Going Protectionist Over a Fantasy Highway

Xenophobes see a threat to U.S. sovereignty in a Texas freeway project that would ease trade with Mexico.

The U.S. is known for its "paranoid style" of politics, so brace yourself for the next Big Scare coming down the pike (literally) -- the Trans-Texas Corridor. Isolationist conservatives, emboldened by their jihad last year against the Dubai Ports World deal, have identified this road project as the spearhead of a conspiracy to dissolve the United States of America.

The corridor is a proposed two-phase project meant to ensure that the Lone Star State has the transportation infrastructure necessary to handle the growing international commerce coming across the border. The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement has doubled U.S.-Mexico trade, three-fourths of which flows through Texas. And the movement of goods through the state is expected to increase exponentially in the near future as Asia routes more exports through the newly expanded Panama Canal.

Texas awarded a planning contract in 2005 for the first phase of the corridor to Cintra, a Spanish multinational company, and its San Antonio partner, Zachry Construction. (Cintra also won a $1.3-billion contract last year to build a 40-mile extension of Highway 130, a state toll road connecting Austin to San Antonio that was conceived separately from the corridor, although conspiracy activists claim otherwise.) The first 600-mile section, planned to include such features as tollways, freight-rail and truck-only lanes, will run parallel to the cramped, north-south Interstate 35 from the border town of Laredo to Oklahoma. Construction contracts for that portion haven't been awarded.

The second phase of the corridor, whose planning contract has yet to be handed out, would build a similar highway from the western edge of the Mexico border to east Texas. This might one day link to a separate, federally initiated eight-state expansion of Interstate 69, which currently runs between Port Huron, Mich., and Indianapolis.

This is all too sinister for Jerome Corsi, the Vietnam War veteran who helped lead the Swift Boat charge against John Kerry. Corsi has knitted disparate strands of each of these separate road projects to help convince fellow xenophobes such as Pat Buchanan, Phyllis Schlafly, Lou Dobbs and the John Birch Society that the corridor is the first leg of a secret federal project called the NAFTA Superhighway, a four-football-field wide monstrosity that would run from Mexico's Yucatan to Canada's Yukon.

Never mind that I-69 originated in a 1991 federal transportation law -- pre-dating NAFTA -- and that the planning for the Trans-Texas Corridor has been fully documented on the Web.

Yet even Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a libertarian Republican candidate for president, has fallen for the paranoia. You'd think that Paul would be chanting hosannas to anything that facilitates free trade, but he too fears that the "superhighway" is part of a scheme by foreign companies to erode U.S. borders and create a North American Union combining the United States, Mexico and Canada -- complete with a single government and a common currency called the "amero."

Superhighway opponents regard even routine dialogue between the three neighbors as a treasonous assault on U.S. sovereignty. They are apoplectic about the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), a forum created in 2005 for bureaucrats to discuss such radical topics as how to snag terrorists before they enter the continent and how to speed up cross-border traffic for just-in-time deliveries.

All of this could be dismissed as the paranoid rantings of a protectionist fringe -- except that it is beginning to have a tangible negative effect on public policy.

Montana's Legislature this summer overwhelmingly passed a resolution condemning the superhighway and any union of the three countries, and 18 other states are considering similar legislation. El Cajon Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter successfully amended the 2008 Transportation Appropriations Act to prohibit use of federal funds for any SPP working group. Virginia Republican Rep. Virgil H. Goode Jr. has introduced a House resolution against both the mythical superhighway and the fantasy union.

After the Dubai Ports debacle, in which anti-terrorism hysteria forced Congress to thwart the transfer of U.S. port management leases held by a major British ports operator to a company based in Dubai, the atavistic idea that foreign investment erodes American sovereignty is back into vogue.

Hunter, for instance, has added hoops to the review process that foreign bidders for U.S. companies must go through to prove that they're not a national security threat. This limits the pool of buyers for U.S. companies, thereby lowering their value and the value of 401(k) plans that invest in them. Hunter has also extended the review process to foreign companies vying to build "critical infrastructure." Should his definition include transportation projects, state governments would be deprived of crucial capital and knowledge to modernize their infrastructure.

The paradox of protectionism is that it damages the very thing it seeks to protect. Labor unions, for example, almost killed U.S. auto and steel companies by helping erect barriers against foreign companies, which made domestic products globally noncompetitive. But the impact of today's isolationists threatens to affect the entire economy. If unchallenged, these ideologues of fear will kill the United States' prosperity in the name of protecting its sovereignty.

