Trans-Texas Corridor (NAU Superhighway?) - Lou Dobbs says Factcheck is wrong

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Yep thank you national media............... It's all a big myth... We're all kooks, don't listen to us Texans who are fighting this non-existent highway.................FUCK!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4BGeSo0f7U&NR=1

Factcheck did not get the story wrong. They acknowledge the TTC, but use, what's that word...oh right, Sense.

Paging Fox Mulder


According to Paul, a secret organization run by unaccountable government figures is in league with foreign corporations who are all bent on usurping American sovereignty. That's not from the script for a new X-Files movie. (Or not that we know of.) It's the gist of Paul's description of a supposed "NAFTA Superhighway." Paul describes it on his Web site as "a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside." And that's not all. According to Paul, the ultimate plan is to form a North American Union with a single currency and unlimited travel within its borders, all headed up by "an unholy alliance of foreign consortiums and officials from several governments" that together form the shadowy "quasi-government organization called the ?Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America,? or SPP."

The problem with Paul's claim is that there are no plans to build a NAFTA Superhighway. Or a North American Union, for that matter. And while the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America does exist, it?s just a boring bureaucracy.

Like many conspiracy theories, this one is a mixture of fact and fiction. That scary-looking map, with lines that rumor suggested were drawn to scale, is the product of an actual group called North America's SuperCorridor Organization (NASCO), which is a consortium of public and private entities. But contrary to conspiracy theorists, the map does not show a new highway. Those bright blue lines show only I-35 and I-29 ? interstates that already exist. On its Web site, NASCO says it and some of the local governments along I-35 have been referring to that route as the "NAFTA Superhighway" for years. NASCO advocates improvements to existing roads, but is not lobbying for, or planning to build, any new thoroughfares. From the NASCO Web site:
NASCO: "NAFTA Superhighway" - As of late, there has been much media attention given to the "new, proposed NAFTA Superhighway". NASCO and the cities, counties, states and provinces along our existing Interstate Highways 35/29/94 (the NASCO Corridor) have been referring to I-35 as the 'NAFTA Superhighway' for many years, as I-35 already carries a substantial amount of international trade with Mexico, the United States and Canada. There are no plans to build a new NAFTA Superhighway - it exists today as I-35.


In terms of new roads, there are, in fact, plans for a Trans-Texas Corridor, a road that would be (in spots) several football fields wide. And the road would be financed by a private company (which is partially Spanish-owned) that would then charge tolls to recoup its investment. But the TTC was approved by the Texas Legislature and the governor of Texas. It is a state initiative, but it is not part of a NAFTA Superhighway, nor is it the product of a shadowy federal conspiracy.

Indeed, Ian Grossman, a spokesman with the Federal Highway Administration told the Los Angeles Times, "There is no such superhighway like the one [Paul is] talking about. It doesn't exist, in plans or anywhere else."

The other parts of the conspiracy are much the same. The SPP ? that "quasi-government organization" ? is really an actual government organization, organized through the White House. According to David Bohigian, an assistant secretary of commerce, the SPP is a bureaucratic dialog staffed by mid-level officials from the U.S., Canada and Mexico who work to synchronize customs, security and regulations. "Simple stuff," Bohigian told The Nation last August, "like, for instance, in the U.S. we sell baby food in several different sizes; in Canada, it's just two different sizes." Not exactly cloak-and-dagger stuff.

The SPP has a factsheet on its Web site that attempts to put to rest all the tall tales surrounding it. And if that isn?t enough, the Washington Post?s Fact Checker, Newsweek and the urban legend site Snopes.com all have previously debunked this particular bit of conspiracy-theorizing.

Of course, maybe they?re all in on it, too.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: bamacre
Government will take land away from Texas. Government says it "doesn't need the support of the people."

Did you mean "gov't will take land away from texaNs"? Because the Texas legislature and governor approved this.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126

Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Yep thank you national media............... It's all a big myth... We're all kooks, don't listen to us Texans who are fighting this non-existent highway.................FUCK!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4BGeSo0f7U&NR=1

1) It is a non-existent highway - the Trans-Texas Corridor hasn't been built yet.

