Filed under: 2-party system, Arizona, Barack Obama, big pharma, Dictatorship, Empire, Fascism, government bureaucrat, government control, government regulation, health care, health care reform, Healthcare, John McCain, Kennedy health care bill, left right paradigm, mccain, medicaid, medical care, medical industrial complex, medicare, neocons, Neolibs, obama, obama care, obama deception, obamacare, Senate, socialism, Ted Kennedy, town hall, universial health care, US Constitution
McCain Booed For Saying Obama Respects The Constitution
Filed under: 2-party system, 2008 Election, amnesty, Amnesty Bill, Arizona, Border Patrol, CFR, code pink, DHS, George Bush, Globalism, heckled, Homeland Security, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, John McCain, left right paradigm, Mexico, neocons, Neolibs, Protest, Ted Kennedy, war on drugs
McCain Admits Supporting Illegal Immigration Bill
Code Pink Interrupts John McCain
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/..cord-to-woo-hispanics/
’McCain is mentally unstable and out of control’ : Arizona Republicans
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070305/blumenthal
McCain: It doesn’t matter that I don’t know cost of gas
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_It_doesnt_matter_that_I_0629.html
Fmr. Bush aide takes over McCain campaign
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0..oday_operation.html
Filed under: 2008 Election, 2nd Amendment, Al Gore, andrew Napolitano, CPAC, DEBT, Economy, election fraud, Global Warming, John McCain, Mitt Romney, New York, Republican Debate, republican forum, Ron Paul, ron paul blimp, Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, US Constitution, US Economy, vote scam, voter fraud, War On Terror
Ron Paul – CPAC Speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWdtMftHTtQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMtjgMTYE1Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SblfSHWHnM
Ron Paul blimp apparently slashed
http://www.readthehook.com/blog/in..ntly-slashed/
Ron Paul Decides Not To Run 3rd Party
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=6554
‘We Are Acting Too Much Like Democrats,’ Paul Says
http://www.cnsnews.com/..rchive/200802/POL20080208a.html
Ron Paul Defends The Second Amendment
http://infowars.net/articles/february2008/080208gunban.htm
Paper: Ron Paul Supporters, We Were Wrong
http://www.montanakaimin.com..article/ron_paul_supporters_we_were_wrong/
Romney Leaves 36 Million in Debt, Ron Paul Has Zero Debt!
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008
Ron Paul’s Name Crossed Out On New York Ballot Papers
http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/070208_crossed.htm
Ron Paul Running Mate Short List Includes Judge Andrew Napolitano?
http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-.tano-020708.html
Congressman Paul Cosponsors Combat Veterans Debt Elimination Act
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.js..nav=Groupspace
Ron Paul: McCain friends with Feingold, Kennedy
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/n..ron_paul_mccain_friends_with_f.html
Filed under: 2-party system, 4th amendment, Big Brother, George Bush, Keith Olbermann, left right paradigm, neocons, Neolibs, NSA, Senate, supreme court, Surveillance, Ted Kennedy
Expert: Both parties cooperate to keep administration crimes secret
Raw Story
November 29, 2007
The Bush administration has made widespread use of the so-called state secrets privilege to dismiss lawsuits that seek to challenge its domestic wiretaps and other illegal activities. Now two veteran senators, Arlen Spector (R-PA) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA), are teaming up to craft legislation that would direct judges to evaluate the government’s state secrets claims rather than accepting them uncritically.
Keith Olbermann described this proposed legislation with a high degree of skepticism, saying sardonically, “The bill may end up as part of the Senate’s wiretapping law, due for a vote next month — after which the president will sign it and monkeys will fly out of his butt.”
He then turned to constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley, asking him why there isn’t already such a law, as most Americans would assume there would be.
“It actually is the law,” Turley replied. “This has been a distortion, or a mutation of the law. The privilege has become something that I think the Supreme Court never imagined when it first created it.”
“Today, the privilege is used primarily not to keep something secret, but to keep something from being used against the government,” Turley went on. “I was in a courtroom when people laughed when the government counsel argued that they could use the privilege to claim as secret something that was published on the cover of the New York Times.”
Turley said that some judges are already scrutinizing government claims under the state secret privilege but suggested that those who do not are merely “lazy.” He pointed out that even the original case which established the privilege was eventually found to have been based on a lie, “and the Supreme Court refused to reexamine the case.”
