The “great and grand” (if pompous) radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh received a call of congratulations from not one, not two, but three members of the Bush family on the 20th anniversary of his talk show.

Wow! Rush picked up the phone and there was George W. Bush on the end of the line, followed by family patriarch George H.W. Bush, and younger brother Jeb! What luck that the current president would be on the phone offering congratulations to the grand Pooh-Bah of daytime talk. No doubt, Mr. Limbaugh felt so privileged — and somewhat embarrassed — that the Bush family considers him their “pal.” Gushing and speaking in tones one only hears at retirement parties and other venues, G.W. was heard hurling congratulations around as freely as rice at the conclusion of a wedding ceremony.

Rush’s popularity with the politically prominent Bush family brings to mind the classic conspiracy movie, The Brotherhood of the Bell.

Set at the fictional College of St. George in San Francisco, and starring veteran Hollywood actor, Glenn Ford, the secret society around which the film’s storyline was built was based (rather transparently) on Yale’s Order of Skull and Bones. However, it is not the membership of both presidents Bush in Skull in Bones that evokes The Brotherhood of the Bell, but the real-life role taken on by the bombastic Rush Limbaugh.

If the movie The Brotherhood of the Bell were to be remade, the part played by William Conrad (television talk show host Bart Harris) could very easily fit the real life role played by Rush Limbaugh. Bart Harris was a corpulent man, who had a gift for gab and could make college professors who appeared as guests on his show appear like kooks. He had his bells and props and a studio audience only too happy to join in on the fun to shut down anyone the Brotherhood conspirators wanted to discredit.

In the 1970 made-for-television movie, Glenn Ford brilliantly portrayed Professor Andrew Patterson who, his conscience tweaked by having to betray an old friend at the behest of the Brotherhood, breaks out from under the secret society’s toxic influence and does what any red-blooded American would do in similar circumstances — he tries to expose the heinous villains operating within the Brotherhood’s conspiracy!

Many a caller to the Rush Limbaugh show finds himself in the same situation as Professor Patterson, who goes on the Bart Harris show to present to the viewers a rational and logical explanation as to why certain events are happening in the world. Events that don’t seem to have any other explanation except that certain powerful people working within secret societies are making those events happen. Here is where Professor Andrew Patterson gets a real life lesson on how a conspiracy operates. He naïvely goes on the show to tell the world of this conspiracy. He feels certain that his credentials are sufficient to give him credibility and to make his case in an open forum like the Bart Harris show. Just like the Waylon Jennings song, “Wrong,” the professor finds himself facing a television lynch mob who are out to assassinate his character.

The Brotherhood gives a few individuals special attention and allows those individuals to rise to the level of celebrities so long as the Brotherhood’s parameters are strictly adhered to. There will be no talk of conspiracy and no naming of names and the secret agendas of the Brotherhood will never be allowed to be discussed in depth. One can mention, for example, the North American Union, but only to demean the people who buy into a “secret plan” or a “plot” or who use any of the catch phrases that point to a “conspiracy.” The job of the talk show host is to cut the caller or guest off right from the start and to misdirect the conversation to the point that the host can then hang the label of “nut job” or “conspiracy kook” on the inexperienced caller. How many times have you heard this done on the Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michael Medved show?

If I were the casting director for the remake of Brotherhood of The Bell I would place a call right away to Rush’s agent and ask if his client would play the part of Bart Harris. He looks the part of the character and he can play it with conviction.

He is the real life version. He is art imitating life!

In his latest weekly "Texas Straight Talk" column, Ron Paul announced a major victory over the Trans-Texas Corridor/NAFTA Superhighway project. According to Paul:

... the Texas Department of Transportation will recommend the I-69 Project be developed using existing highway facilities instead of the proposed massive new Trans Texas Corridor/NAFTA Superhighway.  According to the Texas Transportation Commissioner, consideration is no longer being given to new corridors and other proposals for a new highway footprint for this project.  A major looming threat to property rights and national sovereignty is removed with this encouraging announcement.

After pointing out that a large-scale public outcry against the massive highway program was decisive in stopping it, Paul stated: "If I had to guess, they will probably try to implement the NAFTA Superhighway again sometime in the future."

While I'm happy to hear the news about the Texas Department of Transportation backing down from its grandiose Trans-Texas Corridor highway plans, I'm also skeptical about how permanent this victory will be.

Still, this whole story shows just how effective informed, organized citizen groups can be in changing the course of history. The rest of us need to copy the techniques of the Texans to help solve major problems in other states, and in Congress. One way to do this is to join or organize a JBS.org Freedom Campaign Meetup group. Get started at http://meetupalliance.com/jbs and http://jbs.meetup.com.