2) If the landowners are properly compensated - and that could possibly be a big if - what's the objection to the building of more infrastructure within the United States? I hope you never complain about truck traffic on your local interstate.
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Fuck you Nanook, you pay for the road, cause I don't need their junk or them in MY country and I sure as hell am not going to pay for THEIR road or kick Americans off THEIR land so they can make profit oputsourcing OUR jobs.

Is that clear enough for you? :p

Why would Canada pay to help grow U.S. gross domestic product? You do realize that the figures show that your nation is getting richer as trade grows?

Holy fuck, drop the figures right in front of an idiot's face and even then they simply refuse to read them. GDP = higher. Net employment = higher. Apparently these are bad things.


Why would you or Canada give a shit if we built it or not then? It's not really any of you business is it, so butt out.


Statistics can be made to lie. It's been clear to me for some time that a higher GDP or a lower unemployment rate doesn't mean that things got better for AVERAGE Americans. Indeed, I know more people who are holding down more then one job then ever.... and they're spouses are working too. OF course the GNP is up, DUHHHHH!! But are people keeping up with the cost of living? NO, they aren't.

End of discussion, you lose.

 

Mavtek3100

Senior member
Jan 15, 2008
524
0
0
Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Yep thank you national media............... It's all a big myth... We're all kooks, don't listen to us Texans who are fighting this non-existent highway.................FUCK!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4BGeSo0f7U&NR=1

1) It is a non-existent highway - the Trans-Texas Corridor hasn't been built yet.

2) If the landowners are properly compensated - and that could possibly be a big if - what's the objection to the building of more infrastructure within the United States? I hope you never complain about truck traffic on your local interstate.

Actually portions of the highway have already been built. I'm against your "progress" because in eminent domain the State is only required to pay 75% of what they appraise the value of your property at. I'm against it because they propose to use $80 billion in taxes to build a road that will be a toll road for citizens and free to commercial trucking. I'm against it because we already have interstates and highways along similar routes that could be widened or added on to. I'm against it because it doesn't help Texans at all but uses $80 billion in our tax dollars!

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: bamacre
Government will take land away from Texas. Government says it "doesn't need the support of the people."

Did you mean "gov't will take land away from texaNs"? Because the Texas legislature and governor approved this.

Oops, right, Texans.

They may have approved this but they are doing so against the will of the people who they are supposed to represent.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Fuck you Nanook, you pay for the road, cause I don't need their junk or them in MY country and I sure as hell am not going to pay for THEIR road or kick Americans off THEIR land so they can make profit oputsourcing OUR jobs.

Is that clear enough for you? :p

Why would Canada pay to help grow U.S. gross domestic product? You do realize that the figures show that your nation is getting richer as trade grows?

Holy fuck, drop the figures right in front of an idiot's face and even then they simply refuse to read them. GDP = higher. Net employment = higher. Apparently these are bad things.


Why would you or Canada give a shit if we built it or not then? It's not really any of you business is it, so butt out.


Statistics can be made to lie. It's been clear to me for some time that a higher GDP or a lower unemployment rate doesn't mean that things got better for AVERAGE Americans. Indeed, I know more people who are holding down more then one job then ever.... and they're spouses are working too. OF course the GNP is up, DUHHHHH!! But are people keeping up with the cost of living? NO, they aren't.

End of discussion, you lose.
I'm trying to educate you, you simpleton. :) One doesn't need to have a personal stake in something to advocate truth and reality.

It's clear to you, is it? Got any figures at all to back those gut feelings up, or should I just trust this wholly scientific method of proof? I mean, you'll have to forgive me, but you knowing a couple of people who work more these days is about one notch above "God told me it was so" or "Nostrodamus predicted it".

I don't think I'm the one who's losing here...

Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Mavtek3100
Yep thank you national media............... It's all a big myth... We're all kooks, don't listen to us Texans who are fighting this non-existent highway.................FUCK!!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4BGeSo0f7U&NR=1

1) It is a non-existent highway - the Trans-Texas Corridor hasn't been built yet.

