Super highway

[Ed W]

Randy Brogdon went to Texas to talk about the proposed Super Highway.

http://www.okpns.com/2007/11/super-highway-would-infringe-on-states.html

"Oklahoma House Bill No. 1819 would have helped create a "NAFTA super highway" by waiving Oklahoma's 11th Amendment right not to be sued in federal court."

"He told participants in a Thursday night program offered by the Midland Business and Professional Chapter of the John Birch Society that the road would be regulated under international law."

Now, I thought Randy Brogdon's impassioned defense of people who circulated the TABOR petition in violation of Oklahoma law was over the top, but insisting that a federal highway would be regulated by international law is just plain nutty.  And why talk with Birchers in Texas?  Does he need their support?

I think Randy drank the wingnut's KoolAid, then went back for seconds.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W

Randy Brogdon went to Texas to talk about the proposed Super Highway.

http://www.okpns.com/2007/11/super-highway-would-infringe-on-states.html

"Oklahoma House Bill No. 1819 would have helped create a "NAFTA super highway" by waiving Oklahoma's 11th Amendment right not to be sued in federal court."

"He told participants in a Thursday night program offered by the Midland Business and Professional Chapter of the John Birch Society that the road would be regulated under international law."

Now, I thought Randy Brogdon's impassioned defense of people who circulated the TABOR petition in violation of Oklahoma law was over the top, but insisting that a federal highway would be regulated by international law is just plain nutty.  And why talk with Birchers in Texas?  Does he need their support?

I think Randy drank the wingnut's KoolAid, then went back for seconds.

This is a very serious threat and I am proud that Oklahoma is standing up to face it head on.

[guido911]

Did anyone else think that news article was poorly written?

[cannon_fodder]

I just spent a little time looking into this; essentially the coalition against this highway is anti-business, anti-globalization, and tree huggers.  What exactly they are opposed to I am not really sure.

Currently we import many goods from over seas.  Mexico and Canada are our largest trading partners.  Our highways are over loaded with trade (they were built to facilitate trade remember).  I don't see what is so threatening about a new highway?

Furthermore, the "NAFTA SUPERHIGHWAY" that everyone fears already exists.  It's called I-35:
http://www.nascocorridor.com/admin/images/docs/NASCO%20CONGRESSIONAL%20-%20Myth%20vs%20%20Fact%20December%202007.pdf

Much like the "Avenue of the Saints" from St. Louis to St. Paul it is not a new stretch of 6 lane road with this that and everything else...  it is joining together infrastructure in a coherent manner to make it more effective.  

I also saw no indication that there was any intent to govern said corridor under international law - the Mexican/Canadian/American commercial trucks that were license to be on it would probably be covered by a new set of laws just as Oklahoma trucks on Interstates in Missouri are covered by what were "new" laws for the Interstate system (load permits, insurance requirements, etc.).  

I guess I just don't get the general objection.    Is it that trucks are not the most economical form of transit, that you think trade or economic development is bad, or that you fear closer ties with our neighbors?

Personally, I'd like to see rail be more friendly to use since it is very economical.  But anyone that has ever dealt with a railroad knows that using it to ship cargo for most companies is simply not feasible.  Same with the port (even MORE efficient, but requires huge loads).  I also hate the space utilized by cars in this country, just seems like a waste (and the maintenance!).  

Nonetheless, I fail to see this as a sovereignty issue.  Perhaps I am just ill informed but in spite of what that article said I could find no support for its claims.  I have spent minimal time looking into this, so as always, feel free to correct me please.

[Double A]

www.truthbetolled.com

[tim huntzinger]

The patriotism and intellectual curiosity of those for whom talk of the trans-national highway does not spark the slightest flame should be in doubt. Questions of whether this is One World Gubmint aside, the attempt to seize land for the purpose of the highway should cause one's hackles to rise.

On the lighter side, did you all know that I-35 is . . . um . . . prophesied in scripture? (CBN via Rumormillnews)

[RecycleMichael]

Great link, Tim. I wonder if I can count my pikepass as tithing?

If I-35 is the highway to heaven, I must have taken the off-ramp somewhere. The side road to Satan may be filled with pot holes, but the fellow travelers and the scenery are way more fun.

[Double A]

In the Nation:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070827/hayes

[chesty]

Ed W.

Greetings from the right side of Attila the Hun.

I read your post and the link you included.  Neither of these states whether Sen. Brogdon is in favor or opposed to the NAFTA Super-Highway.  I have talked with Senator Brogdon about this issue and heard him speak on the subject a few more times.  I have a hard time believing he is in support of the highway and/or waiving Oklahoma's rights.

Do you have any more information on this that would show Sen. Brogdon's stance on the subject.  I need to know if he needs to hear my opinion or not.

Just because he spoke, doesn't mean he's in support of the idea.

