It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ted Cruz: First President of the North American Union

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlesT

I am about 10 minutes in and I feel like I am watching the Onion but this stuff is real.

"HA HA HA HAAAA!!!
LMAO LMAO LMAO LMAO!!!
THAT IDIOT???
LMAO LMAO LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I don't know if I could have said it better myself, my hats off to "CHONOTIN".




posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlesT

I tried my darnedest to get this idea out on ATS - but didn't have that really great vid, was shot down by a couple of our exalted mods, and one thread was closed and the other deleted. [ATS does not allow more than one thread on the same subject.]

Here are a few comments I managed to post:



Canada and the USA -and Mexico- for that matter are bound at the hip with NAFTA - and I suspect our corporate rulers would like to "simplify" all our elections. And thus, their rule.



I suspect that's the whole point of the exercise - to prove birthplace doesn't matter, and to entrench the meme. Thus will the way be paved for a true union of nations, to be followed by what? the United States of Pepsi? ....a few more steps are required of course, but that's the endgame.



Makes me wonder how long it will be before we have the United States of Pepsi or whatever - and it won't matter where the president was born.






PS. F&S&







edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
North American Union?

Hell no!
The US president is NOT the leader of the "free" world. Not the laeder of North America. Not the leader outside of the US.
Not my president. I don't have a president.

If that ever happens I might just have to move to Iceland. .......

Cruz is a religious nut....



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: snowspirit

The original initiatives stalled, but support remains. The names -and stated purposes- have changed, but that's all. Point is, "It ain't over 'til it's over." And it ain't over.


The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was a region-level dialogue with the stated purpose of providing greater cooperation on security and economic issues.[1] The Partnership was founded in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, by Prime Minister of Canada Paul Martin, President of Mexico Vicente Fox, and U.S. President George W. Bush.[1] It was the second of such regional-level agreements involving the United States following the 1997 Partnership for Prosperity and Security in the Caribbean (PPS).

Since August 2009 it is no longer an active initiative of any of the original dialogue partners.

....On February 4, 2011, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama announced a new security and prosperity initiative with plans to "pursue a perimeter approach to security in ways that support economic competitiveness, job creation, and prosperity".[22]

On March 13, 2011, the Canadian government announced it was beginning a five-week consultation process "with all levels of government and with communities, non-governmental organizations and the private sector, as well as with our citizens on the implementation of the shared vision for perimeter security and economic competitiveness".
[23]


THE HARPER GOVERNMENT AND THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION RELEASE THE CANADA-UNITED STATES REGULATORY COOPERATION COUNCIL JOINT FORWARD PLAN

CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES COMMIT TO DEEPENING THE LEVEL OF REGULATORY COOPERATION

Ottawa, Ontario
29 August 2014

Introduction

Today, the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Forward Plan was released. The plan sets the stage for fundamental changes in the way regulatory departments and agencies in both countries work together, making it easier for businesses to operate in both countries.

The Joint Forward Plan, which builds on the RCC Joint Action Plan launched in December 2011 by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama, will deepen Canada-U.S. regulatory cooperation through new bi-national processes and partnerships. This approach will institutionalize joint planning and collaboration between Canadian and U.S. regulatory agencies.










edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)

edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: add link, quote



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I can live with a NA union IF it's under the Constitution.

Yet, just in the last couple of days Obama offers another executive order allowing office staff to be given work permits as an enticement for foreign business investments into the U.S..

If Obama hasn't opened the doors and you can't see it...well that's on you.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

So you get that it's about defining our nations as commercial ventures, first and foremost? And the "new" Joint Forward Plan institutionalizes "joint planning and collaboration between Canadian and U.S. regulatory agencies"? ....That corporations are persons and people are just "consumers," and the endgame involves corporate oversight? You're good with all that?

[North American Union = Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America = Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Forward Plan.]


29 August 2014
Introduction

Today, the Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Forward Plan was released. The plan sets the stage for fundamental changes in the way regulatory departments and agencies in both countries work together, making it easier for businesses to operate in both countries.

The Joint Forward Plan, which builds on the RCC Joint Action Plan launched in December 2011 by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama, will deepen Canada-U.S. regulatory cooperation through new bi-national processes and partnerships. This approach will institutionalize joint planning and collaboration between Canadian and U.S. regulatory agencies.

