This divisiveness, is not in regard to something as substantial as slavery, its a boogeyman hiding in the closet. He’s portraying himself as the everyman hero against every nutjobs particular bogeyman in order to get their vote. That’s not about being ‘divisive’ on an issue of principle like slavery, its about pandering to a base of complete retards.

Carbon taxes would be collected by national governments, and not by the UN. There is no direct taxation of americans (or anyone else), by the UN. His fantasy is based on an amendment he made to a completely unrelated law which would prohibit a certain kind of tax that really was proposed to benefit the UN. However, there was no actual bill in place to make that proposal law, nor was there any serious attempt to make it so. Some economist delivered a paper suggesting it at the world economic forum in Davos a couple of years ago, and a few months later, Ron Paul proposed an amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act prohibiting funds from it from being used to benefit the furtherance of this proposal which no one ever took seriously.

This is what I mean: He creates a boogeyman that doesn’t exist, demonizes everyone but himself as being ‘for’ the boogeyman, then sets himself up as the hero slaying the boogeyman. Its shameful that so many people are so deluded.

There is no push for a ‘union’ of any type. Not for common currency, or anything remotely like common union. All there is a push for is removing barriers to trade and creating the infastructure to see that trade prosper, something which helps all of us in all three countries.

I don’t understand what your problem is with mexican truck drivers. There is a shortage of long haul truck drivers. Stuff needs to get hauled. If Canadian truckers can drive in the US, and US drivers in Canada (both of which I assure you already occurs), then why is it bad for mexican truckers to take part? There is a critical shortage of drivers, and companies are recruiting like mad to cover the shortfall.

Ron Paul is the crazy uncle of US politics, and he should be put in an asylum, and not on meet the press.

I know this may not be what you meant by “politics of division” but I would like to spin the idea that divisiveness is sometimes a good thing. It was good to be divisive about slavery, for example. In times of overwhelming injustice, divisive leaders can be better than ignorance and lethargy.

I confes some of the things I said earlier may not be technially accurate. For example, Kyoto etc… is not direct evidence that the UN wants to tax Americans. I am also not sure that environmentalsits want global carbon taxes – but even if this were the case, I don’t know that it would have to go through the UN. However, when Ron Paul claims to have “successfully fought” an UN taxation effort in Congress, it I think it might deserve checking into what he is basing this on.

Also, Ron Paul’s website does say, as I have discovered, “…a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico…” I’m not sure what Paul’s definition of “nation” is here. I mean, even the European Union is not a single country per se. However, I am inclined to believe there is some push for a type of “union”, so count me on Ron Paul’s camp here as well.

I apologize for perhaps exaggerating my reaction to your second to last paragraph. In addition. I don’t know if Bush personally wants Mexican trucks travelling American roads but there are those who would argue that the Adminstration is indeed pushing for a form of this.
I don’t want to innaccurately malign individuals or companies but I just don’t feel that everyone succeeds in being overwhelmingly benevolent with regards to the effect of their policies or practices. If some people see trends or patterns of injustice, I can’t say that I diagree with them.

The politics of division are powerful, but they are not good.

Was there something I put in there which you found particularly offensive? Please let me know.

I’m sorry I wrote this, I’m not actually sure whether it was reported or not during past decades. I believe it has been covered recently though.

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/061207_nafta_real.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59105

As a Christian, your second to last paragraph deeply disturbs me. You seem to ridicule those people who are worried about the effects of big government and big business. The story of the Bible is a history of un-conscientious people uspuring and exploiting power. It’s partly what got Israel kicked off their home turf for a time. Actually, you can see this trend in all human history. It is the natural selection process of a fallen humankind. You would have to be naive to not see any un-holy collusion between government and big business today.
I guess manufacturers move to China to help the Chinese, not to expolit cheap labour. I guess most Americans want Bush pushing for Mexican Trucks on their roads. Don’t even get me started on the inflation tax sanctioned by the federal reserve. Bilderberg meetings are just to play chess I suppose (even Bilderberg has now been reported by mainstream press after decades of silence)

On the global taxation front, I do not think it unreasonable to see a disturbing trend. Are environmentalists not calling for a global carbon tax? Wan’t Kyoto somewhat of a global tax? Again, you say there is no basis in fact.

While I don’t like some of Ron Paul’s more Libertarian positions, I am grateful for his shaking up of the establishment Republocrats.