BTW, I saw Sen. Brogdon's profile on the John Birsch website once.  He commands a $1000 speaking fee.  I'd travel to Massachusetts for $1000, let alone Texas.

Chesty

[dbacks fan]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

In the Nation:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070827/hayes

Thanks for the link AA, they were talking about this on the readio the other day and I could not remember what they were calling it until I saw it in this article. Check out "North American Union" on Google and find the story Lou Dobbs did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H65f3q_Lm9U

It seems that this will make The US, Canada and Mexico like the Eruopean Union, with free trade and travel from Mexicos southern border (not our southern border) to the northern border of Canada.

Not paranoid but I want to find out more about this, because I believe that they also want to create a common currency.

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by chesty




Do you have any more information on this that would show Sen. Brogdon's stance on the subject.  I need to know if he needs to hear my opinion or not.

Just because he spoke, doesn't mean he's in support of the idea.

BTW, I saw Sen. Brogdon's profile on the John Birsch website once.  He commands a $1000 speaking fee.  I'd travel to Massachusetts for $1000, let alone Texas.

Chesty

LINK



An Oklahoma state senator said Thursday that he led opposition to a plan like the Trans Texas Corridor this year because it would have surrendered his state's sovereignty to the federal government.


...Saying the big Texas and Oklahoma highways are necessary to the creation of the North American Union by Mexico, the U.S. and Canada, Brogdon explained he became aware of the danger a year ago and was alarmed when the bill overwhelmingly passed the Oklahoma House of representatives in Oklahoma City.


..."We'd be subject to an international tribunal in case of a dispute, including accidents or other lawsuits."

=======================

I saw Randy coming into Panera Bread over the weekend, Chesty, but I didn't get a chance to talk with him.  I like the guy because he's articulate and obviously committed to public service, but the ideas expressed up above are way out of the mainstream.

But that said, you know I'd most likely oppose a superhighway like this on environmental grounds.   I've seen estimates ranging from 100 yards to 400 yards for the right-of-way.  It would be a huge concrete gutter, cutting farms and towns in two.  We have enough highways dividing our cities, towns, and farmland already.  The noise alone is reason to oppose it.

On the other hand, we could form a legion of Paul Tay wannabes, and bring traffic to a standstill.  I find a certain perverse appeal in that idea.

[chesty]

OK, Once again, my political arch-nemesis, I think we are on the same side of this issue.  Neither of us want this highway.  Unless I am reading wrong, neither does Brogdon.

Something strange is happening here....either your getting more conservative, I'm getting more liberal, or our world is evolving in a way that blurs the traditional lines between libs and cons.

I personally see the highway as a piece of a larger North-American Union  on the horizon.  I oppose it because I believe if that happens we can say good bye to the middle class in America.  Of course I certainly like the environmental reasons you cited too.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by dbacks fan
Not paranoid but I want to find out more about this, because I believe that they also want to create a common currency.

They call this currency the Amero.

[cannon_fodder]

Did anyone actually read what I posted?

THERE ARE NO PLANS FOR A SUPER HIGHWAY, A UNION, OR A COMMON CURRENCY

You are protesting I-35.  No official has proposed and no one is even lobbying for what you are conspiring about.  We have free trade with Mexico, Canada, Peru, Panama, and several other central American countries.  Canadian trucking can use our roadways.  Mexican guest workers flock to the US in the millions.  The United States is governed by hundreds of international law treaties...  and yet we remain the United States.   You think widening I-35 is the last straw?

When someone of note suggests any of the things you are talking about let me know.  Until then keep your tinfoil hats firmly over your ears.  I'm off to slay Chupacabra before he tries to jump the border.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Did anyone actually read what I posted?

THERE ARE NO PLANS FOR A SUPER HIGHWAY, A UNION, OR A COMMON CURRENCY

You are protesting I-35.  No official has proposed and no one is even lobbying for what you are conspiring about.  We have free trade with Mexico, Canada, Peru, Panama, and several other central American countries.  Canadian trucking can use our roadways.  Mexican guest workers flock to the US in the millions.  The United States is governed by hundreds of international law treaties...  and yet we remain the United States.   You think widening I-35 is the last straw?

When someone of note suggests any of the things you are talking about let me know.  Until then keep your tinfoil hats firmly over your ears.  I'm off to slay Chupacabra before he tries to jump the border.

Yeah, we just didn't believe you.

Texas Legislature Takes on NAFTA SuperHighway

quote:  the bill "would put the brakes on the Trans-Texas Corridor, a superhighway that a private firm received a contract for earlier this year."

Texas DOT Trans-Texas Corridor Page

....doesn't appear to be "I-35" to me at all.

And, is way beyond the 'planning' phase and into the Public Comments portion of development.

Any idea what happens to this 1,200-foot wide right of way once it reaches Texarkana?

Here's another one, La Entrada al Pacifico

Oh, and the Amero also already exists, if not yet in circulation.