The Joint Forward Plan also includes specific commitments to align 24 areas of regulatory business. Work will continue in areas such as marine safety and security, pharmaceuticals, food safety, plant and animal health, and crop protection products. The RCC Forward Plan also expands work into new areas such as energy efficiency, toy safety, medical devices, chemicals management, and the use of natural gas in transportation.






edit on 26/3/15 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Ted Cruz was HAPPY to give up his birthright in order to be President of the United States (when almost EVERY analyst says he doesn't stand a chance).

If he's happy to give up all citizenship ties to the nation of his birth just in order to run for an office he has no chance of winning, how can he call himself a "PATRIOT"?

A true patriot loves their country, no matter the county.

I'm a dual citizen, and I love BOTH the countries I'm tied to, both my birth country AND my adopted country. I'm proud to call myself English, and proud to call myself Canadian.

Apparently Ted Cruz wants to hide both his Canadian birth AND his Cuban heritage. After all, would "Rafael Cruz" (his REAL name) even be a consideration for President by the far righties?



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies


Apparently Ted Cruz wants to hide both his Canadian birth AND his Cuban heritage. After all, would "Rafael Cruz" (his REAL name) even be a consideration for President by the far righties?


I don't see why his name makes a difference. It's his policies that matter.



posted on Mar, 26 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   
There is no way in hell that Cruz will win the nomination. First and foremost, he's too polarizing within his own party. This is nearly akin to Ralph Nader jumping into the 2000 presidential election and shaking things up for the Dems.

Secondly, he panders to an extremely narrow niche. Unless he is able and willing to broaden his base, all he is really going to do is muddy the water for the other candidates who are just a slighty more moderate with their views. All the charisma in the world isn't going to be worth a damn if he's pissing off the majority of the GOP.

Honestly, Rick Perry stands a better chance at being nominated and that's saying something.



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 03:01 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Yep, no other reason to do so.

I don't get Cruz as being any real player in this.

More likely, from my point of view, is the left's agenda as being shown by Obama. I see this as more of a take-down of Cruz by the left.

I could be wrong, but in a right controlled Congress, I see that agenda as far harder to accomplish than in a left agenda which has ignored the wishes of it's citizens far more than the right.

I guess, personally, that if the people voted for that kind of unification, in all three countries and it was under the Constitution then I'd be OK with it.

IF this was to stop a corporate agenda unification, we'd see which corporations were involved, the CEO's names, so on.

THAT was kill this FAST.

Not hitting Cruz, that's pure political B.S.. and I don't buy it....



edit on 27-3-2015 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

...IF this was to stop a corporate agenda unification, we'd see which corporations were involved, the CEO's names, so on.


You obviously didn't watch the vid. You should. And remember: North American Union = Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America = Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Forward Plan.




posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   
I'll play...Responses in bold


originally posted by: sirlancelot

Its funny people call him all these name but if you look at what hus agenda is my question is why?

What dont you like about our govt following the constitution?

Pre-supposes that his view of the constitution is accurate. For example he believes in religion being part of government and outright ignores the establishment clause

What dont you like about getting rid of IRS?

Elimnating revenues altogether? So how does he plan on funding defense or other necessities? ...More to the point, he knows this and says these things dishonestly with the aim of appealing to "useful" ideologues he sees as incapable of thought ...which should offend anyone he is speaking to

What dont you like about getting rid of Obamacare and getting a better solution?

He has no solution...hell he doesn't even have a solution for himself...thus he said he would go on Obamacare

What dont you like about a President that actually does what he says he will do and that doesnt lie!

Which candidate for President in the history of the United States has claimed otherwise?


edit on 30-3-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: babybunnies


Apparently Ted Cruz wants to hide both his Canadian birth AND his Cuban heritage. After all, would "Rafael Cruz" (his REAL name) even be a consideration for President by the far righties?


I don't see why his name makes a difference. It's his policies that matter.


His name is actually Barack Hussein Cruz.

Dunno why he changed it.



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5
I'll play...Responses in bold


originally posted by: sirlancelot

Its funny people call him all these name but if you look at what hus agenda is my question is why?