Shikha Dalmia is a senior analyst and Leonard Gilroy is a senior policy analyst at the Reason Foundation.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • SIV||

    except that it is beginning to have a tangible negative effect on public policy


    You say that like it is a bad thing.

  • ||

    I have trouble focusing on the point of the thread when it's so overwhelmingly dominated by unapologetic spending of public funds to create infrastructure that make business for others cheaper.
    Sure, xenophobes are annoying. But there are many perfectly valid reasons to oppose such projects.

  • ||

    Preeminent NAFTA freeway comment nyah

  • ||

    The xenophobic conspiracy nuts have yet to explain to me exactly why Canada or Mexico would desire to be in a "NorthAmericanUnion" that would be obviously dominated by a much larger nation with a bigger economy than either put together by far.

  • ||

    Apparently this article has the lunatic Birchers in a dither claiming that REASON is now serving "the conspiracy" that they and other crazies imagine in their heads. Freestudents.blogspot.com has covered this attack which, among other things, says REASON is fascist. Seriously, that is how those people think.

  • SIV||

    REASON is fascist

    I assume they are referring to the REASON Foundation.Fascist may be a bit much but they are a bunch of Statist tools advocating tolls on roads already funded/paid for by gas taxes.
    I'm as skeptical of "libertarian" market informed public policy as any other kind.

  • TLB||

    As I'm sure the Reason Foundation would tell us, none of these articles exist:

    worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57548
    wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57694
    worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57762

    Neither do these discussion threads about the article:

    freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1901347/posts
    freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1899764/posts

    It's all a figment of your feverished, xenophobic and mean-spirited imagination.

  • shecky||

    Worldnetdaily and freerepublic.

    FairAndBalanced overload for the day.

  • SIV||

    So if I want to drive the length of this road from the Mexican States to the Canuck States how many ameros will the toll be for a two axled vehicle?

  • ||

    The xenophobic conspiracy nuts have yet to explain to me exactly why Canada or Mexico would desire to be in a "NorthAmericanUnion" that would be obviously dominated by a much larger nation with a bigger economy than either put together by far.

    That's precisely why our xenophobic conspiracy nuts oppose the "North American Union." They think it's an American plot to take over Canada.

  • ||

    Cesar,

    To sully the virtue of our women, natch.

  • ||

    Let me be the first to say, as a current native Texan, that the TTC stinks to high heaven. The plans have been made to make the highway as straight as possible and the maps for it have been up for a long time. The state has already let people know that their land will be taken regardless of their wishes.

    I'm confused as to how we can value trade with a foreign country over one of our basic natural rights in this country of private property.

    I understand that the state will inevitably need land and that the power of eminent domain will always be needed, but many Texans feel that this is a ridiculous plan.

    You might want to check on the fact that once the highway is built, private companies cannot simply just build on it to take in revenue. The land has to be leased to them, by the state, before they can open a business. And since all businesses will be off the highway, tolls will be required to patronize those spots.

    And this doesn't even talk about how small towns that had highways run through them will be adversely affected once the mega highway allows truckers and other long travelers bypass them.

    One more thing: Texans have been fighting this TTC for years and fear of Mexicans or terrorists is at the back of our minds. The biggest fear is losing our private property and towns.

  • JBinMO||

    The bit about the one government, one currency all being done in the name of trade sound nuts. Of course, it would sound even crazier if it was not currently happening in Europe.

  • ||

    vault_dog4,

    Opposition to Federal involvement in road construction is a valid libertarian objection. Opposition to this project in particular, is all about the xenophobia.

  • SIV||

    warren,
    You might want to read this first.

  • vault_dog4||

    I'm just a little taken aback how I've read in Reason for years about how eminent domain is bad when the state gives the land to private investors, or how centralized planning for roads leads to congestion and problems, and how it is bad when the government forces us to pay taxes on it to be built and then charges us tolls when we drive on it.

    Sad that a few xenophobic nuts can change a person's entire philosophy. Maybe Reason is just taking the TTC side out of spite?

  • SIV||

    Sad that a few xenophobic nuts can change a person's entire philosophy. Maybe Reason is just taking the TTC side out of spite?

    I don't know about the Editors of the magazine but the REASON Foundation is more concerned with their influence on public policy than any libertarian principles or ideals.

