snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04 June 2007, 07:11 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,642
Icon27 The Kennedy-McCain Sell Out & the Rest of the Story

Quote:
If you thought the goal behind the Kennedy-McCain Amnesty legislation was simply to grant a path to citizenship for 12-20 million illegal aliens...

..then you haven't heard -- as Paul Harvey would say -- "the rest of the story."

According to a report by WorldNetDaily.com, this amnesty bill ALSO legitimizes the eventual formation of a North American Union -- and with it the construction of a "North American Superhighway" -- a plan that until now, our elected officials told us was an urban legend... a myth... a fairy tale.
http://www.americanchronicle.com/art...rticleID=28640
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04 June 2007, 02:20 PM
guruwan2b's Avatar
guruwan2b guruwan2b is offline
 
Join Date: 16 October 2001
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,701
Default

So what happens when the superhighway hits Indian land in OK? Wouldn't the tribes have to agreed to the project. I don't see modern day tribes signing away land the way they did in the 1860's.....

There are many Indian casinos built along I-35.

And if it were happening, wouldn't there be a run on the land adjacent to I-35? I mean, wouldn't there be a profit to be made when the 4 football lengths of land have to be bought?

And why are people still building new stores, gas stations and fast food joints along I-35 if they will have to be torn down when the superhighway hits town?

Oh, no. The super Walmart in Purcell will have to go.
Hey, I need to see how far away from I-35 my building is.... I may end up with a front row seat to the construction....
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05 June 2007, 02:41 AM
Parrothead
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From what I heard, the idea was to run the highway several miles to the west of I35 so that traffic could flow more smoothely. I'm all for this if it means not having to deal with the traffic between San Antonio and Austin when travelling north from here in the Coastal Bend.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05 June 2007, 03:21 AM
Zakor
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibbie View Post
There's also I69 which when complete will run from Canada to Mexico. Except that at the rate we're going it will run from MI to Indy, stop and pick up again in Kentucky because Indiana can't get their act together and get the road funded and built from Indy to Evansville not that I'm bitter about it at all.

In an amusing side note former 8th District Representative John Hostettler was lobbying for a more moral sounding number.

Gibbie
That article from the Hoosier Gazette was a spoof...
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05 June 2007, 03:23 AM
Amigone201's Avatar
Amigone201 Amigone201 is offline
 
Join Date: 11 March 2005
Location: Islip, NY
Posts: 6,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nismobeach View Post
According to this older conceptual drawing that is no longer posted on NASCO's web page, the Winnipeg "port" would be used to shift supplies to western Canada.
C'mere. I have a present for you.

Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 05 June 2007, 09:05 AM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 25,889
Default

What would be the problem with the idea anyway? It's a road... Roads already exist, surely?

I do find right-wing America's relationship with the free market to be odd sometimes. I know they're already against the free movement of labour, even though that's part of the model, but why would they be against the free movement of goods?
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 05 June 2007, 05:35 PM
Silas Sparkhammer's Avatar
Silas Sparkhammer Silas Sparkhammer is offline
 
Join Date: 22 September 2000
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 26,843
Whalephant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard W View Post
What would be the problem with the idea anyway? It's a road... Roads already exist, surely?

I do find right-wing America's relationship with the free market to be odd sometimes. I know they're already against the free movement of labour, even though that's part of the model, but why would they be against the free movement of goods?
This one bewilders me, too. I thought I'd found the answer in the issue of international trucking -- if trucks and drivers from Mexico can drive on U.S. highways without meeting U.S. inspection and safety standards, that would, obviously, strike many people as a bad thing. It would lower wages for U.S. truckers, so the U.S. labor unions would hate it, and it could arguably reduce our safety and security. (For instance, Mexico has very easygoing regulations on how long a driver may be on the highway. So a driver might have gone, say, eight hours south of the border, cross into the U.S., and still go another eight hours before U.S. time-on-road limits are reached.)

But this is the sort of thing that's easily fixed by bureaucracy; the same weighing and inspection stations that check drivers' hours now would also check Mexican drivers' log books, etc. etc.