What dont you like about our govt following the constitution?

Pre-supposes that his view of the constitution is accurate. For example he believes in religion being part of government and outright ignores the establishment clause

What dont you like about getting rid of IRS?

Elimnating revenues altogether? So how does he plan on funding defense or other necessities? ...More to the point, he knows this and says these things dishonestly with the aim of appealing to "useful" ideologues he sees as incapable of thought ...which should offend anyone he is speaking to

What dont you like about getting rid of Obamacare and getting a better solution?

He has no solution...hell he doesn't even have a solution for himself...thus he said he would go on Obamacare

What dont you like about a President that actually does what he says he will do and that doesnt lie!

Which candidate for President in the history of the United States has claimed otherwise?



Not sure how to respond like you did but here it goes.

Point 1 Cruz never said his christian values where mandated by the constitution.
Point 2 Cruz isnt suggesting getting rid of revenue but simplifying the revenue based on a flat tax.
Point 3 As a member of the senate obamacare is the only healthcare option and its the law. Unlike many dems he isnt taking the waiver to subsidy his coverage. WHen and/or if he or others are able to amend or replace obamacare then lets see what happens.
Point 4 Your right all politicians lie its just a matter of the degree. All I know is Cruz was elected based on certain positions and he has attempted to honor his positions.

Cant wait for the debates to start. He will surprise and win over many!



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: sirlancelot

originally posted by: Indigo5
I'll play...Responses in bold


originally posted by: sirlancelot

Its funny people call him all these name but if you look at what hus agenda is my question is why?

What dont you like about our govt following the constitution?

Pre-supposes that his view of the constitution is accurate. For example he believes in religion being part of government and outright ignores the establishment clause

What dont you like about getting rid of IRS?

Elimnating revenues altogether? So how does he plan on funding defense or other necessities? ...More to the point, he knows this and says these things dishonestly with the aim of appealing to "useful" ideologues he sees as incapable of thought ...which should offend anyone he is speaking to

What dont you like about getting rid of Obamacare and getting a better solution?

He has no solution...hell he doesn't even have a solution for himself...thus he said he would go on Obamacare

What dont you like about a President that actually does what he says he will do and that doesnt lie!

Which candidate for President in the history of the United States has claimed otherwise?



Not sure how to respond like you did but here it goes.

Point 1 Cruz never said his christian values where mandated by the constitution.



Confusing retort. Cruz does not believe his Christianity is mandated by the constitution...he believes that the constitution affords for State Sponsored Religion. He does not recognize the "establishment clause" aka. government shall not establish a national religion.





Rated 100% by the AU, indicating opposition to separation of church & state.
Cruz scores 100% Americans United for the Separation of Church and State
Scoring system for 2014: Ranges from 0% (supports separation of church & state) to 100% (opposed to separation of church & state).

www.ontheissues.org...

There is a tonnage of quotes and rhetoric of his that can be cited supporting the same.




originally posted by: [post=19181711]sirlancelot
Point 2 Cruz isnt suggesting getting rid of revenue but simplifying the revenue based on a flat tax.



A flat tax still requires an Internal Revenue Service. He has indisputably called for the complete elimination of the IRS.


originally posted by: [post=19181711]sirlancelot
Point 3 As a member of the senate obamacare is the only healthcare option and its the law.

Incorrect. Perhaps research the specifics of his legal obligations as a Senator. He is under no legal obligation to enroll in Obamacare. He can get insurance on the private market. The law only requires that he have health insurance.


originally posted by: [post=19181711]sirlancelot
Point 4 Your right all politicians lie its just a matter of the degree. All I know is Cruz was elected based on certain positions and he has attempted to honor his positions.



To be specific, I simply said that all politicians claim they are telling the truth and that they will deliver on their promises. I see no reason why Ted Cruz doing so makes him special.


edit on 31-3-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-3-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: babybunnies


Apparently Ted Cruz wants to hide both his Canadian birth AND his Cuban heritage. After all, would "Rafael Cruz" (his REAL name) even be a consideration for President by the far righties?


I don't see why his name makes a difference. It's his policies that matter.


It's America.......everything matters. ....especially things someone else thinks don't matter!