  • ||

    The super rich in the USA do not have the interests of the American middle class at heart. That's the downside of being "world citizens." Like illegals they are nomads. But rather than being defenseless, they are totally defended. They have their own lawyers guns and money to protect them. They can represent foreign -- sometimes hostile--foreign interests. The current project of the super rich is to foist unlimited liabilities on the American middle class in exchange for nothing.

    the NAFTA superhighway would eventually enable a chinese box to be loaded in shanghai and unloaded in small town west virginia without inspection. currently american inspectors are in china. they inspect 1% of goods that flow to the USA.

    Open borders means that spies, drugs, illegal aliens and contraband--have unlimited access to the USA.

    (none of this matters, of course, to the superrich.)

    Anyone care to salute the NAU flag. Why not press 2 for english.

  • ||

    Chips, TLB, any other conspiracy nut-

    Why would Mexico (pop: 108,700,891, GDP:1.149 trillion), and Canada (pop: 33,026,800, GDP:$1.165 trillion) want to join up with the USA (pop: 302,497,000. GDP: $13,244,550m)? Again, they would be totally dwarfed by the giant in the middle.

    It would be like the Baltic states and the 'stans just begging to join back up with Russia. It makes no sense at all for them.

  • ||

    Anyone care to salute the NAU flag. Why not press 2 for english.

    English would be by far the most dominant language in the mythical NAU.

  • Asharak||

    I have trouble focusing on the point of the thread when it's so overwhelmingly dominated by unapologetic spending of public funds to create infrastructure that make business for others cheaper.
    Sure, xenophobes are annoying. But there are many perfectly valid reasons to oppose such projects.


    I concur.

  • ||

    Why not press 2 for english.

    I'm with Cesar... What will change it from "Press 1 for English"? Or did "press 2" just do that much better in focus group trials?

  • ||

    As I'm sure the Reason Foundation would tell us, none of these articles exist



    World Net Daily is a bunch of xenophobic paranoids, liberally salted with outright loonies. The Free Republic makes them look sane in comparison. If this is where you are getting your information, no wonder you're walking around at a seven degree tilt.

  • ||

    I have never trusted articles where they go on the attack right away.

  • Barry||

    What of constitutionality, I ask?

    How "constitutional" is this, when we have no say in its construction, they take our land, and we pay to drive on it, all from our tax dollars, and it is constitutional in what way again???

  • K.||

    Uh. It's just a road, m'kay?

  • ||

    Don't worry about North American Union. We don't want all of Canada. Alberta and British Columbia would do nicely though.

  • SIV||

    We don't want all of Canada. Alberta and British Columbia would do nicely though.

    I want the Maritimes. We should have bought them back when the loonie was worth 60 cents and the Canucks were hurting.Where is a president like James K Polk when you need him.

  • ||

    This has nothing to do with xenophobia, it's about crappy sprawl-producing infrastructure. Texas is bad enough, why make it worse with a 1/4 mile wide freeway and more chain restaurants? I have no problem with an express freight/passenger railway, but the freeway has be stopped.

  • Jesse Walker||

    We don't want all of Canada. Alberta and British Columbia would do nicely though.

    There's a slogan for you: "Make the states contiguous again!"

    Of course, to do it justice, you'd also have to build a very long bridge to Hawaii. Ideally, it would be a toll bridge.

  • ||

    Citing World Net Daily? Yeah, there's a source with credibility...

  • TLB||

    Odd how the *only* argument the other side can come up with is name-calling. C'mon, with all that money available can't you people hire someone to come up with some talking points? I'm sure DickMorris is available.

  • DavidRockefellersBoyToy||

    Accusations of name-calling? Coming from someone who loves to rant about those people who disagree with him that must be beholden to ForeignGovernments or JooishBankers or SomeOtherNonsense?

  • ||

    TLB--

    You have never answered ONE question I've ever posed to you. So yes, I'm going to call you a name. Troll.

  • ||

    fears of a phantom NAFTA superhighway

    Frisky Dingo had an episode with republican presidential Candidate Xander Crews pushing for a pedestrian overpass to Canada.

  • LarryA||

    Open borders means that spies, drugs, illegal aliens and contraband--have unlimited access to the USA.

    As they do right now?

    What of constitutionality, I ask?

    Given that the Constitution says Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" I'd say this is something legitimately within their jurisdiction. They finally get to use the Commerce Clause as designed.

    Failure to provide roads won't stop the trade from coming. It will just make driving even worse than it is now.