2) If the landowners are properly compensated - and that could possibly be a big if - what's the objection to the building of more infrastructure within the United States? I hope you never complain about truck traffic on your local interstate.

Actually portions of the highway have already been built. I'm against your "progress" because in eminent domain the State is only required to pay 75% of what they appraise the value of your property at. I'm against it because they propose to use $80 billion in taxes to build a road that will be a toll road for citizens and free to commercial trucking. I'm against it because we already have interstates and highways along similar routes that could be widened or added on to. I'm against it because it doesn't help Texans at all but uses $80 billion in our tax dollars!

Okay, what portions?

The issue of compensation for expropriation is a real one, and I hope those landowners get the proper price for what they're being asked to sell.

That truck traffic would offload a huge amount from your existing interstates. Those citizens also often work for the companies that will benefit from the more streamlined highways. Outside of those having land expropriated, citizens aren't being screwed in this deal.

That's just dumb. It's very often cheaper to build a new road than it is to widen an existing one. How about all that traffic disruption from the construction? The underground cables and pipes that will need to be moved or rerouted? The lost revenue to the roadside business that are inaccessible or have to be demolished because of the widening? It's not like you can tack a single lane on the side like it's LEGO.

The Texan legislature approved this, how do you know it's not in their best interests? You know better than the duly elected representatives of the people of the state? Or are you just another person with a "gut feeling" of what's going on?
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Fuck you Nanook, you pay for the road, cause I don't need their junk or them in MY country and I sure as hell am not going to pay for THEIR road or kick Americans off THEIR land so they can make profit oputsourcing OUR jobs.

Is that clear enough for you? :p

Why would Canada pay to help grow U.S. gross domestic product? You do realize that the figures show that your nation is getting richer as trade grows?

Holy fuck, drop the figures right in front of an idiot's face and even then they simply refuse to read them. GDP = higher. Net employment = higher. Apparently these are bad things.


Why would you or Canada give a shit if we built it or not then? It's not really any of you business is it, so butt out.


Statistics can be made to lie. It's been clear to me for some time that a higher GDP or a lower unemployment rate doesn't mean that things got better for AVERAGE Americans. Indeed, I know more people who are holding down more then one job then ever.... and they're spouses are working too. OF course the GNP is up, DUHHHHH!! But are people keeping up with the cost of living? NO, they aren't.

End of discussion, you lose.
I'm trying to educate you, you simpleton. :) One doesn't need to have a personal stake in something to advocate truth and reality.

It's clear to you, is it? Got any figures at all to back those gut feelings up, or should I just trust this wholly scientific method of proof? I mean, you'll have to forgive me, but you knowing a couple of people who work more these days is about one notch above "God told me it was so" or "Nostrodamus predicted it".

I don't think I'm the one who's losing here...

In case you didn't notice, I don't care what you think. I live here, it affects me directly and as a taxpayer I will end up paying for it.

You can quote all the stats you want from your biased site that claims it's "dispelling myths". They're just trying to sell a product and I'm not buying.

The bottom line is that we should let the people/companies that will reap the benifits from a superhighway pay for the highway instead of letting them try and con the taxpayers into subsudizing it for them. Then lets see how your alleged "truth and reality" fare on their own feet.

You have the right to your opinion and we Americans have the right to ours. In the final analysis, ours is the only one that counts.



 

Mavtek3100

Senior member
Jan 15, 2008
524
0
0
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Okay, what portions?

Segments 1 through 4 of SH130. That's what they call these "segments" these wonderful new toll roads that will all be joined to form I69 or SH "Super Highway" 130. More info can be found here
http://www.sh130.com/project/


The issue of compensation for expropriation is a real one, and I hope those landowners get the proper price for what they're being asked to sell.

Ah well thank you for your concern..... While your at it can you please post some more articles in these forums telling these people why it's a myth and they shouldn't be worried?

That truck traffic would offload a huge amount from your existing interstates. Those citizens also often work for the companies that will benefit from the more streamlined highways. Outside of those having land expropriated, citizens aren't being screwed in this deal.