Perhaps Turley’s most telling observation was that members of both parties are happy to see these cases dismissed because they are determined to keep impeachment off the table. “There’s a lot of people, both Democrats and Republicans, that … don’t want a court to say that the president did something that is a federal crime. That’s why they’re trying to get all these cases thrown out of court. … When a federal judge says the president committed a crime, it’s pretty darn hard to ignore that.”
However, he agreed with Olbermann that it would still be important to have such a law in place for after Bush leaves office, saying, “The privilege is now a tool used to protect the government from its own crimes.”
Expert on Olbermann: ‘It Is Rather Clear That What The President Ordered Was A Federal Crime’
http://www.crooksandliars.com/200….-federal-crime/
Filed under: 2-party system, Alan Greenspan, Bill Clinton, Censorship, Chris Matthews, Dick Cheney, George Bush, Hardball, jon stewart, neocons, Neolibs, Ted Kennedy, War Crimes, White House
Matthews says Bush administration has “finally been caught in their criminality”
Examiner
October 4, 2007
Chris Matthews had barely finished praising his colleagues at the 10th anniversary party for his “Hardball” show Thursday night in Washington, D.C. when his remarks turned political and pointed, even suggesting that the Bush administration had “finally been caught in their criminality.”
In front of an audience that included such notables as Alan Greenspan, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Sen. Ted Kennedy, Matthews began his remarks by declaring that he wanted to “make some news” and he certainly didn’t disappoint. After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations.
The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him.
“Not so this crowd,” he added, explaining that Bush White House officials — especially those from Vice President Cheney‘s office — called MSNBC brass to complain about the content of his show and attempted to influence its editorial content. “They will not silence me!” Matthews declared.
“They’ve finally been caught in their criminality,” Matthews continued, although he did not specify the exact criminal behavior to which he referred. He then drew an obvious Bush-Nixon parallel by saying, “Spiro Agnew was not an American hero.”
Matthews left the throng of Washington A-listers with a parting shot at Cheney: “God help us if we had Cheney during the Cuban missile crisis. We’d all be under a parking lot.”
Following his remarks, a few network insiders and party goers wondered what kind of effect Matthews’ sharp criticism of the White House would have on Tuesday’s Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan, which Matthews co-moderates alongside CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo.
“I find it hard to believe that Republican candidates will feel as if they’re being given a fair shot at Tuesday’s debate given the partisan pot-shots lobbed by Matthews this evening,” said one attendee.
When reached, the White House declined to comment and NBC refused requests to release video of the event. The event included such NBC/MSNBC brass as NBC Senior Vice President Phil Griffin (the former “Hardball” executive producer called “Hardball” the “best show on cable television”), “Meet the Press” host Tim Russert, “Today” show executive producer Jim Bell, NBC News Specials Executive Producer Phil Alongi, “Meet the Press” Executive Producer Betsy Fischer, NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell, MSNBC Vice President Tammy Haddad, “Hardball” correspondent David Shuster and Vice President for MSNBC Prime-Time Programming Bill Wolff.
On a side note: Matthews was overheard discussing his Tuesday appearance on “The Daily Show,” which featured a heated exchange with host Jon Stewart. According to one source, Matthews was steadfast in his belief that the debate left Stewart crestfallen, and Matthews victorious.
Filed under: Amnesty Bill, Canada, China, Congress, corporation, Defazio, Felipe Calderon, George Bush, Globalism, Immigration, John McCain, Mexican Trucks, Mexico, NAFTA, NAFTA Superhighway, North American Union, secret meetings, SPP, SPP Summit, Stephen Harper, Ted Kennedy, Toll Roads, Virgil Goode
Congress debate begins on North American Union
WND
September 25, 2007
A House resolution urging President Bush “not to go forward with the North American Union or the NAFTA Superhighway system” is – according to its sponsor Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., in an exclusive WND interview – “also a message to both the executive branch and the legislative branch.”
As WND previously reported, on Jan. 22 Goode introduced H.C.R. 40, titled “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.”
The bill has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
WND asked Goode if the president was risking electoral success for the Republican Party in 2008 with his insistence on pushing for North American integration via the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.
“Yes,” Goode answered. “You won’t hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer.”
How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the SPP could turn into the North American Union as “conspiracy theorists”?
“The president is really engaging in a play on words,” Goode responded. “The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee,” he explained, “and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, ‘There’s no NAFTA Superhighway.’ But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada.”
Goode is a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development of the House Committee on Appropriations.