That is a real issue (but I think a small one.) The mere existence of wide north-south highways? Huh? How is that an issue at all?

Silas
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03 July 2007, 04:58 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,642
Icon204 Recent articles were misleading

Quote:
Two syndicated articles recently ran in the Times-Union that called the North American Union a conspiracy theory and the North American Free Trade Agreement superhighway an urban myth.

These articles seemed designed to ridicule and dismiss valid questions about the plans of bureaucrats and corporations for Mexico, Canada and the United States.

These nicknames do describe ideas and projects under serious consideration by some North American politicians and businesses.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-onlin...76323412.shtml
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 31 July 2007, 12:39 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,642
Icon104 Rumors of a Super Highway

Is there a secret plan being hatched by the federal government to construct a NAFTA super-highway from Mexico straight through to Canada, stopping off in Kansas City?

Alongside immigration and Iraq, it is a question that is being posed with surprising regularity to the leading Republican presidential candidates by people who fear it is the first step toward the establishment of a new mega-country that would merge Mexico and the United States.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...super-highway/
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03 August 2007, 05:51 PM
PatYoung's Avatar
PatYoung PatYoung is offline
 
Join Date: 23 October 2001
Location: Hempstead, NY
Posts: 6,875
Default

Steve Colbert featured the NAFTA story last night, and Ron Paul is running with it: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst103006.htm

Strangely enough, there are roads which lead from Western N.Y. into Canada!!!!! Could these have been constructed by the Illuminati???
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 03 August 2007, 06:34 PM
Not_Done_Living's Avatar
Not_Done_Living Not_Done_Living is offline
 
Join Date: 02 September 2006
Location: Markham, ON
Posts: 3,735
Default

Thinking about this....

with the US dollar sinking and the Canadian dollar raising, and so much manufacturing moving to Mexico due to NAFTA already..

Immigration issues would dissolve, costly SOX issues would evaporate, and vacations would be easier for everyone!

Would the "United States of AMexiCa" really be such a bad thing?
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03 August 2007, 06:43 PM
guruwan2b's Avatar
guruwan2b guruwan2b is offline
 
Join Date: 16 October 2001
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,701
Default

OK, so they build a highway and don't force our highway regulations on the other countries. We could have thousands of trucks driving cross country without anti-emissions devices which would add to air pollution.
Truckers driving more miles without rest which could cause more wrecks and possibly deaths. When these truckers from other countries wreck, do we ship them back home, or treat them here even if they don't have insurance?
Now if you can get products from Mexico to Canada and not pay US truckers, that puts US truckers out of business.
If businesses can ship cheaper from Mexico, do they move more factories down there?

What about people who live in the path of the superhighway? What kind of buy out can they expect? Or will it become more of an eminent domain type of deal?
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04 August 2007, 03:08 AM
Not_Done_Living's Avatar
Not_Done_Living Not_Done_Living is offline
 
Join Date: 02 September 2006
Location: Markham, ON
Posts: 3,735
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guruwan2b View Post
OK, so they build a highway and don't force our highway regulations on the other countries. We could have thousands of trucks driving cross country without anti-emissions devices which would add to air pollution.
Truckers driving more miles without rest which could cause more wrecks and possibly deaths. When these truckers from other countries wreck, do we ship them back home, or treat them here even if they don't have insurance?
Now if you can get products from Mexico to Canada and not pay US truckers, that puts US truckers out of business.
If businesses can ship cheaper from Mexico, do they move more factories down there?

What about people who live in the path of the superhighway? What kind of buy out can they expect? Or will it become more of an eminent domain type of deal?
Last time i checked, any vehicles crossing the border was subject to checks of local regulations.

Have you not seen Transport trucks with multiple plates from multiple states/countries on them? This means this vehicle has passed the inspections and is registered in those states and countries.

This is a very common sight on Canada's highways. (Trucks with Ontario, Quebec and Louisiana plates for example)

The Transport industry is also strictly regulated, and any ground based trans border licensed shipping facilitator would be sure to manage their fleet to meet all international standards.