Well except for the $.09 added gasoline tax proposed to pay for it. Honestly "truck traffic" isn't that huge of an issue on our existing interstates as it is. You know maybe you should come down and live in Texas for 31 years of your life before you make these comments about what you think it will do or won't do for Texans. Personally I don't see how this highway benefits Texans when proposed exits skip towns altogether, this seems like a great way to get cargo to Houston, Austin, and the rest of the US, unfortunately it seems to serve cargo from Mexico more than any Industry in Texas or the US. We have some of the largest cotton farms in the US along this road, but there's no entrance/exit proposed near Mills in Bexar county.

That's just dumb. It's very often cheaper to build a new road than it is to widen an existing one. How about all that traffic disruption from the construction? The underground cables and pipes that will need to be moved or rerouted? The lost revenue to the roadside business that are inaccessible or have to be demolished because of the widening? It's not like you can tack a single lane on the side like it's LEGO.

I haven't made that claim that's it's cheaper to build a new road than to widen another so I'd like to see your evidence of that. Underground cabling is often in the center of an interstate if there is any cabling at all anyway. This often isn't touched. Besides we already have interstate widening projects and HOV projects that have been going on for Decades that still aren't complete and now they want to build a new super highway?

The Texan legislature approved this, how do you know it's not in their best interests? You know better than the duly elected representatives of the people of the state? Or are you just another person with a "gut feeling" of what's going on?

Wrong! They have not approved it, as a matter of fact they have formed a committee to see how funds got appropriated for this project.

http://corridornews.blogspot.c...ght-of-hand-texas.html

"Lawmakers accused the transportation department of acting like a fourth branch of the state government. State Rep. Jim Dunnam, who adamantly opposes a proposal for toll lanes to finance Interstate 35 expansion, said deceit and sleight of hand are used to convince Texans they have no choice but toll roads.

All are legitimate criticisms of the state?s transportation agency. Under Gov. Rick Perry, it has acted as if it responds to only him and its own whims."
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Per the thread subtitle, did Dobbs mention factcheck at all? I didn't hear it in the vids. I'd be surprised if he did since he knows they'd be able to prove him wrong with, you know, evidence.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
Originally posted by: yllus
From George Blackwood, president of the North American Super Corridor Coalition, Inc.:

* NASCO is a nonprofit advocacy group, not a government agency. NASCO does not set transportation policy, build highways, or set up customs facilities.

* NASCO is not building or encouraging the creation of 'a NAFTA Superhighway.' I-35 and key crossing interstates such as I-80 already exist and have been described as "a NAFTA Superhighway" due to the loads they bear since the 1994 passage of NAFTA. They require attention to support future growth and trade.

* NASCO does not plan to have a Mexican Customs Office on "Mexican soil" within the U.S. that will bring in or stimulate entry of illegal immigrants.

* NASCO does not encourage the elimination of international borders.

* NASCO does not focus on or have any intent to change Federal immigration policy.

* NASCO advocates for balancing increased border security and trade and transportation efficiency.

* NASCO exists to facilitate solutions to trade and transportation challenges and to stimulate economic development, job creation and prosperity.

This and more at the article entitled Highway myths.

i dont give a fuck what blackwood says on his website. of course he is going to say this shit it is his pet project.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Lou Dobbs is a an old windpipe who will try to convince you the world is falling apart. I dont think he honestly believes half the crap he spews. But he spews it anyways becuase he needs the ratings.

Isnt he one of the douches going on and on about the American Union and the Amero? Two figments of the far rights imagination?
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
In case you didn't notice, I don't care what you think. I live here, it affects me directly and as a taxpayer I will end up paying for it.

You can quote all the stats you want from your biased site that claims it's "dispelling myths". They're just trying to sell a product and I'm not buying.

The bottom line is that we should let the people/companies that will reap the benifits from a superhighway pay for the highway instead of letting them try and con the taxpayers into subsudizing it for them. Then lets see how your alleged "truth and reality" fare on their own feet.

You have the right to your opinion and we Americans have the right to ours. In the final analysis, ours is the only one that counts.