“So, I think that saying we’re ‘conspiracy theorists’ or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition,” Goode concluded.
Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: “The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada,” Goode confirmed.
The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.
“Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins,” he argued.
“I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country,” Goode continued. “The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration.”
As WND reported, the Department of Transportation has begun a Mexican truck “demonstration project” under which 100 Mexican trucking companies are being allowed to run their long-haul rigs throughout the U.S.
Previously, Mexican trucks have been limited to a 20-mile commercial zone in the United States, with the requirement that goods bound for locations in the U.S. beyond the 20-mile commercial zone be off-loaded to U.S. trucks.
WND reported last month that Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., successfully offered an amendment to the Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill to block DOT from spending any federal funds to implement the truck project.
Dorgan’s amendment passed 75-23, after Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., changed her vote to support Dorgan.
By a voice vote, the House passed an amendment offered by Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., to the DOT appropriations bill comparable to Dorgan’s, designed to block the agency from using federal funds to implement the truck project.
DeFazio chairs the House transportation subcommittee that oversees motor carriers.
“With the Trans-Texas Corridor, which I would say is part of the NAFTA Superhighway system, and with this NAFTA plot with the Mexican trucks just coming in and not loading off to U.S. trucks, they will just drive right over the Rio Grande and come on over into Texas,” Goode argued. “A lot of these Mexican trucks will be bring containerized cargo from the west coast of Mexico where they will be unloaded in Mexican ports to avoid the fees and costs of unloading at U.S. ports.”
“So, when you look at the total package,” he continued, “we do have a NAFTA Superhighway system already in place. There are those in all three countries that believe we should have a North American Union and the Security and Prosperity Partnership, in my opinion takes us down that road. And I am vigorously opposed to the loss of our sovereignty.”
Why, WND asked, do so many congressmen and senators insist on writing and telling their constituents that they don’t know anything about the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or that SPP working groups are really just to increase our competitiveness?
“In the House, a strong majority voted to provide no money in the transportation funding bill,” Goode responded. “I commend Congressman Duncan Hunter for submitting an amendment to the Department of Transportation funding bill [which] got over 360 votes that said no funds in the transportation appropriation measure, prohibiting Department of Transportation funds from being used to participate on working groups that promote the Security and Prosperity Partnership.”
As WND reported, Hunter’s amendment to the FY 2008 Department of Transportation funding bill prohibiting DOT from using federal funds to participate in SPP working groups creating NAFTA Superhighways passed 362 to 63, with strong bipartisan support. The House approved H.R. 3074 by 268-153, with the Hunter amendment included.
“So, I think a majority the House, if you had an up or down vote on the SPP, would vote down on the SPP,” Goode concluded. “But some still say, and it’s a play on words, that we don’t have a Security and Prosperity Partnership that will lead to a North American Union. I don’t think they can say anymore that we don’t have a Security and Prosperity Partnership arrangement between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, because that was done in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, and the recent meeting at Montebello was to talk about it further.”
WND asked Goode to comment on the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, a group of multinational corporations selected by the Chambers of Commerce in Mexico, Canada and the U.S. as the central adviser of SPP working groups.
At the SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, the NACC met behind closed doors with the three leaders, cabinet secretaries who were present, and top SPP working group bureaucrats, while various public advocacy groups, environmental groups, labor unions – and the press – were excluded.
Should SPP working group meetings be open to the public?
“I wish they were,” Goode responded. “If it is as the Bush administration says, ‘We’re not planning any North American Union,’ then why wouldn’t those meetings be open, why wouldn’t you let the media in?” Goode asked.
“But some of the very big corporations want the goods from China to come in here unchecked,” he continued. “It costs money for U.S. trucks to transport Chinese goods from West Coast ports like Los Angeles or Long Beach. But if you can have a Mexican truck and Mexican truck driver, that’s going to be cheaper. And it’s all about the margins. The margins relate directly to how much money the multi-national corporations are going to make.”
Has the Senate debate on the Dorgan amendment brought the issues of the NAU and NAFTA Superhighways more to the attention of the Senate?
“I think so,” Goode said. “That debate had a very positive effect. You had grassroots support calling the Senate on the Dorgan amendment.
“The Bush administration engages in the same play of words with all these issues,” Goode added. “Take a look at the Kennedy-McCain comprehensive immigration reform, which the Bush administration has now tried to jam through the Senate not once, but twice.
