end of America as we know it. And I mean very soon.
Regardless of what Hunter, Paul, and Tancredo ultimately do, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents who believe we must protect America's borders, stop the burgeoning North American Union, and secure our national sovereignty must be prepared to abandon the two major parties' presidential nominees in 2008 and support an "America First" third party candidate. Even a virtually unknown candidate with limited experience, but someone who understands the issues and has the backbone to do what is right, would be head and shoulders above what the two major parties are currently shoving down our throats.
Better start preparing yourselves for it now, folks.
...............................................................
It is apparent that President Bush does not intend to safeguard our borders; just as Bill Clinton, and Bush's father before him, Bush, allied by members of Congress never intended that our borders be a defining factor in our Nation's sovereignty. Unhappily, Our border states of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California expect, and ask too little of our illegal immigrants.
Upon arriving, immigrants do not have to learn to speak English, can expect to get work, Medicaid benefits, including hospital care, drivers' license, and a fake social security card. They're set, then to pull down (artificially depressed) wages, but enough to send some money home. It's all a great adventure, a chance at a new life for them. On a small scale it wouldn't matter at all. But when the law of large numbers begin to operate, the the concomitant law of unintended consequences also comes into play. On the local level, towns where illegals tend to pool, the ability of social services to handle and pay for these numbers of people, who shouldn't be here in the first place, begins to degrade. Local inhabitants on the lower end of the socio-economic scale cannot any longer expect to find employment in or around their communities. They have to either move, or travel longer distances to find work. As the Mexican diaspora continues to flow northward, the problem is exacerbated, and the demographics of say, smaller towns in Georgia, become distorted. All the while, big government has calmly looked on, and done nothing. Now they are making a show of enforcement. But it's just a show. National Guard troops are sent in with a 'do nothing' directive. The troops came storming into New Orleans after Katrina, took U.S. citizen's guns away from them at gunpoint, an insane thing to do, yet they are not armed while 'protecting our borders'. They were sent in on a 'supportive role', whatever that is. Face it, our borders will remain porous for the foreseeable future, until we get a president with a pair of balls.
All of this brings us to the question of why? Is there some agenda the government is concealing from the public. You bet there is. It's called the New World Order, The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, the SPP, in which our borders with Canada and Mexico will be nullified. Stripped of sovereignty, America will come under the rule of a collection of elites, who will take over our governance and our lives. Exactly as The European Union (which is being advanced in exactly the same way in Europe), is being perpetuated on the Europeans today. None of this has come to meaningful public debate, or forum or referendum. That's because it isn't being advanced as Law; rather, it is being instituted through such plans such as NAFTA, and a NAFTA Superhighway.
Big Brother. Oh, George Orwell, what prophecy.
In response to these events, Representatives of the House have put forward this Resolution to the House of Representatives:
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North... (Introduced in House)HCON 487 IH
109th CONGRESS 2d Session H. CON. RES. 487
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
September 28, 2006 Mr. GOODE (for himself, Mr. PAUL, Mr. JONES of North Carolina, and Mr. TANCREDO) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada. Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);
Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA;
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union;
Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers;
Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That--
(1) the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System;
(2) the United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and
(3) the President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
.........................................
It is up to all Americans to speak out against this take-over of our country. It is real, as real as cancer (like, you know,the Federal Reserve), and we must not give in to it. Fight back. New World Order? No thanks. I like the old one; for all its flaws, it still belongs to the People, not some elitist technocrats, who only want the good for themselves. As good as it is to see someone, anyone in Congress stand up and say, "This is not right", it is not nearly enough. It is not enough to merely "express the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a Superhighway". We must DEMAND that Congress get to the bottom of this outrage, and dismantle it. Otherwise, we will see anarchy in America. And in my view, that's not necessarily a bad thing, anarchy. Big Brother is coming for you, and you, and yours.
|