  • ||

    I'm sure DickMorris is available.



    Oooh! Name calling!

  • ||

    Oh yes, lets give up our land, our money, our jobs, and our freedom so that driving from Mexico to Oklahoma is easier. I could be wrong, but other than truckers, not too many people do that.
    --------------------------
    Isn't that website about free markets? How could any libertarian, freedom loving person support a cause such as this. This is the epitome of how the government is destroying our freedom day by day. This time it's sacificing everyone to big business. They take our land so that ships can unload in Mexico so the businesses don't have to pay U.S. workers.
    -------------------------------
    Why would Mexico (pop: 108,700,891, GDP:1.149 trillion), and Canada (pop: 33,026,800, GDP:$1.165 trillion) want to join up with the USA (pop: 302,497,000. GDP: $13,244,550m)? Again, they would be totally dwarfed by the giant in the middle.

    Are you seriously ignorant enough not to see why? All of the benefits of being an economically sound nation, none of the work! Plus, you get the US military to crush the rebels fighting for freedom from the oppressive mexican government.
    -------------------------------
    Anyone who advocates any growth in government size is a statist and is not worthy of the libertarian title.

    If you are so concerned about congested roads, start your own company and build roads, and charge people to drive on them. This is the capitalist thing to do. Having the government build roads and then letting businesses collect tolls is SOCIALISM.
    ---------------------------------
    Larry:
    I fail to see how building roads constitutes "regulating trade."

    ---------------------------------

    It's obvious that the Texas state government is extremely corrupted by business money. It was just recently that the governor tried to coerce little girls into getting the HPV shot because he has ties to the pharm. company that makes it. Texas doesn't have much welfare for the poor, which is good, but instead they have tremendous welfare for business, which is worse than welfare for the poor.

  • ||

    To deny the fact is at best to be an idiot, and a worst a pathetic lair. The plans for the NAU has been in works for over a decade, members of congress publicly acknowledge this, PSP is openly talking about it, and the signs of Mexican and American economies merging are everywhere, just open your eyes.

  • ||

    "Why would Mexico (pop: 108,700,891, GDP:1.149 trillion), and Canada (pop: 33,026,800, GDP:$1.165 trillion) want to join up with the USA (pop: 302,497,000. GDP: $13,244,550m)?"

    It is really funny to see this raised again and again by supposed "libertarians".

    Please explain: how do "Mexico" and "Canada" "want" anything? You people keep talking about these states like they're soveriegn individuals. Sort of ironic, "libertarians" talking in terms of collectives.

    Well leave that aside. Evidently you folks aren't slick enough to catch that one. So, OK, "libertarians". Read this:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/008338.html

    What is a "nation"? What is a "state"? Come on, deep thinkers. Deal with it.

    The spectacle of you half-baked "libertarians" fighting for a super state in the the name of a utopian anarcho-capitalist ideal that is about as realistic as anything from the "Communist Manifesto" is really something to behold.

  • ||

    "English would be by far the most dominant language in the mythical NAU."

    Unreal. Where do you live? I teach here in Texas. English sure won't be numero uno here in 20 years; depending on where you are, it's a distant second even today. And why the hell should I subsidize every single foreign language speaker that sets foot in this country by providing bilingual government across the board? I mean, I do that *right now*.

    As for the "mythical NAU"...??? Are you serious? Good god. You obviously have an internet connection. What's the problem? Oh, it's arrogance + ignorance. The lethal combination.

    http://www.spp.gov/
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul149.html
    http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst103006.htm

    Now please... go ahead and complete the hat trick. Attack Dr. Paul. You've slammed every man of any worth in the movement, from Rothbard to Badnarik to RP. So knock yourself out.

    You people are worse than neocons.

  • FemaCamper||

    Ignorance is bliss, right?

    Come visit my website if you want to know the truth.

  • ||

    These guys don't know what they are talking about. The evidence is there, it is being talked about and is very much the agenda of the three nations involved whether the people want it or not.

    These guys need to pull their heads out of the sand!!

  • ||

    Cesar | September 24, 2007, 9:28am | #
    "The xenophobic conspiracy nuts"

    BTW, as far as name calling...

    Gonna be a lot more than name calling before this one's over, Cesar. Thank the 2nd amendment baby. The "xenophobic conspiracy nut" farmers in Central TX who are about to have their land stolen from them ain't gonna give in without a fight.