“The Bush administration claims it’s not [amnesty] when you let someone stay in the country and give them a path to citizenship,” Goode pointed out. “Well, that’s their definition, not my definition, and not the definition of the majority of the public. The majority of the public called in and buried the amnesty bill because of public pressure. Public pressure also got de-funded the pilot program on Mexican trucks in this country.”
So should the U.S. pull out of the SPP?
“Yes,” Goode answered, “but the best way to end SPP would be to have a chief executive that wouldn’t do anything with it.”
What does Goode think of the state legislatures that are passing anti-NAU, anti-NAFTA Superhighway and anti-SPP resolutions?
“If enough state legislatures pass resolutions like that, it surely should have an impact on the House and the Senate,” Goode said.
“President Bush’s position is that we need to carry out NAFTA and we need to have this free flow of goods with Mexico and Canada,” Goode explained. “Well, Bush’s approach involves a derogation of our sovereignty and it also undermines the security and the safety of the country.
“It will be much easier for a truck to get a container on the west coast of Mexico and haul in a biological or radiological or nuclear weapon than it would be if you are going to have to unload the trucks on the Texas-Mexico border and put the goods and material in a U.S. truck,” he continued.
“The problem is that the NAU, NAFTA Superhighways and SPP all go back to money,” Goode stressed. “The multinational companies want their goods from Mexico and China because they want the cheap labor.”
What about the U.S.’s large and growing trade imbalance with China?
“I don’t want to have to be an ‘I told you so’ person,” Goode answered, “but I was a vigorous opponent of PNTR (“permanent normal trade relations”) and before that of ‘most favored nation’ trade status with China. We need tariffs and quotas with China. Personally, if I know food is coming in from China, I won’t buy it. The American people with the adoption of COOL, country of origin labeling, with the food clearly labeled, I think you will see the American public will shy away from Chinese products.”
In 2000, Congress voted to extend to China PNTR. “Most favored nation” or MFN trade status, was given to China first in 1980 by the Carter administration. COOL rules are administered by the Department of Agriculture.
Goode concluded the interview by thanking WND for covering the SPP, NAU and NAFTA Superhighway issues: “I want to thank you for putting these issues out where people can read it,” Goode said. “You have enlightened hundreds of thousands if not millions of American citizens who otherwise would have been greatly in the dark on the SPP.”
Private Toll Roads In Florida?
http://www.miamiherald.com/467/story/248197.html
Reason Magazine calls NAU agenda “a Xenophobic Fantasy”
http://reason.com/news/show/122632.html
Canada: Losing Water Through NAFTA
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?c..va&aid=6859
How the Government Will Toll Existing Roads Electronically with Transponders in Cars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKauoewoOPw
Mexicans pour into Canada from U.S
http://www.canada.com/nation…9f47-9bd487596021&k=8472
What is the ‘North American Union’?
Kennedy cramming hate crimes into defense bill
‘Shameless attempt to push homosexual agenda … by exploiting soldiers’
Bob Unruh
World Net Daily
July 17, 2007
Sen. Edward Kennedy’s “hate crimes” plan – feared by Christian leaders as a way to censor biblical condemnations of homosexuality – has been proposed as an amendment to a defense spending bill, a maneuver opponents are calling “shameless” and “manipulative.”
The Kennedy plan, which earlier was introduced as separate legislation, would classify gender and sexual orientation as specially protected classes of people under federal law. Opponents say it would require law enforcement personnel to become “thought police” to determine whether a crime already addressed by existing law could be prosecuted under an enhanced standard of “hate crime.”
The White House already has suggested the proposal is unneeded and a veto would be in order if it is approved. But Kennedy has proposed inserting it into the defense appropriations plan, which Bush wants to pass.
“The maneuver is one clearly calculated to put the president in the position of ending up vetoing a defense appropriation,” Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel told WND.
Joe Glover of the Family Policy Network said the move is “shockingly manipulative.”
“It is a shameless attempt to push the homosexual agenda on the American people by exploiting American soldiers who are currently in harm’s way around the world,” he said.
Many dismiss the idea Christian pastors and others who oppose homosexual behavior on biblical grounds would end up being punished for their beliefs and thoughts, including the ACLU. The organization issued a statement endorsing the plan to amend the defense spending bill to include the hate crimes legislation.
“The serious problem of crime directed at members of society because of their race, color, religion, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability merits legislative action,” the ACLU said.
And the ACLU noted a clause protecting “free speech” in the proposal makes it clear it would be applied only to actual crimes, not thoughts.
