Conservatives NOW seeing Bush as Traitor to the Constitution

Doug Wrenn
SPP End Of USA. Oh, By The Way, Happy "4th Of July," Formerly Known As "Independence Day."
By Doug Wrenn
Jul 3, 2006, 09:47



Disclaimer: The following material is solely intended for independent thinking, liberty loving American patriots only. Some material may be deemed unsuitable for Bush apologists, GOP lemmings, "free traders" and one-world-order globalists. Reader discretion is advised.

I almost gagged the other day, when I heard the tail end of a radio broadcast, in which President Bush was addressing our troops, and making a connection between their sacrifice and our nation’s upcoming "Independence Day, " now relinquished to simply "The 4th Of July." My near gastric disruption was not because of President Bush’s war policies regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Those policies are among the few in his agenda of which I actually concur and support. As for our troops, I support them very much, and more so than our so-called "mainstream" press and media, although that probably isn’t saying much. The crux of my agitation was that this President, of all people, had the unmitigated gall to invoke the birth of our nation’s founding and hard-fought independence after his betrayal to our nation and to our independence, a betrayal that took place on March 23, 2005 in Waco, Texas.

I am referring to the "SPP," or "Security and Prosperity Partnership," colloquially referred to as "the North American Union." Globally speaking, does any variation of that otherwise innocuously sounding phrase sound at all familiar? It should. Socialism, via the globalist agenda, much like what now exists in Europe, has reared it’s ugly head, and has officially found it’s way to a continent near you.

President Bush entered into the SPP agreement with Canada and Mexico in his 2005 Waco summit. This was also the time he dubbed the Minutemen "vigilantes." His recent trip to Cancun was a follow-up to the 2005 summit, which in effect, creates an expanded free enterprise zone with the US, Canada, and Mexico, provides for military defense for our two continental neighbors, and waters down, if not eliminates our once sovereign Constitution as we know it. Maybe "red, white, and blue" symbolizes American patriotism, but "seeing red, feeling blue, and looking white as a sheet" is not what I had in mind, and to any patriotic American, those feelings are exactly what this outright and outrageous sedition should cause.

The sage adage reminds us that you can attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. Keep that in mind as you read the soft, warm, fuzzy "fact sheet," our government has provided us at www.spp.gov/factsheet.asp. While the US has entered a "partnership," in reading between the lines, it seems more likely that the "security and prosperity" will be primarily enjoyed by Mexico and Canada, and at the expense of the US. What the "fact," or more appropriately, "propaganda" sheet does not reveal is that our borders, as we once knew them, are to be erased in 2010, and in recent speeches, the President has occasionally blended in "migration" with "immigration." I doubt that is coincidence, and for Americans, as frustrated as bewildered as I, perhaps now we have our answer to this President’s lethargy, if not defiance, in securing our national and woefully porous borders. We will soon also see a uniform currency to replace the dollar, called, the "Amero," much like the "Euro" from across the pond. Also, a continental highway is supposedly being proposed for construction, linking Canada with Mexico, through the US. There are also slated perks for business that support the SPP agenda, thus giving those businesses an edge over their competitors, and limiting competition in the marketplace, and allowing less choice for the consumer, hardly an accepted staple of the theory of capitalism, which has so long been an integral part of our country’s economic prosperity, quality of life, and sustained liberty. One of the SPP proposals includes a "North American Bank," which will undoubtedly act as a funnel to control commerce as desired by those sitting at the pulling end of the strings. The SPP also intended to have a trilateral say in our food safety. As the US will be outnumbered in this partnership by a 2 to 1 margin, this idea offers me little solace, as we now get sick cows from Canada and tainted fruit from Mexico. What’s next, diseased chickens from China?

Remember that the EU, or European Union, is based on a secular, rather than a Judeo-Christian foundation, as in the US. The Europeans have arrogantly and foolishly determined that they know better than the Creator. Do not expect anything even remotely fair in human rights as time progresses and even intended guidelines deteriorate. If men think they can change God’s rules, it is inevitable that they will pompously, myopically eventually, and gradually change their own rules. What is to stop them? Canada is becoming increasingly secular. It’s SPP membership and influence will only further fuel the secular fire. Remember that our Constitution does not give us rights, it only articulates, and provides a means of enforcement of our rights, which come only from God. Canada’s weak and overly tolerant immigration policies have also made that country a virtual haven for Muslim terrorists. To the limited extent that our border impedes these carnivores at all, just wait until the floodgates are officially opened for the real fun to begin.

