[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: It's Official — NAFTA Is a Treaty It's Official — NAFTA Is a Treaty Jim Capo JBS Wednesday, May 23, 2007 It must be true. The editors of the Washington Post would never lie to us would they? Yesterday, while whining over lawmakers in the U.S. House having the temerity to re-assert their Constitutional authority to "regulate trade with foreign nations," the pro-globalist editors of the Washington Post made it official that as far as their paper of record is concerned, NAFTA is a treaty. Post editors let their willful ignorance of the Constitution slip while they were explaining their disdain for the elected representatives of the people, who last week passed the Safe American Roads Act of 2007. The act effectively blocks Mexican trucking companies from having free access to all U.S. highways until they can verify that they are in compliance with all Federal regulations that have to be met by U.S. trucking companies. The act is in direct defiance of the already postponed timetable set out in NAFTA for opening up all U.S. roads to Mexican trucking. Never mind that the U.S. Congress itself was effectively blocked from making any changes to the NAFTA deal as it was being shoved down their throats by Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich in 1993. The Post hung out this jewel as its main bone of contention with our momentarily less prostrate House: With action seven years overdue, will U.S. policymakers ever follow through on this country's clear treaty obligations? "Clear treaty bligations?" Check all the records you want, but the North American Free Trade Agreement was never submitted to or passed as a treaty before the representatives of the people. The elitists running the Washington Post do find it hard to swallow apparently that the pesky Constitution is still nominally in effect. While Congress indeed cannot just willy-nilly abrogate legitimate treaties, agreements passed on simple majority votes can likewise be changed on simple majority votes. Better yet, for all those who are fed up being told NAFTA is such a great deal for our country, agreements like NAFTA can be outright repealed by simple majority votes. Thus, the Constitutional viability of The John Birch Society's campaign to Repeal NAFTA.... Pitch in and do your part now. Endnotes: Further indicating how out of touch the elites at the Washington Post are with We the People, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007 passed on a vote of 411-3. When you are shilling for the ruling oligarchy, 411 out of 435 must look like the lackeys of a "Special Interest" group that is "stalling," as they titled their article. The only Republican voting against the act was Jeff Flake of Arizona. The two Democrats voting against the act, Henry Cuellar and Charles Gonzales, represent districts in Texas along the Mexican border.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala (#0)
This was one of our arguments in '93, that NAFTA wasn't a treaty and therefore was unconstitutional. Since then I've come to the conclusion that this George Bush's assessment of the constitution is correct; it's a useless piece of paper.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||