    This is all about human beings and their right to property. As raw, and as real as it gets. Viva la revolucion. It's the PRO-AMNESTY wing who constantly try to "racialize" this issue. Not us. We (white, black, latino, asian) just get beat up by a bunch of latino gang bangers when we go to protest. It'll be interesting to see that worm turn, eh?

    The tragedy is, the people who should be recipients of le revanche (look in a mirror, Cesar) won't be the ones who get slammed. It'll just be a bunch of poor migras, and the cycle will continue, on and on. Sad.

    I hate violence. But self defense of life and property is IMO permitted by Natural, Moral, or whatever-you-want-to-call-it, Law. Personally, I'd like to see non-violence a la Gandhi used to combat this. But I don't have much hope of that happening.

    Well this was amusing. A bunch of upper middle class suburban "libertarians" deriding the conspiracy nuts. Talk about a movement coopted. But then it's been that way a long, long time.

    I'm out. Flame on. Stuff like this is a prime example of how "libertarians" in this country are so *totally* out of touch with REALITY. There'll be a special place in Hell for you SOBs. But then I suppose Atheism is the one aspect of Objectivism you folks are holding on to. Of course, thanks to the misguided efforts of dogmatists like the asinine idiots here at "(t)Reason", hell on earth is a very real possibility.

  • ||

    This is all about human beings and their right to property. As raw, and as real as it gets.

    I gather, then, that you are completely supportive of an American's right to lease his property to anyone from anywhere in the world, to employ on his property anyone from anywhere in the world, and to otherwise trade and associate with anyone from anywhere in the world.

    If so, I wonder... Why the hostile tone when people from elsewhere in the world are brought up?

  • ||

    If so, I wonder... Why the hostile tone when people from elsewhere in the world are brought up?

    So, Mike,... from what part of the world did you emigrate when you came here?

  • ||

    New Jersey... I don't blame you for not being able to tell. It was a long time ago, and I've lost the accent.

  • ||

    From the article...

    The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement has doubled U.S.-Mexico trade, three-fourths of which flows through Texas. And the movement of goods through the state is expected to increase exponentially in the near future as Asia routes more exports through the newly expanded Panama Canal.

    Why would Asia want to ship goods way down south and east, through the canal, and then back north and west on the other side, into Mexico, and thence into Texas and the US? Look at a chart or a globe - if one is trying to get to the US, that is one hell of a long way out of the way. More likely, Asia would send its goods to the western coast of Mexico and thence north to Texas. Of course, that would probably require a huge highway be built through Mexico to join with the Trans Texas Corridor at the border. But I suppose such things would only occur to conspiracy nuts - rational folk would figure that a huge quarter-mile wide highway would just up and and begin in the middle of nowhere at the border and then suddenly stop at Oklahoma.

    Why would Asia want to ship to Mexico anyway? If the US is the final destination and market, why not ship to the ports on our west coast, which would be an even shorter route? Whatsamattah - not enough cheap peon labor in California? Give it time - there will be. Nice thing about Mexico though is not only the large supply of extremely cheap and humble labor, but the political and cultural institutions that keep it that way. American workers tend to get uppity - "bad for bidness."

    Something the article does not mention is the sweetheart deal that the builders and operators of the toll road get: the company gets to keep all the tolls collected for a period of fifty years! So, essentially, money from American TAXpayers will be used to buy land from Texas property owners (who will be FORCED to sell) and then given over to some private company to make a bunch of money on.

    The whole scam smells alot like another Texas sweetheart deal that a certain Georgie Porgy was in on back before he became President. That one involved a new ballpark up in Arlington, Texas. Private land was taken and used to build a baseball stadium, profits of which were to acrue to the owners of a certain Texas baseball team for a period of some years.

    One last thing: howsacome the article didn't mention the role of everyone's favorite New York, hero-mayor in all of this TTC business? That's right - 911 RudyG's law firm is/did handle the contract negotiations for the Spanish conglomerate that got the Corridor deal. One would think that someone might ask him about it, since he's running for President.

    Yup. Grand Old Party, crony capitalism is alive and well after all these years. Is this a wonderful country or what?

  • ||

    New Jersey... I don't blame you for not being able to tell. It was a long time ago, and I've lost the accent.