Oh, you care. :) You care because you know you're basing your opinion purely off of emotions and not even the tiniest bit of factual data, and you know you're full of crap. You care because someone who doesn't even live in your country has it right, has the facts to back it up and has made you look like the angry simpleton that you so often prove yourself to be.

Flee back to your defence of "your opinion doesn't matter" since that's all you've got - it's not like I "lose" here, especially since your ignorant rantings won't be listened to by anyone anyways. However, it does make me smile to box you into a corner and see that your only contrary evidence is unearthed to be, "My neighbour Joe has three jobs!" I was going to drop the argument anyways, because I have work to do and you really have nowhere else to run to. Thanks again. :)

Edit: Oh god, Mavtek3100 replied to me too. I honestly don't have the energy right now to argue with people this clueness, so I'm just going to declare that you're all right and I'm wrong. Your YouTube evidence has convinced me. The Superhighway is real! The Amero is real! I stand revealed as your future Canadian elite! Skewer me with your well-thought out opinions on engineering and finance! Ron Paul for President of Earth!
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,834
1
0
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
In case you didn't notice, I don't care what you think. I live here, it affects me directly and as a taxpayer I will end up paying for it.

You can quote all the stats you want from your biased site that claims it's "dispelling myths". They're just trying to sell a product and I'm not buying.

The bottom line is that we should let the people/companies that will reap the benifits from a superhighway pay for the highway instead of letting them try and con the taxpayers into subsudizing it for them. Then lets see how your alleged "truth and reality" fare on their own feet.

You have the right to your opinion and we Americans have the right to ours. In the final analysis, ours is the only one that counts.

Oh, you care. :) You care because you know you're basing your opinion purely off of emotions and not even the tiniest bit of factual data, and you know you're full of crap. You care because someone who doesn't even live in your country has it right, has the facts to back it up and has made you look like the angry simpleton that you so often prove yourself to be.

Flee back to your defence of "your opinion doesn't matter" since that's all you've got - it's not like I "lose" here, especially since your ignorant rantings won't be listened to by anyone anyways. However, it does make me smile to box you into a corner and see that your only contrary evidence is unearthed to be, "My neighbour Joe has three jobs!" I was going to drop the argument anyways, because I have work to do and you really have nowhere else to run to. Thanks again. :)

You haven't disproven anything I said and are still trying to maintain that all my fears are based on nothing but "myth".

If companies want a cheap way to bring in foreign goods, then let them pay for it. That incluydes buying the land from the individual, private owners instead of trying to steal it through eminent domain.

You can try and hide behind your trumped up "statistics" all you want, but that fact is I'm right here in your face, talking commen sense, which seems a little too hard for a "simpleton" like you to understand. :p
 

shiner

Lifer
Jul 18, 2000
17,116
1
0
Originally posted by: FoBoT
Originally posted by: shinerburke
I need a map of the route this thing is going to take through Oklahoma.

I-35

it already exists

Doesn't look like it goes up I-35 all the way. Looks, from the small maps I've seen, that at OKC it changes onto the I-44 route and comes through Tulsa.

I'm just wondering what kind of profit I can make off this deal if it goes through since they're gonna have to buy some land off me if they want to go that way. ;)

 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
funny. i seem to remember just a year ago several of us posted about this road and we were called crazy. i seem to remember one person saying "you are a mornon for thinking a road like this would be built, tin foil hat much"

yea who's laughing now bitches.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Citrix
funny. i seem to remember just a year ago several of us posted about this road and we were called crazy. i seem to remember one person saying "you are a mornon for thinking a road like this would be built, tin foil hat much"

yea who's laughing now bitches.


TTC != Mexico-Canada Nafta Superhighway
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: sirjonk
Originally posted by: Citrix
funny. i seem to remember just a year ago several of us posted about this road and we were called crazy. i seem to remember one person saying "you are a mornon for thinking a road like this would be built, tin foil hat much"

yea who's laughing now bitches.


TTC != Mexico-Canada Nafta Superhighway

Not yet. :D