However, WND columnist Janet Folger wrote the idea of arresting people for stating their religious beliefs that homosexuality is wrong is no longer something that “may” happen in the future.
“Here’s the Cliff Notes of what so called ‘hate crime’ legislation has already done IN AMERICA,” she wrote. “This is no longer up for debate. Here are the facts.”
* Madison, Wisconsin. David Ott, a former homosexual, was arrested for a “hate crime” for sharing his testimony with a homosexual at a gas station. He faced a $10,000 fine and one year behind bars. Seven thousand dollars in legal fees later, [he] was ordered to attend re-education classes at the University of Wisconsin conducted by a lesbian.
* St. Petersburg, Florida. Five Christians including two pastors were arrested at a homosexual rally for stepping onto the public sidewalk instead staying caged in their officially designated “free speech zone.”
* Elmira, New York. The Elmira police arrested seven Christians for praying in a public park where a homosexual festival was getting started.
* Crystal Lake, Illinois. Two 16 year old girls are facing felony “hate crime” charges for the content of their flyers.
* Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Arlene Elshinnawy, a 75-year-old grandmother of three, and Linda Beckman, a 70-year-old grandmother of 10 (along with nine others), were arrested for sharing their faith on the public sidewalk.
Folger said the testimony from the grandmothers can be seen and heard at the Stop Hate Crimes Now website.
“Just how many cases do we need to cite before America stands up and stops the bill that will criminalize Christianity?” she asked.
“It will criminalize not just those willing to speak the truth and spread the Gospel in the public square, but those pastors, authors, radio hosts and anyone who ‘counsels, commands, induces or procures [the commission of a ‘hate crime’]’,” she said.
Rev. Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America, said the plan will “punish Christians for preaching certain biblical principles and lead to pastors being jailed in violation of their First Amendment rights as we have already witnessed in Europe.”
A pastor in Europe already has served a prison term for preaching that the Bible condemns homosexuality.
Scarborough said it is significant that the proposal to add the plan as an amendment “will bypass the Senate committee process, thereby denying significant debate on the legislation.”
“If this bill passes, a pastor who preaches about homosexuality being sin could be prosecuted if someone who has heard his message commits a crime against a homosexual. The implications for conservative biblical pastors who have broadcast ministries are staggering. We cannot allow Christians to be dragged into court for simply fulfilling their biblical mandate of preaching the gospel,” said Scarborough, a Southern Baptist pastor who now is participating in a “70 Weeks to Save America” campaign.
“It is clear the enemies of the cross are wickedly shrewd,” said Rusty Lee Thomas, of Elijah Ministries.
Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy for the Family Research Council, said even with “speech protections” there are grave dangers.
“We’ve seen it in states, with the Philadelphia 11, where they used ethnic intimidation laws. Intimidation is a broad term, it does not require any act of violence and intimidation is included in the definition of hate crime,” he told WND.
“What we see and what we’ve seen repeatedly, when a crime occurs, the homosexual activists will inevitably blame it on the speech of people like us who oppose homosexual behavior,” he said.
Sprigg cited the recent murder of a homosexual in California. Witnesses said the attackers were speaking Russian, so immediately nearby Slavic Christian churches came under suspicion, he said.
Staver said a vote on the amendment could come as early as this week.
“I think this bill is a significant threat, more so than most Americans realize,” he said.
“I’ve seen situations where courts told mothers they cannot even expose their own children to teachings or messages that are ‘homophobic,'” he said “They construe anything that says homosexuality is wrong or immoral to be homophobic.”
“Hate crimes legislation that includes sexual orientation is bad law because it criminalizes speech and does nothing to prevent violent crimes. All crimes are motivated by hate. Hate crimes laws will not be used to punish the perpetrator, but will be used to silence people of faith, religious groups, clergy, and those who support traditional moral values,” said Staver.
The American Family Association earlier issued an “Action Alert” about the pending proposal.
The Alliance Defense Fund, a leading advocate for freedom of speech in the U.S., analyzed the proposal and concluded “it is entirely constitutional for a person’s speech to be used to prove a crime was committed.”
“And one’s speech (including reading materials, websites visited, sermons heard and preached) is particularly relevant when a component of the crime itself is politically incorrect motive,” the analysis said. “The chilling of speech that may result from such a regime is self-evident, whether the First Amendment is implicated or not.”
Michael Marcavage of Repent America also has warned of the potential consequences.
Former White House insider Chuck Colson, in his Breakpoint
noworldsystem.com 