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: sirlancelot
What dont you like about our govt following the constitution?
WHat dont you like about getting rid of IRS?
What dont you like about getting rid of Obamacare and getting a better solution?
What dont you like about a President that actually does what he says he will do and that doesnt lie!


Following the constitution is such a ridiculous statement. It's like following the Bible, which oddly enough people like Cruz equate in roughly the same holy context. Different people have different interpretations and what may be constitutional to one is unconstitutional to another. Even Madison, the guy who wrote the constitution worked in severe breach of the separation of powers. The constitution is more about an ideal we should strive to (and a self checking system to keep us working towards it) than iron clad laws we must adhere to. That is why we can amend the constitution to change the goalposts.

Getting rid of the IRS is undesirable because part of responsible governance includes the collection of taxes. The IRS is the mechanism by which we do this. A centralized system allows us to take advantage of the economy of scale making that collection more effective and less costly. Would you prefer a system where the government can't collect taxes? Where tax cheats are rampant and no one pays their share?

Getting rid of the ACA is fine, provided you have a plan to replace it. Thus far the only real plan other than single payer which has virtually no support has been the Heritage plan which ultimately turned into the ACA. The Republicans spent 30 years pushing the Heritage plan, then 8 years running against it. In those 38 years no one has suggested something else. You shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and considering that not only is no one suggesting better, but that Obamacare is better than what we had previously... I am forced to believe that by the process of elimination Obamacare is good.

A president doing what they say they will do? That has to do with the presidents ability to lead. Obama has been fiercely opposed at every step, and he has displayed no ability to get people to follow him. Would Cruz? That has yet to be determined, but considering most of his own party goes against him and all of the Democrats go against him he would face even tougher opposition than Obama. Also, to a good percentage of the country, they would prefer it if Cruz (if elected) were completely impotent and unable to do a thing.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: sirlancelot
Point 1 Cruz never said his christian values where mandated by the constitution.
Point 2 Cruz isnt suggesting getting rid of revenue but simplifying the revenue based on a flat tax.
Point 3 As a member of the senate obamacare is the only healthcare option and its the law. Unlike many dems he isnt taking the waiver to subsidy his coverage. WHen and/or if he or others are able to amend or replace obamacare then lets see what happens.
Point 4 Your right all politicians lie its just a matter of the degree. All I know is Cruz was elected based on certain positions and he has attempted to honor his positions.


Others covered point 1.

I believe that point 2 is a misunderstanding of the flat tax. It is billed as a way to make everyone pay the same and a simplification of the tax code but that's not really accurate. A flat tax represents a tax increase on those with less money, and a tax cut for those with more money. When someone like Ted Cruz supports a tax cut, what he is saying is that he wants to pay less in taxes while you should cover his tax burden.

You see, a flat tax typically involves some sort of clause that the first $x is tax free. This emulates the current system where people get back more in things like food stamps, hud, wic, and all the rest than they pay in through income taxes. Except those at the bottom typically get money back. This means those on the bottom end up with less. Additionally, those at the top also pay less taxes because we're no longer in a progressive system with a top marginal rate of 35%. Instead it falls to a say 20% for everyone. This means those at the top pay less. From here you can easily infer that the middle class pays more. The bottom 50% collectively only cover 1% of the tax burden, so they're largely irrelevant. The top 1% is paying another 40%, but with their tax cut they are now paying less... about 23% (using the 20/35 numbers). This means the middle class goes from paying 59% to paying 76%... a 29% increase.

Flat taxes only help the very rich. It throws away the idea of a progressive tax rate, and instead introduces a regressive tax rate where the higher your earnings the less impactful taxes are on you, while the less you earn the higher impact taxes are on you.

On point #3, if Cruz truly wanted to protest against Obamacare, he would do what the right wing media is claiming many others are doing, and protest the law by paying the fine. That he is taking Obamacare rather than going without proves he has no ability to stand behind convictions.

On point #4, a congressman serves a small demographic. The presidency is about leading while being a Senator is about representing state interests. His deeply held positions, that got him elected are positions that many in the country disagree with. This is why congressmen make for poor presidents. Both jobs are filled by politicians but they have radically different job requirements and duties.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join