Robert Pastor is still hard at it. He’s written still another article (“The Future of North America,” July/August 2008 issue of Foreign Affairs) in favor of creating a “North American Community.” Of course, he’d never dream of promoting a North American Union (NAU). To his way of thinking the NAU concept is merely a pipe dream of Lou Dobbs and other anti-NAU “populists.”

However, the summary provided for the 500-word preview of Pastor’s new article on the Foreign Affairs website is: “It’s time to integrate further with Canada and Mexico, not separate from them.” So, Pastor is definitely in favor of more integration with our two neighbors, but understandably shy about applying a politically negative term to his enterprise.

Pastor candidly acknowledges that his proposals for integrating the U.S. with Mexico and Canada have been slowed down by a "perfect storm" of anti-NAU activists on both the left and the right in recent years. Here’s his take:

ASSAULTS FROM both ends of the political spectrum have transformed the debate on North America in recent years. From the right have come attacks based on cultural anxieties of being overrun by Mexican immigrants and fears that greater cooperation with Canada and Mexico could lead down a slippery slope toward a North American Union. Dobbs, among others, viewed a report by a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force (which I co-chaired), Building a North American Community, as the manifesto of a conspiracy to subvert American sovereignty. Dobbs claimed that the CFR study proposed a North American Union, although it did not. From the left came attacks based on economic fears of job losses due to unfair trading practices. These two sets of fears came together in a perfect storm that was pushed forward by a surplus of hot air from talk-show hosts on radio and television. In the face of this criticism, the Bush administration was silent, and the Democratic candidates competed for votes in the rust-belt states, where unions and many working people have come to see NAFTA and globalization much as Dobbs does.

Pastor’s analysis is fairly accurate, although he unfairly characterizes his opponents on the right as opposing his North American “Community” due to “cultural anxieties of being overrun by Mexican immigrants and fears that greater cooperation with Canada and Mexico could lead down a slippery slope toward a North American Union.” That is, according to Pastor, conservative opponents of his ideas for integrating North America are merely racist xenophobes with an unreasonable fear of an NAU bogeyman. Apparently, Pastor doesn’t dare state the real reasons for opposition to his ideas because by stating them in a neutral manner, most would probably agree with his opponents.

For example, one of the leading critics of Pastor’s North American integration schemes, the John Birch Society, bases its opposition on the certainty that an eventual merger of the three nations would alter or override our U.S. Constitution. Thus, our precious, God-given rights and freedoms, which are secured by the Constitution, are under direct threat by any such merger, by whatever name Pastor and his fellow elites choose to call it. (For an in-depth rebuttal of Pastor's proposals, read "Merger in the Making," a special issue of The New American magazine.)

Nonetheless, Pastor goes right ahead with his proposals “to deepen economic integration,” “to permit trucks to travel in all three countries,” “to narrow the gap in income that separates Mexico from its northern neighbors by creating a North American investment fund,” and “to educate a new generation of students to think North American.” He concludes with: 

... a vision of a North American Community ... designed to pursue a bold agenda that includes a customs union, a North American commission, a North American investment fund, and a common team of customs and border guards to man the borders and the continental perimeter.

If you agree that Pastor’s North American integration plans are a direct threat to our hard-won rights and freedoms as Americans, you can take immediate action to help influence your representative and senators to block the North American Union process by supporting HCR 40, Rep. Virgil Goode’s (R-Virginia) resolution, “Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.” This bill already has 48 cosponsors.

Click here to take immediate action to block the NAU!

To join with others in your area to block the NAU, go to http://meetupalliance.com/jbs.

These United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States....
-- Declaration of Independence, 1776

[There is a plan] to induce the gradual surrender of American sovereignty, piece by piece and step by step, to various international organizations -- of which the United Nations is the outstanding but far from the only example....
-- Robert Welch, Founding Meeting of the John Birch Society, Indianapolis, December 8-9, 1958

After his warning in 1958 regarding a plan to surrender American sovereignty to the United Nations, Robert Welch launched the Society's first campaign to expose the UN's sovereignty-destroying potential in April 1959. In February 1962 the Society began selling envelope stickers with the slogan, "Get US out!" This slogan was intended to be understood as "Get US out of the United Nations!" During his years of leadership of the JBS (1958-1983) Robert Welch continued to emphasize the importance of getting the U.S. out of the UN. Many times during the 1970s, Mr. Welch would end the monthly Bulletin to the members with "P.S. Get US out!" The subsequent leaders of the Society have continued to emphasize this issue of getting out of the UN right up to the present day.