NAFTA superhighway

[Dave Wood]

http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261467

[njandrewg]

Paul probably voted against it

[Dave Wood]

Sorry, I hit the post button by accident.

This page sounds like someone who is supporting Paul at first and then shows Paul as being the one to request funding for parts of the Nafta superhighway. I think we made to get clearification on this from the campaign?

[LibertyEagle]

If I click on what he says will explain everything, it says I have to be registered... so what does it say? Because I don't want to give Hannity a dime.

[ecliptic]

Please stop posting negative "hit piece" type articles here!!!!

You are helping the enemy.

You are giving them tons of hits because these forums are heavy traffic.

STOP THIS!!!!


Who the hell cares what Hannity writes? NO ONE!!!!

If you want to help this campaign I suggest you adopt the same simple approach which is known to work in almost any type of race:




never look back





.

[Dave Wood]

I didnt reg either but if you go down the page a bit you will see a posting of a lot of Pauls funding requests through congress and you can get the Idea of what they are doing here by their response of "His supporters arent going to like that".

I refuse to be Hannitized so this is all I can offer

[MGS]

Isnt this the same tired argument? He has a responsibilty to request these funds for his district, but then he votes against them?

[LibertyEagle]

Here's MSNBC coverage of the Trans-Texas corridor, which is the 1st stage of the NAFTA superhighway:
http://video.msn.com/v/us/fv/msnbc/fv.htm??g=4ced876c-0b42-4979-947a-142130cbdb0b&f=00&fg=email

Here's a picture from NASCO of what the corridor, as a whole, will look like:
http://www.nascocorridor.com/

Here is a graphic of where the corridors will be:
http://www.nascocorridor.com/pages/ports_network/ports_network.htm

Phyllis Schlafly, who is known as a conservative, has a full page devoted to the NAFTA superhighway and the North American Union:
http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/NAU/

[Dave Wood]

Someones in a bad mood?

[LibertyEagle]

Ecliptic appears that he may have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed.

I guess this should probably have been posted in Media Matters, per the forum description.

Maybe the admins could move it for us.

[LibertyEagle]

Dave, in my opinion, there's a lot of people that are much more easily reached than someone who follows Sean Hannity. If they believe this guy, they're already so far gone, it would take a lot of effort to bring them back to reality, when we could probably use that time and reach like 100 less propagandized people.

[mesler]

I didnt reg either but if you go down the page a bit you will see a posting of a lot of Pauls funding requests through congress and you can get the Idea of what they are doing here by their response of "His supporters arent going to like that".

I refuse to be Hannitized so this is all I can offer

There is a very strong and well-known pro-Paul group on that board, they don't need help from single-day posters. Unfortunately for the anti-Paul people there, I continue to see more and more people jumping on the Paul wagon than jumping off it.

[Dave Wood]

Yeah, that sounds like a better idea. My only problem is these people are fanatics and when they are told a lie like this they tend to build it in to a bigger lie and the bigger lies are usually the ones people believe..just my .02

[Dan Klaus]

We better get used to this...if and when Dr. Paul gains real momentum - meaning the msm and everyone wakes up to the reality that he has a serious chance to win the nomination - they are going to lampoon Dr. Paul with charges of racism, anti-Americanism, the clip from the Morton Downey Jr. show, and everything and anything else they can conjure up....this nonsense is nothing compared to what may be coming...JMO...sorry to seem dour...truthfully i'm overly pleased with the financial situation and gaining momentum...

[LibertyEagle]

Now, here's one of their threads on Presidential Signing Statements:
http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261374&page=1

I find it absolutely amazing what some of the people think.

[angelatc]

Is this the link that's asking ya'll to register? I got it to pop up no problem

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/allpolitics/0706/popup.congress.earmarks/pdfs/tx.14.paul.pdf

It's the earmark file. My text select won't work on it, but the it's a request from Ron Paul requesting money for I-69, Texas, in 2008.

I don't think it's a big deal. Nobody believes that the Superhighway is a real threat to our sovereignty anyway, right?

[Oddball]

There is a very strong and well-known pro-Paul group on that board, they don't need help from single-day posters.That's riiiiiight! :)


Unfortunately for the anti-Paul people there, I continue to see more and more people jumping on the Paul wagon than jumping off it.The anti- Paul squealers over there have pretty much become cartoons of themselves.

Probably still not over the fact that Dr. Paul won a straw poll posted on the site last spring.

[johnrocks]

I-69 in not part of the NAU or whatever anymore than your local farmer's market is part of La Raza! That idiot over there is on a Dick tracy type mission to uncover anything that remotely looks bad to Ron Paul.

[angelatc]

Now, here's one of their threads on Presidential Signing Statements:
http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261374&page=1

I find it absolutely amazing what some of the people think.

OK - I'm confused. If the Constitution says,
Executive Branch

The branch of the U.S. government that is composed of the president and all the individuals, agencies, and departments that report to the president, and that is responsible for administering and enforcing the laws that Congress passes.


how can a person actually make an argument that this means the President has the right to not administer and enforce the laws that Congress makes?

[LibertyCzar]

I don't think this is bad. This is one of the stages before victory. We've touched on the "Ridicule" stage. They will ridicule us. But as long as we can correct any contentions that are not correct, we're fine. This is a good thing. Hannity's folk are no longer ignoring us. It won't be long before they surrender. :D

[Oddball]

Speaking of cartoonish behavior, check this one out! http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261441&page=7

[johnrocks]

Speaking of cartoonish behavior, check this one out! http://www.hannity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261441&page=7

:D

[johnrocks]

This is from the Constitution Party on the Super Highway and I think it clearly shows Ron Paul's position.

http://www.constitutionpartyofwa.com/forms/Flyer-SuperHwyandSPP.pdf

[richard1984]

Paul probably voted against it

It doesn't sound like congress had a hand in this--which is bad. But yes, he definitely would vote against it.

[FreedomLover]

I fail to see anything remotely bad...

That thread is making me dumber, no one knows anything...

[Bob Cochran]

If they believe this guy [Sean Hannity], they're already so far gone, it would take a lot of effort to bring them back to reality...
Those who follow and parrot Hannity probably aren't reachable. One of their characteristics is a kind of stubborness that gets worse the more you speak reason to them...it's kind of like how the Hulk gets stronger when he gets angrier.

Give 'em over to Hannity. They deserve each other.

[LibertyEagle]

OK - I'm confused. If the Constitution says,
Executive Branch

The branch of the U.S. government that is composed of the president and all the individuals, agencies, and departments that report to the president, and that is responsible for administering and enforcing the laws that Congress passes.


how can a person actually make an argument that this means the President has the right to not administer and enforce the laws that Congress makes?

EXACTLY.

[ronpaulitician]

I don't think it's bad at all.

a) There appear to be plenty of intelligent posters of that board that can defend Ron Paul's position.
b) Every hit piece on Ron Paul that we are able to discuss intelligently will better prepare us to answer questions from people on the street. If not for a thread like this, I would not be able to properly answer someone who asks me "Isn't Ron Paul guilty of requesting pork for his own district?"

[kylejack]

Frankly, I don't like that Ron Paul requests earmarks. But oh well.

[kylejack]

OK - I'm confused. If the Constitution says,
Executive Branch

The branch of the U.S. government that is composed of the president and all the individuals, agencies, and departments that report to the president, and that is responsible for administering and enforcing the laws that Congress passes.


how can a person actually make an argument that this means the President has the right to not administer and enforce the laws that Congress makes?

The President swears to uphold and defend the Constitution, thus unconstitutional laws can be not defended.

[angelatc]

That's the Supreme Court's job, not his.