To our south, we have Mexico, with little to know middle class, just the poor and the few rich. The rich have little to no reason to want to migrate here, and the oppressed, uneducated, diseased and unskilled poor will offer more of a strain on our country (even more so than now) than an asset. As of this writing, I do not yet know who is leading in Mexico’s presidential election, but I see no reason for hope, as one candidate is a Fox ally, and the other is a radical leftist, who while opposed to globalization, wishes to suck more perks out of the NAFTA agreement for Mexico, which is now suffering from competition from CAFTA and its allies. (As "Blue Collar" comedian, Ron White would facetiously and aptly say, "There’s some good news!") In either case, our future with Mexico has two potential outcomes: the same, or worse. Bear in mind that Mexico has a corrupt government and judicial system, deeply amalgamated with high stakes drug cartels. The North American Union will supposedly, and undoubtedly raise the quality of life for Mexico, and possibly even Canada, but it will certainly ruin ours. Overall, the SPP is a good deal, but only for Canada and Mexico. It will be a "give and take" relationship; they will both take, and we will give.

By observing what is happening in the EU, and what goes on with our southern and northern neighbors, we can easily predict our "nation’s" future, without the need for resurrecting Nostradamus, or breaking out the crystal ball and the tea leaves. Remember, that as a member of a three-nation pact, there is great potential for the US to be frequently outvoted, just like in the United Nations (UN), but on a smaller scale, and with similar anti-American sentiment. Just tick off the potential losses we could take as a hit in our possibly soon to be doomed Bill Of Rights:

1st Amendment- Less free speech (Less, if any mention of God and faith, and don’t even dream of publicly expressing dissatisfaction with the homosexual agenda, for such would most likely be dubbed a hate crime, as advocated in the EU now.)

2nd Amendment- Kiss your guns good bye. The globalists have previously tried this move in the UN already. Canada has already disarmed it people, and in Great Britain, not only has the government confiscated all guns, but it is now illegal, and under penalty of law, for a robbery victim to use any kind of physical force to defend himself. Meanwhile, the rate of "hot" burglaries (or in other words, "home invasions," burglaries or robberies occurring in homes while occupied) is skyrocketing in Great Britain, to the peril of its now sitting duck citizens. Furthermore, Great Britain is now considering what sadly, some of us have previously joked about, but has now come to fruition, "knife control." Yes, I am quite serious; first the British government wanted the guns, now it’s the knives. What is next? Plumbing fixtures, tree branches, rocks, cars, hands, feet? Where does this insanity end? That joke is now no longer funny. By the way, read any AAA (American Automobile Association) guide about traveling to Mexico. The mere possession of a bullet, even without a gun, can land you in jail, and without the same rights granted in US courts and jails.

3rd Amendment- No quartering of troops in homes. This was partially the argument about putting the National Guard on the border, because our country so reviles the use of our military against our own people, or in civilian areas. That principle does not exist in Mexico, however, as the Mexican Army guards Mexico’s border with Guatemala. So in a future SPP era, what is to stop the trilateral government from quartering troops in your now unarmed home (See "2nd Amendment" above.)?

4th Amendment- Unlawful search and seizure. Now see "3rd Amendment" above. If the new ruling continental government "The United States of Canxico" (my own phrase) is going to quarter troops in your home, do you really think a warrant will be a consideration, or any kind of consideration to a search or seizure? The mere mention of a warrant would likely cause laughter for those with the guns, and possibly jail for those without them. Thousands of kidnappings have occurred and continue to occur in Mexico every day, with the passive, if not sanctioned approval of corrupt law enforcement officials. Besides, once you and your family disappear, who is left to complain, or brave enough to even try?

The 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments- All deal with various components of your judicial rights. While it is rightfully said that our judicial system is far from perfect, it is still the best in the world. Canada’s comes close. Mexico’s is abhorrent. And remember, in the SPP, God will likely be gone, men rule, and with God out of the picture, if any parameters exist, they can be moved at any time, per whim. I would venture to say that between the US and Canada, we would retain some, but doubtfully not all of these rights, but the more distressing question is how long we will keep them, and to what degree, if any, will they be enforced. On paper, Mexico has some pretty fair sounding constitutional provisions and laws. The problem is that they are seldom, if ever, applied in practice.

9th Amendment- "The enumeration in the (big "C") Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." That will be a fond memory some day, once our "Constitution" (big "C" again) will be either officially ignored, or simply abolished. Then, rest assured, there will be no contradiction among its various amendments, articles and sections, thus, problem solved.

10th Amendment- Guarantees rights of the states, or the people. Another fond memory. In a trilateral continental government, no country, no states, no problem. As for the people, we will be well under the government’s control by then.

As we are (hopefully) with tearful eyes, heavy hearts, and minds filled with angst, reviewing this magnificent, glorious and precious document, called our Constitution, before it is stabbed through the heart to death by willfully manufactured extinction, I would be remiss if I did not cite yet another noteworthy codicil, specifically, Article 2, Section 2, paragraph 2: "He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..." I have never heard of President Bush seeking advice and consent of the Senate regarding a proposed SPP, or of the Senate concurring with the signed SPP agreement of 2005. If such news was reported, it was apparently not as emphasized as much as the latest Hollywood celebrity’s marriage or divorce, but of course, that’s real news, isn’t it? In the House of Representatives, Congresswoman Katherine Harris (R-FL) proposed a bill supporting the SPP initiative with regard to use of our military, and in the Senate, Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), proposed a similar bill, directing the Secretary Of State to formally establish a program that would also offer military defense to the SPP cohorts. (It is worthy of note that Senator Lugar was also a gleeful proponent of the "L.O.S.T. Treaty, or "Law Of The Seas Treaty," which articulates the willful giving up of many of our sovereign rights in the oceans off our shores.) Neither bill has made much progress in either congressional chamber, but that fact only further instigates the question, why does the formally signed SPP agreement, signed off by President Bush, now exist, when this treaty was never apparently agreed upon by the Senate, as so stipulated in the Constitution?

There has been a story circulating the Internet since last December, which reveals that allegedly, President Bush, in some sort of cabinet or administrative meeting was challenged by a subordinate regarding a possible suggestion discussed that might have been a violation of the Constitution. As the story goes, President Bush replied in anger, words to the effect that "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It’s just a G__ D___ piece of paper!" I have deliberately refrained from ever mentioning this story until now, because I have never seen any conclusive proof that convinced me that this alleged event ever really took place. I still don’t know if the President really ever made that statement, but I do know this, actions speak louder than words.

We have seen this President overexert his Constitutional authority time and again. Just this past week, he was slapped down by the Supreme Court regarding his use, or abuse, of military tribunals. He has, without satisfactory explanation, circumvented the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court, by ordering warrantless phone taps on American citizens, suspected of being accomplices in terrorism. The FISA Court was specifically established so that this much needed practice could be done, and done legally. He secretly and aggressively tried to force through the Dubai Ports World deal, which would have turned our ports over to the United Arab Emirates, even after a widespread backlash by almost all of Congress within both parties, and a vociferous, and vast mass, if not majority, of the enraged American people. When signing the Campaign Finance reform bill into law, the President actually had the audacity to state that he believed the bill to be unconstitutional, and then he signed it into law. President Bush also has also pushed "fast-track " status for previously coveted international trade agreements, in effect, by-passing much of the Congressional process with a wink and a nod. This is a President who has pushed the power of the Executive office to the brink, and then some on more than one occasion. Our country was freed over 200 years ago by secession from one tyrant named George an ocean away. In 2005, we lost our freedom to another tyrant, also named George, present among us and elected by us. President Bush reminds me of the college freshman, away from a restrictive home for the first time, who raises hell and parties every night.

In Texas, the office of Governor is not as empowered as it is in many other states. The Governor of Texas is in some ways, more of a figurehead, as per the structure of that state’s government. I can’t help but wonder, if former Texas Governor Bush, now President Bush, having his previous restrictions removed, is now overzealously enjoying his new-found freedom, and to the detriment of us all.

I then wonder if he did make that statement about the Constitution. If he did, it explains a lot. If he didn’t, his actions, regardless, explain much more, and it is with this apparent mind-set, that he has now sold out our country to eternal sacrifice on the less-than noble altar of regionalism, if not globalism. Another sage adage poses the riddle: "How do you eat an elephant?" Answer: "One bite at a time." Incrementalism is the slow but steady vehicle, by which all political endeavors are fulfilled. Just as registration has been the historical step taken just before gun confiscation, and in many cases, gun confiscation has been the necessary and next chronological step before tyranny, regionalism, in the form of the EU, or the SPP, is the next logical step before a one-world-order, or the closest model to it. This President has now become the facilitator of that movement, and his previously mysterious actions are now much clearer, and understandable, given his chosen agenda or our nation’s fate. Immigration reform activists should recognize this fact, in particular.

Supposedly, there are many globalists, of like mind with the President, currently, but stealthily roaming the halls of Congress, and from both sides of the partisan aisle. If for no other reason, this is the political Apocalypse that indicates the desperate need for the stronger presence of one or more so-called "third" parties, yet at the same time, I wonder if such a change were to occur, if it wouldn’t be too little, too late. Is this damage irreparable? Could this unconstitutional treaty be broken, perhaps by a new President in 2008? Looking at both sides of the thus far, prospective and announced "non-third party" candidates, I see little sign of realistic hope in any of them, as each and every one of them is a by-product of the "go along to get along" government machine, equally fueled by the Democrat and Republican parties, both of which are too consumed with the unquenchable thirst for power at all costs, including the demise of their country. If such were not the case, however, could such a treaty, as the now signed SPP agreement be legally broken? I don’t see why not, after all, it wasn’t legally signed in the first place. Meanwhile, for President Bush, an impeachment should be begun for this abominable constitutional atrocity, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for that prospect. Congress, and more specifically, the Senate, could and should intervene in this matter, but what is being done among the 535 selectively deaf, dumb and blind members of the "Three Monkeys" Club (hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil) on Capitol Hill? The Senate has a role, and a responsibility to play here, not in any way a violation of the separation of powers, but as a clearly articulated constitutional check and balance. So, what’s going on in the Congress? Are they too preoccupied in such more weighty national matters, like assuring that professional baseball players don’t take steroids? Our nation is being overturned by a traitor, not a President, and the majority of those so-called "Honorable" members of the Legislative branch are not Congressmen (and women); they are conspirators. Why are they so silent and compliant? What is their motive for sitting back, looking the other way, and allowing this silent coup to occur? Apathy? Coercion? Bribery? Something else?

Ponder this scenario, just this past week, the Senate, contrary to popular belief, did not really vote against an amendment banning flag burning, but instead, voted against allowing such a consideration to be forwarded to the states for ratification. When the Senate votes on any Constitutional amendment, that is the bottom line of which they vote, not on the issue itself, as with other bills of legislation, but whether or not the 50 states should each be allowed to vote on the issue at hand. If you think the process for amending the Constitution is complex, add to the process two other countries, with different forms of government than ours, and each of those countries having a separate but equal overriding vote, but don’t worry. As I mentioned before, by then, our Constitution will likely no longer be an impediment once this whole nightmare really gets rolling, and then our overburdened schoolchildren can then devote even more of their limited learning time to multi-culturism, the gay agenda and applying condoms on cucumbers, rather than our nominally mentioned founding fathers, who by then, will be forgotten flunkies. Banning religion, disarming the citizenry, dumbing down school students, etc., are all basic ingredients in the vile recipe of government overthrow and oppression of the people by tyrannical regimes or dictators, but that is history, now practically about as routine in some classrooms as the Pledge of Allegiance, (to the former USA) and a (whole) minute of prayer or silent mediation.

Countries in Europe cannot agree on matters within the EU. How will our new system be any better? If you want to see how the American family will be destroyed in a few years by some of the loopy proposals, currently floating around, look to Scandinavia now. If you want to see how our national government, definitive sovereignty, individual liberties, and overall security, stability, and quality of life will be destroyed in a few years, look to the European Union now. Look at the flawed Socialist system that exists in Europe, and the crushing Draconian taxes and astronomical gas prices that it’s citizens pay, which make our expenses seem like a bargain at a "Going Out Of Business" sale. The enticement of the SPP is the wealth and resources of the US. We still can’t figure out how to pay a now mandated and still unfunded $800 + billion Medicare prescription entitlement. How many more entitlements will we have to fund for our SPP partners, and for Mexico, in particular? At what point will our economy then collapse? We are closer to that debacle than many realize, or wish to know. China will soon be in a position to collapse us, just by calling in it’s debts we owe, and are slowly bankrupting us in much the same way we bankrupted Russia and brought about the end of the Cold War. And when, not if, China decides to use it’s rapidly growing and indirectly US funded military to take us on, who will protect us in the SPP, again, Canada, Mexico? Wonderful! I will now sleep well, knowing that these two "super powers," who both love the US so much, will be there to save us in our hour of need. And with this economic strain, we will have to support those two countries as well? Don’t think that we won’t, either.

The Kyoto Treaty calls for tight restrictions on the US, while giving a pass to far worse polluters, like China. Expect the same trend in the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) supported SPP in the future as we have seen in the past from the UN. To quote the famous saying, "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Supposedly, President Bush has said that he does not read newspapers. I believe him.

Ironically, I am writing this column on July 2nd. I say ironically, because some historians say that the Declaration of Independence was actually written on July 2nd, not July 4th, as the date on which we currently celebrate the document’s signing. I would like to say that our beloved country, for whom countless have made the supreme sacrifice to create and preserve, is 230 years old today, but thanks to President Bush, our country actually is 228 years old, as it was killed roughly four months before it’s 229th birthday. While we may still celebrate the event, I wonder how many more such birthdays, or true birthdays, our country will ever live to celebrate again. I also wonder, how many such columns as this one, I will be able to write in future years. Will they still be "free," or will someone wave a magic wand and declare them, any other public expression of dissent "a hate crime"? Please, my fellow Americans, oops, excuse me, my fellow "Union" (big "U") members, don’t let me at all disturb your usual pattern of otherwise harmonious daily life. By all means, keep playing your video games, fanatically obsessing over absolutely meaningless sporting competitions by which you vicariously live your otherwise empty lives, or ponder what kind of novel and astounding depravity you will see on the next episode of your even more meaningless, but favorite reality TV program. My sarcasm is not intended to be offensive, despite the fact that for those of you to whom it applies, I couldn’t care less if it offends you, because while you were not the planted seed that caused this disaster, certainly you have been the fertile ground that nurtured it’s growth, but instead, consider my tongue in cheek statements as an answer to the question you might already be asking, or will soon ask, as your chin drops, your lower lip drools, and your befuddled and gazed eyes sport that deer-in-the-headlights look, with utter astonishment, "How could this have ever happened?" That’s how. Now you know.

Now, go back to continuing your "bear in the winter" impression and resume hibernation, while the rest of us pay for the deep, vast, and devouring abyss that you created in our country, and left in your wake; an abyss which your civic duty should have filled long ago. Our country was forged with sacrificial blood by citizens better than you. Now, you have transformed that noble blood into water with red food coloring. Thanks for the memories, because that is all we will now have left, while America was conquered, without a shot ever being fired, as you blissfully and ignorantly slept. America was not robbed; it was burglarized, and certainly not in the "hot" sense that I previously explained.

As for me, when will I give up the fight? My answer to that question is akin to what actor and then National Rifle Association (NRA) President Charlton Heston once recently said, as he proudly held a rifle above his hands, and proclaimed, " ... From my cold, dead, hands!" Ditto with me with this keyboard, and if need be, a pencil and paper, and if need be still, a carrier pigeon, and yes, likewise with my guns. Some "Americans" dance around, actually saying nothing, with empty and vague euphemisms, covered in warm and sugary coatings, such as "compassionate conservativism." The rest of us still rally behind a true leader from many years ago, who in a very clear, direct and succinct manner, proudly and defiantly exclaimed, "Give me liberty, or give me death." That brings me to yet another question to further stimulate and provoke your thoughts. Some say that the true definition of prophesies is not what will happen, but rather, what could happen, unless the people involved change their actions and/or behavior. Do you remember the old cigarette ads that used to say, "I’d rather fight than switch"? My fellow Americans, we are now discussing a matter far more significant than choosing a brand of cigarettes, but given that same question, which will you do, fight, or switch?

On a lighter and more refreshing note, in the next couple of days, I wish you all a very happy Independence Day. Oops, excuse me, I mean, "Happy 4th Of July," because from now on, on that particular calendar day, since March 23rd, 2005, no longer symbolizes anything else, and is for evermore, just the 4th of July, and nothing more, or is it?

Doug Wrenn


[link to magic-city-news.com]