It is election time and they seem to come out of the woodwork….they sprint to the closest microphone to make whatever point that they feel will get them into the news cycle….and that is a major contributor to the massive amounts of anal statements…..yep….I got another one…..
This time it is from a guest that was being interviewed on FOX News, one Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson…..while speaking on women in the news he stated…..
PETERSON: “I think that one of the greatest mistakes that America made was to allow women the opportunity to vote. We should have never turned that over to women.”
“It was a big mistake…these women are voting in the wrong people. They’re voting in people who are evil, who agree with them…Men in the good old days understood the nature of the women, they were not afraid to deal with them.”
“Wherever women are taking over, evil reigns.”
So women are evil and one of this country’s biggest mistakes was giving them the right to vote…is that about it?
I really want to say something clever but about the only thing that comes to mind is…..”Can’t Fix Stupid”!
Recently my conserv friend Terrance over at Sibboleth Nation were debating about the oil industry and the possibility of an OPEC-esque group for the oil industry for North America in a way to try and fight the rising cost of ME oil…….we did not agree much but I understood his point and I believe he got mine also. But that exchange go me to thinking about the possibility of an EU like organization for the North American continent. There had bee some lip service for a Mediterranean Union, a group of nations that encircle the sea to promote trade, educational and democratic advances…..this was back in 2008, the Summer to be exact…..but alas not much has come to pass since the proposal of the idea.
I got to thinking that surely someone, somewhere had come up with this as a solution to the problems of the hemisphere…..I found this quote in the Economic Policy Journal……
More generally, President Obama has worked closely with his Canadian and Mexican counterparts to create High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Councils with both countries. The councils are developing and implementing plans to eliminate or prevent the creation of unnecessary burdens on cross-border trade, streamline regulatory requirements, and promote greater certainty for the general public and for businesses in the regulation of food, pharmaceuticals, nanotechnology and other areas.
The U.S. and Canada have already agreed to harmonize their rules with respect to fuel economy, building on a long history of collaboration on national emission standards for new vehicles. This step will avoid divergent requirements and unnecessary costs on both automobile companies and consumers.
Is there a history of this sort of thinking?
From Wikipedia…..According to a January 2005 diplomatic cable that was released by Wikileaks in 2011, U.S. government officials were assessing Canadian views on what aspects of integration they were most interested in and how these goals might be best implemented there. The cable suggests a new “North American Initiative” that would address goals in the areas of “security” and “prosperity” through incremental measures saying such a proposal would get the most support from Canadian policymakers. It notes many Canadian economists supported “ambitious” goals like a single market, with some supporting a monetary union, but that they believed the incremental approach was more appropriate at the time. Canada’s central bank governor is partially quoted in the cable from a 2003 speech when he said “First, let me stress that monetary union is an issue that should be considered once we have made more progress towards establishing a single market for goods and services, capital, and labour. Without a single, well-functioning market for labour, a single currency could impose great adjustment costs on workers.” The National Post‘s Robert Hiltz described the cable in June 2011 as discussing “the obstacles surrounding the merger of the economies of Canada, the United States and Mexico in a fashion similar to the European Union.”
Two months later at the March meeting of North American leaders the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was formed. It was described by the leaders of Canada, Mexico and the United States as a dialogue to provide greater cooperation on security and economic issues. In response to later concerns, a section was put up on the initiative’s site clarifying the SPP was not a legal agreement, that the initiative “does not seek to rewrite or renegotiate NAFTA”, and that the partnership itself “creates no NAFTA-plus legal status.” A number of academics and government officials at the time viewed the SPP as moving North America towards greater integration.
Actually, some form of a combining of Canada, US and Mexico has been batted around since about the mid-19th century and NAFTA has been called the kick-off of the NAU with its own common currency, called the Amero
Now think about the problems that the EU is having today…..part of the problem is the single currency….a country cannot devalue its currency to try and counter economic problems and it seems that North America will be looking at the same sorts of problems. It is a horrible idea and I think that the recent situations that has arisen within the EU could put this type of talk in the crapper.