Some people seem to not realize that cross border commerce is not just a daily occurrence, but a CONSTANT occurrence.

I guess it's more of a mystery to the interior States that don't border Canada or Mexico.. but for those of us that live on or near the border, it's nothing new.

(man some people seem to think Mexico is some lawless third world country... and i think its funny that American's feel their standards are naturally higher then any other countries.. remember you gave the world Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan)
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04 August 2007, 08:59 PM
Silas Sparkhammer's Avatar
Silas Sparkhammer Silas Sparkhammer is offline
 
Join Date: 22 September 2000
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 26,843
Whalephant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Done_Living View Post
Last time i checked, any vehicles crossing the border was subject to checks of local regulations. . . .
The issue of truck-drivers' hours on the road goes beyond local regulations: if it is legal for a driver to be on the road for (just as an hypothetical) 14 hours in Mexico, but only for him to be on the road for 10 hours in the U.S., then how do we regulate drivers who cross from Mexico to the U.S.? We would be in the position of requiring Mexican drivers to keep records of their operating hours while in Mexico, something that is obviously beyond the legitimate sphere of U.S. regulatory power.

Cross-border issues always involve the possibility of contradictions between differing sets of regulations: just look at the Tijuana River or the New River, or at the permitted wattage of radio stations transmitting out of Mexico.

These problems can only be addressed at an international level, by U.S./Mexico/Canadian inter-governmental agreement. Until they are addressed, we have a real and significant reason to worry about local regulations being violated, simply because of a lack of any (remember this phrase?) governing regulatory authority.

Silas
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 05 August 2007, 03:38 AM
Not_Done_Living's Avatar
Not_Done_Living Not_Done_Living is offline
 
Join Date: 02 September 2006
Location: Markham, ON
Posts: 3,735
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silas Sparkhammer View Post
These problems can only be addressed at an international level, by U.S./Mexico/Canadian inter-governmental agreement. Until they are addressed, we have a real and significant reason to worry about local regulations being violated, simply because of a lack of any (remember this phrase?) governing regulatory authority.

Silas
Yet planes from 100 different countries fly into n out of America on a daily basis without these same concerns...
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 05 August 2007, 03:46 AM
Silas Sparkhammer's Avatar
Silas Sparkhammer Silas Sparkhammer is offline
 
Join Date: 22 September 2000
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 26,843
Whalephant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Not_Done_Living View Post
Yet planes from 100 different countries fly into n out of America on a daily basis without these same concerns...
Because the international treaty-work has been seen to, and the regulatory agreements are in place.

The same work has not yet been done with regard to trucking.

Silas
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10 August 2007, 07:00 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,642
Mexico The NAFTA Superhighway

There's no such thing as a proposed NAFTA Superhighway.

Though opposition to the nonexistent highway is the cause célèbre of many a paranoiac, the myth upon which it rests was not fabricated out of whole cloth. Rather, it has been sewn together from scraps of fact.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070827/hayes
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 14 August 2007, 02:00 PM
Ali Infree's Avatar
Ali Infree Ali Infree is offline
 
Join Date: 02 February 2007
Location: Wheeling, WV
Posts: 2,565
Goat

I was getting ready to post The Nation article which I read last night, front cover of the magazine, no less.
What I found interesting was that the idea of this motivated people from both political wings to oppose it. Christopher Hayes suggests that this is because the initiatives which are happening (the Texas toll road to be built and owned by a Spanish company) are not seeking public approval. Our frustations at this executive decision-making is significant. Hayes describes the highway as Governor Rick Perry's Iraq war--continued inspite of deep and widespread oppositon.

Ali "for whom the troll tolls" Infree
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04 December 2007, 08:45 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,642
Icon104 Paul believes in threat of North American superhighway

The GOP presidential candidate says U.S. sovereignty is at risk. Highway and trade officials and transportation consultants say there are no plans for such a project.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4646522.story
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 06 December 2007, 07:44 AM
Ravenhull's Avatar
Ravenhull Ravenhull is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2005
Location: Mobile, AL
Posts: 1,935
D'oh!

Why was I not surprised to see which canidate they were talking was?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.