    New Jersey?!! Crap, that's worse than New York! ;-)

  • ||

    Oh, Cesar...,

    You ask why a relatively small country such as Mexico would want to become part of the US? Well why do you suppose the relatively weak, small and unpopulated Republic of Texas wanted to do so back in the 1840's? For that matter, why did any of the states want to join? (Hint: maybe it's got something to do with being nearly bankrupt and about to go under...the Mexican government, that is.)

  • Matt||

    I can't believe this article is serious!
    I live in England and I have never even been to the USA and even I know the North American union exists. Shikha Dalmia and Leonard Gilroy are clearly delusional. There is even a web site for it, morons!. http://www.spp.gov/ just because it's not called the North American union doesn't mean that not what it is. It is exactly the same as the European Union. Please remove your heads from your own backsides and take a look around before you loose your country. IDIOTS!!!!!

  • ||

    Yup. Grand Old Party, crony capitalism corruption is alive and well after all these years.

    There - that's fixed!

  • ||

    Well REASON magazine, from the looks of the majority of comments on this page it would seem that people aren't buying into the crap you're publishing. Maybe if you just keep repeating it and calling us all more names we'll start to believe that cheaper shipping for China and toll roads operated by foreign companies is somehow good for Americans.

    I know what the word xenophobe means, but what do you call it when you betray the interests of the people in your own country?

  • Godwhacker||

    Xenophobia has nothing to do with my opposition to The North American Union. My opposition is seated "rationally" in the fact that the acquiescence of our sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats is unconstitutional and destroys the democratic underpinnings of our republic. Paranoid? I don't think so. Observe that as of this writing, the U.S. and Canadian dollar have achieved parody, which I would assume is a necessary step before conversion to the "Amero", which is slated to be our new currency, and no doubt will be even more worthless than our current fiat currency. I just can't wait for our dollar to reach parody with the Peso so I can pay 18 bucks for a gallon of milk.

    In all the years that I have been reading Reason, never has it seemed so irrational.

  • ||

    Reading this article provided sufficient 'reason' to never read another by these authors authors again. Simply disinfo.

  • Frank||

    What kind of delusional medication are the authors of this pile of crap on? This is no conspiracy. It is taking shape before our very eyes.

    We are facing a very bloody economic meltdown on this continent with a subsequent revolution that we have never seen. The American and Canadian currencies are at par for the first time in 30 years. The Fed is in control of the entire dog and pony show and they have deliberately devalued the greenback to help further their NAU agenda. The Bush administration has ENSURED that in the event of another 9-11 type of event occurring they will remain in power and the U.S federal government will be at the helm of protecting and guarding the entire perimeter of North America and all the precious resources in the name of TERROR. The banking elite on this planet based in London, are so determined to condense and consolidate the wealth and resources on this planet that we will eventually have no choice but to revolt. They know this.

    Do you think either of our countries on this continent are actual countries in the true sense of the word? They aren't. They are all individual corporations OWNED by BANKS! Why are our countries borrowing and paying interest on the creation and circulation of our own currency? Who is the U.S or Canada BORROWING MONEY FROM???????

    Wake the hell up. This whole planet is nothing but a giant game of Milton Bradley Risk with 4 men sitting at the grand table pushing all of us, as little game pieces, around the board.
    What you know about your existence and everything you have learned and lived in this political world is a lie and a myth.
    This has nothing to do with Libertarians, Liberals or Conservatives. That is just a sock puppet show and another distraction to keep us arguing. There are men behind the curtains pulling the strings.

    The writing for the NAU was on the proverbial wall as soon as the Patriot Act was pushed through in the blink of an eye after 9-11. What is the government of the U.S doing to curb illegal immigration from their southern border?......NOTHING!!! They are buying time by saying "we need comprehensive immigration reform legislation" for the last 3 years and constant rhetoric that is keeping everyone distracted and divided so we just sit around clogging up airtime constantly arguing moot points all day. Wake the f*** up and open your eyes.

  • ||

    There's no such thing as "free trade". Just ask the people who will lose their land for the highway.

    "You'd think that Paul would be chanting hosannas to anything that facilitates free trade"

  • ||

    Cintas did not get this contract it was awarded to the NTTA (North Texas Trans authority). It will be a major four football field wide corridor taking many private lands by emminent domain. It will also allow Mexico to bring in drugs and illegals unchecked. Even if it wasn't the begining of a N Am union it is still very bad in many respects. They can't even handle the highways we have now and the tolls are outrageous.Please get the facts straight in this case before ranting against something. I live in Texas and this is bad for our state.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement