You think the title is too extreme or out there?  Think again.  Many conservative pundits have been warning of the Bush Administrations work to create a "North American Union", including Jerome Corsi at humanevents.com.  I firmly believe that the Immigration Bill being forced down America's throat is the first step to that North American Union, or NAU.  Here's how we get there from here.

Mexicans are in America for wages not jobs

Don't let anyone fool you:  Mexicans are not massively unemployed, they are just underpaid.  The Mexican unemployment rate is 3.5% but their poverty rate is a staggering 27% according to Wikipedia.  Mexico has the 13th largest economy in the world, but ranks 53rd in per capita GDP.  Mexicans working in America send $22 billion back to Mexico every year.  That is more direct foreign investment in Mexico than even their oil industry exports.  Mexican are coming to America not because of a lack of jobs, but because they are not paid squat in Mexico for the jobs they have.  Americans, on the other hand, have been all to eager to turn a blind eye to the illegal immigration problem because of all the benefits we reap.  Mexicans provide cheap labor for our agricultural and construction industries that has kept our prices artificially low.  Everyone knows but is unwilling to acknowledge the reality that our booming economy has been because the sweat of illegal Mexicans has freed disposable income to purchase all of these consumer products.

Mexican government is corrupt and will not change because of this bill

There are hundreds of stories detailing Mexican corruption at the highest levels of the Mexican government.  The drug trade through Mexico has corrupted the Mexican army into helping the drug smugglers get their drugs into America.  60% of all of the wealth of Mexico is in the hands of the top 10% of the Mexican population. 

The Immigration Bill could depopulate Mexico by half

Mexico has just over 100 million citizens at 107 million as of 2006.  The immigration bill allows the 12 million illegal immigrants to bring over up to 4 additional family members.  This means that 60 million Mexicans will be legally allowed to live in the United States (12 million illegals + 48 million family members = 60 million).  Mexico's population will effectively be halved by the US immigration law.  This will only exaccerbate the United States' problems with healthcare, insurance, Social Security and ever increasing welfare rolls.  Mexico on the other hand will be able to export it's 27% that are impoverished plus an additional 20 million.

The Immigration Bill as pathway to a North American Union

With the Mexican population remaining in Mexico down to 40 million, Mexico will have a population density almost as small as Canada's 32 million.  The population of the United States will grow by 20% from 300 million to 380 million.  WIth almost 90% of the inhabitants of North America living within the confines of the most prosperous nation in the world, the case will easy to make for the creation of the North American Union. 

The End of American Sovereignty

With the creation of a North American Union, there is no guarantee that American rights that are guaranteed in our Bill of Rights and our Constitution will be a part of the new North American Union.  With the 60 million potentially new Democrat voters and the liberals policies of socialism, there are many indicators that the liberals will write a new Constitution for the new NAU instead of adopting our constitution as is and adopting it a part of a larger United States of America.  Liberals always believe that they are the smartest people in the room.  They believe that socialism and communism, done right, will lead to a utopia and they never stop trying to advance their utopian socialist ideals.  I have no doubt that a new North American Union will be that socialist/communist paradise for the liberal elites in all three countries.  It will be a socialist hellhole for those of us on the receiving end of the elite's socialist machinations.  I firmly believe that the immigration bill is the first step to making the NAU and their socialist nation a reality. 

I was heartened that the French may have turned a corner with the election of Nicholas Sarcozy as President of France.  He talks tough on terrorism.  He says that he will renew the relationship with the United States.  He says how he wants to fight France's tendency towards mendacity and self-deception with their failed socialism and economic decline.  Of course, the proof is in the pudding and we will have to wait and see what kind of "conservative" leader he becomes.  Our faithful readers must recall that George W. Bush ran for President in 2000 as a "Compassionate Conservative".  As his presidency has borne out, he is definitely not a conservative.
    With the apparent loathing of all things American, one would have the impression that it has always been this way.  In fact, the anti-American streak began with the one man that should have loved America as much as France itself: Charles DeGaulle.  DeGaulle ran the Free French during World War II and was a champion for the French to resist the German occupation of France.  After World War II, DeGaulle was elected president of France and started a campaign of Anti-Americanism that has influenced every leader of France since, right up to the most recent president, Jacques Chirac.  DeGaulle was so anti-american that in 1971, when the Bretton Woods system, where the US covered foreign currency exchanges with gold, collapsed and the United States began to "float" the dollar and asked the other nations to accept the dollar as is instead of an equivalent measure of Gold.  Only DeGaulle and France demanded to be paid in gold for what the United States owed them. Remember that it was France that dragged the United States into Southeast Asia and the Vietnam War.  Remember that it was Francois Mitterand that denied our F-101s bound for Libya entrance to French airspace and made them fly around the Iberian peninsula to strike Qaddafi in 1982.  Remember that France was the exile home of the Ayatollah Kohmeni before he returned to Iran after the Shah of Iran was deposed in 1979.  Remember that it was a French built nuclear power plant that Israel destroyed in their daring raid at Osirak in 1981.  Remember it was a French Exocet missile, fired by an Iraqi jet, that severely damaged the USS Stark in the  Persian Gulf in 1987.  Since World War II, France has been a constant thorn in the side of United States and it's foreign policy.  But it has not always been so.
    The truth is that France was a role-model for the west and America before there was a west and America.  The War on Terrorism actually began many centuries ago and in France of all places.  The Battle of Tours in 732 was the first time the west and Islam clashed.  The new religion of Mohammed was on a rampage through North Africa and the Middle East.  The Umayyad Muslims of North Africa crossed the Straits of Gibraltar, subjugated the Iberian peninsula and drove north into the Frankish kingdom, what is now France.  The Frankish king, Charles Martel, is seen by historians as the man that led the forces that routed the Umayyads at Tours, also known as Poitiers, and halted the advance of the Muslim armies.  So a Frenchman led the first fight against Jihadists.  The Maquis de Lafayette aided the fledgling nation of America as we battled for our independence.  Lafayette and other Frenchmen were great admirers of our new form of government.  
    With the election of Sarcozy, what can we expect from France as we go forward? Realistically, I would not expect French troops to come to the aid of the US in Iraq; that won't happen.  But maybe, France will stop obstructing the US on the UN Security Council.  Right now, France has blocked our efforts against Iran, North Korea, and in our finding a resolution to the events in Darfur, Sudan.  A pro-US France will give the US another ally, along with Great Britain, as a counterweight to the Russia-China block.  A pro-US France will denude the growing influence of Germany and will do more to keep NATO together, instead of fracturing into a France-Germany alliance that appeared to be brewing.  We might finally get to hear what role Chirac and his government had in the UN Oil-For-Food scandal.   One can only hope we see some of these outcomes. 
    The truth is that a newly Conservative france may be the tipping point to start to rollback the rising tide of Jihadism throughout Europe.  With new policies of assimilation of it's Muslim populace and agreement with some of the US's stands against terrorism.  Sarcozy may be as big an ally on the War on Terrorism as Tony Blair, only the new France will be a key player behind the scenes.  Only time will tell.    

 There are 14 elements that define a Fascist state as defined by the website "Old American Century"  seen at this link,  http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm .   This website tries to make the case that somehow all of the Liberals in America are just going to roll over an allow George W. Bush, in the last year and a half of his presidency, to turn America in to a Fascist state. Of course, this type of nonsense has been going on since 9-11 and the start of the War on Terrorism.  The "Ron Paul-type", Blame America Firsts, White Guilt Liberals obviously buy into this pap wholeheartedly, as they do the belief that America is responsible for Global Warming, Bush orchestrated 9-11, Cheney and his buddies are profiting from the oil revenues in Iraq, Elvis is alive, the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Great Pumpkin, and every other children's fantasy story.  But don't question a liberals patriotism!! Oh no, you better not! Even though liberals in America have come out in defense of terrorists at G'itmo but against our Soldiers and Marines, demand that we retreat in humiliating shame and defeat from Iraq, and use the necessity of funding for our troops in battle to pass special interest, non-war related pork projects.  They have even forbade the use of the term "War on Terrorism" from being mentioned in Liberal bills.  But they are all patriotic Americans all.  I digress...

The term "islamofascist" has received some criticism from the Left because they say a religion can't be Fascist.  I say they are full of crap and I provide below 14 reasons why they are in fact, full of crap.  Enjoy.


14 Reasons Why The Term "Islamofascist" Fits 

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism

If you substitute “nationalism” with Islam, the Islamists want obedience (which is what Muslim means) to Islam more than anything else. Even Steve Centani and his Olaf the Photo Guy from Fox were forced to “convert” to Islam as a means of staying alive.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

Beheadings, genocide, rape of school girls, stoning women to death, killing men for not having a beard and killing people for kite flying are all hallmarks of Sharia law. Yeah, Islamists don’t give to hoots about anyone’s, Muslim or Non-Muslim’s, human rights.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.

I suppose you never heard of America as referred to as the “Great Satan” and Israel as the "Little Satan"? The Islamofascists want is to destroy the United States and the west because it represents everything that is evil to Islamofascists. They don’t try to destroy Lithuania.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.

The Islamic world still holds military parades and demonstrations. Iran has just bought missile firing submarines and the latest in Russian and Chinese export weapons. Musharref(sic) in Pakistan took over the government in a military coup. Can’t tell me that the Middle East isn’t obsessed with military might.

5. Rampant sexism.

One word says it all: Burhka. Women have no rights in Muslim nations. Can’t vote, can’t get an education, and can’t own property. Well, they are property. When I was in an Army school, I made friends with a Saudi Arabian soldier. He invited me to have lunch at his house with him and his family. When my daughter and I arrived at his house, my daughter went off to a back room to hang out and eat with his wife while the husband and I ate in the front room. Uday and Qusay kidnapped and raped 11 and 12 year old girls for weeks at a time. When they were done, they released the girls where the parents promptly “honor” killed the girls for disgracing their family. Honor Killings even happen in the United States. Fact: Muslim nations practice rampant sexism

6. A controlled mass media.

Al-Jazeera and Al Aribya do not practice “fair and balanced” journalism. State-controlled media is the norm in Islamic nations.

7. Obsession with national security.

Our allies, the Pakistanis, recently executed 3 for being “American Spies” for the CIA. Saddam Hussein had four and five levels of secret police. Every Muslim nation has a secret police force to oppress their people.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.

The mullahs in Iran control everything, including Mahmoud Iwannajihad, or whatever his name is.

9. Power of corporations protected.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia owns every red cent we send them for oil. Dubai Ports International was denied the contract to manage the 6 east coast ports because, [Shock!] it was owned by Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem of Dubai. When the definition of “corporations” is broadened to include state-owned corporations, the Muslims are batting 1.000.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.

Ever hear of a labor strike in Damascus or Tehran? Me neither.  Might have something to do with that state run media in those countries.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.

The Taliban destroyed priceless and ancient works of art just because they weren’t “Muslim”. Those Buddha in Afghanistan can never be replaced, but that didn’t stop the Taliban from destroying them anyway. That is just the largest and most egregious example. It was also the Iraqis, not any Americans, that looted their own art works from the Mesopotamian period for sale on international markets. America has been trying to recover those works for the last 3 years.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment.

Stoning for adultery, cutting off of hands for thievery, beheadings for drug use and smuggling. Hard time in a Muslim world is the time between sentencing and your execution.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.

Saddam’s sons, brothers, sisters, brothers-in-law all had posts in his government. Basher Assad was a dentist with the distinction of having Hafez Assad as his father before he came to power. Corruption is the norm in the Muslim world. One of the main reasons why it took so long to get the Iraqi police retrained was because our trainers had to go back to the fundamentals with classes like: Why Graft is Bad 101, Who You Really Work For: lectures on not working for Militias.

14. Fraudulent elections.

Saddam was the only name on the Ballot. Mahmoud Iwannajihad was elected despite rampant election fraud in Iran, as seen at this link: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2005/06/allegations-of-election-fraud-arise.php. Even more “enlightened nations” like Egypt have repeated instances of election fraud as evidenced by Hosni Mubarak getting elected over and over again. Actually, he is the only president Egypt has had since Sadat.

There you go.  14 Reasons why "Islamofascist" fits.  I truly believe that the Islamofascists want to create a Caliphate that will be exactly as Fascist as Nazi Germany was.  As a disclaimer, I do give as examples many present day Muslim nations.  Do I think all Muslim nations are Fascist: No.  However, most Muslim nations are definitely less free and open than the United States is.  I think that is true without question. For those of you that disagree with that, I'm sure that there are many seats still available for flights to the Middle East you could catch sometime today.

I was able to see the 2nd GOP presidential debate last night.  Here is my review of the debate:

Fox News proved once again what a class organization it is and what a classless network that MSNBC is.  Brit Hume, Chris Wallace and Wendall Goehler were polite, profressional, very organized and, most importantly, truly fair and balanced in how they asked their questions and hwo the questions were framed.  Contrast that to the beligerant and condecending way Chris Matthews and the two Politico hacks framed and asked the questions at the MSNBC debate.  When a candidate failed to answer the question asked, Brit Hume would give the candidate another 30 seconds to actually answer the question, exposing the fact that the candidate was wevading the answer.  That and the very nature of the debate last night provided the answer why the Democrats will never hold a debate on the Fox News Channel:  They would actually have to answer questions that would force them to expose the vacuum of ideas of the Democrat Party.

The Second Tier:  The second tier of the GOP provide last night why they are where they are. Tancredo, Brownback and Paul were all one issue candidates.  Tancredo is the "immigration candidate", Brownback is the "Religious Right candidate",  and Paul is the "Anti-war Democrat candidate." Huckabee and Gilmore did a better job than the others to separate themselves from the bottom third of the pack, who used their standing as Chief Executives of their respective states to distinguish themselves from the Members of Congress.  Tommy Thompson didn't acquit himself well at all.  He appeared very stuffy and a little out of touch. Thompson, who was the Secretary of Health and Human Services, couldn't name one program that he would cut or eliminate.  When pressed with an additional 30 seconds he mumbled about the drug stockpile, but still couldn't name one.  I think that Thompson, Brownback and Hunter will be the first of the bottom tier candidates to drop out of the race.  Paul has no chance at getting the nomination because he is a member of the "blame America first" crowd and sounds way too much like a liberal than a conservative, but he will become the darling of the drive by media.  Therefore, Ron Paul will be the 'maverick' candidate and will be around for a while.  Mike Huckabee did a great job articulating the need for the Fair Tax.  It makes Huckabee a good candidate for Vice-President with his stand on taxation and the fact that he could balance either a Romney or Gulianni ticket.

The Top Tier:

McCain:  John McCain proved to me why I could never vote for him.  McCain is a capitulator.  Over and over, McCain said he would "reach across the aisle" to the Democrats to get things done.  The Democrats have proved that they do not concede any of their ideals in the name of compromise.  McCain, I am convinced, would give the Democrats a mile of what they want to get an inch of what he wanted.  Also, when given the imminent terrorist threat scenario, McCain stated that he would take responsibility for the call to get the information out of the terrorist, but refused to do any of the agressive interogation techniques, to include waterboarding, calling them torture.  When pressed on this, McCain said that Powell, Vessey and others all agreed with him that if we torture the suspects, then that puts our soldiers in the field in danger of torture if captured.  Here is what McCain refuses to acknowledge: Our soldiers captured by al Qaida have been tortured and mutilated.  Specialist Maupin is still missing and presumed dead in Iraq.  Additionally, Khalid Shiek Mohammed broke down after 2 minutes 30 seconds of waterboarding, giving us invaluable intelligence that was verified to be true.  That information stopped dozens of plots.  If I were president and we had a terrorist with knowledge of an upcoming event, two and a half minutes later I would have the intel we needed to stop it because I would authorize waterboarding in a heartbeat.  Finally, McCain is a party to all of the bad legislation to come down the pike in the last six years. He admitted he was wrogn about the Bush tax cuts, he blocked the "nuclear option" to end the filibuster of Supreme Court nominees, he wrote the McCain-Feingold assault on free speech, and the McCain-Kennedy illegal immigration amnesty bill.  That makes McCain unelectable in my book and I would not be able to pull the lever for him, even if he was the GOP nominee.    

Rudy Gulianni:  I think Rudy actually increased his electability when he slammed Ron Paul's insane tirade on why we were attacked on 9-11.  Gulianni appeared more presidental than the others and I appreciate the method of how he arrives at his stand on abortion.  I think that Rudy will remain at the top of the GOP horserace for the forseeable future.

Mitt Romney:  Didn't do as well in this debate as the other, but still did well.  I like that Romney can articulate his evolution to his stands.  While McCain, falsely, claims that he has been consistent, Romney was able to link his experience as governor to where he stands on things like No Child Left Behind and other programs.  I wish that Romney could give a clearer stand on things like the tax code the same way Huckabee did and could explain his stand on national healthcare.  If Romney wants to take his healthcare plan from Massechusetts to Washington, than he may have problems with the GOP base on that subject.

Winner:  Fred Thompson.  He starts looking more and more attractive as the name "Ronald Reagan" gets tossed around more and more, even though he has given no real reason to vote for him.  

Winner that actually appeared:  Rudy Gulliani.  Why?  When Ron Paul started ranting about why we were attacked on 9-11, Gulianni came out and slammed him hard.  I cheared for Rudy because he said to Paul what I wish our elected Republicans would say to the other Republicans that want to side with the Democrats.

Loser: Brownback and Thompson.  They just couldn't distinguish themselves and give anyone a reason to care for their campaigns.