The American Patriots Have Lost to the Globalists.
1. It follows logically that those of us who believe that America is exceptional, in its history, its accomplishments, and its singularity, would revel in same, and desire to perpetuate it...
....but those who despise America, believe that America was founded by racists and slaveholders, that it is an imperialist nation, that 35 million Americans go hungry, that it invades countries for corporate profits, and that it is largely racist and xenophobic, wish to transform it.
These, the Leftists, wish for global governance .the end of our sovereignty.
2. Flying under the radar in this election is the fact that it ensconced progressives and that doesnt just mean Democrats, in charge. Listen to them speak:
a.Strobe Talbot, president of the Brookings Institution, has written that he welcomed super-national political authority, saying "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
b.Harold Koh, chief legal adviser of the State Department, and the legal authority of the government on foreign legal policy, states that the Supreme Court "must play a key role in coordinating U.S. domestic constitutional rules with rules of foreign and international law," The only way for the Supreme Court to do that "coordinating" is to subordinate the real American Constitution to ever-evolving rules of foreign and international law.
c.Richard Haass, Republican, president of the Council on Foreign Relations states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function . sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalization.
d. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, is a passing phase. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/us/12ginsburg.html
3. When we consider the abrupt changes in Europe, we should be concerned about the lack of consensus in our own country regarding. The following from a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C. on the importance of constitutional sovereignty....
a. Had we ratified the Kyoto Protocol we would have delegated the authority over huge areas of public policy to international authorities, i.e. the lost of constitutional treaty making powers. But the Obama administration is aiming to negotiate a new treaty along those lines.
b. There is the thinking that 'human rights law' transcends the laws of particular countries, even those pertaining to national defense. But who should set the standards- especially against terrorists?
c. People who expect to retain the benefits of sovereignty- such as defense and protection of rights, without constitutional discipline, without retaining responsibility for their own legal system, are putting all their faith in words or in the idea that as long as we say nice things about humanity, we will be safe. Sounds as good as incantations and witchcraft.
d. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?
e. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
6. Tragically, this is the position Obama voters have created.
Unable to judge the future, these voters, these Brutuses, have left the rest of us in the position of one day saying...
..'Forgive them, they knew not what they did.'
1. It follows logically that those of us who believe that America is exceptional, in its history, its accomplishments, and its singularity, would revel in same, and desire to perpetuate it...
....but those who despise America, believe that America was founded by racists and slaveholders, that it is an imperialist nation, that 35 million Americans go hungry, that it invades countries for corporate profits, and that it is largely racist and xenophobic, wish to transform it.
These, the Leftists, wish for global governance .the end of our sovereignty.
2. Flying under the radar in this election is the fact that it ensconced progressives and that doesnt just mean Democrats, in charge. Listen to them speak:
a.Strobe Talbot, president of the Brookings Institution, has written that he welcomed super-national political authority, saying "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
b.Harold Koh, chief legal adviser of the State Department, and the legal authority of the government on foreign legal policy, states that the Supreme Court "must play a key role in coordinating U.S. domestic constitutional rules with rules of foreign and international law," The only way for the Supreme Court to do that "coordinating" is to subordinate the real American Constitution to ever-evolving rules of foreign and international law.
c.Richard Haass, Republican, president of the Council on Foreign Relations states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function . sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalization.
d. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges,...American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, is a passing phase. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/us/12ginsburg.html
3. When we consider the abrupt changes in Europe, we should be concerned about the lack of consensus in our own country regarding. The following from a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C. on the importance of constitutional sovereignty....
a. Had we ratified the Kyoto Protocol we would have delegated the authority over huge areas of public policy to international authorities, i.e. the lost of constitutional treaty making powers. But the Obama administration is aiming to negotiate a new treaty along those lines.
b. There is the thinking that 'human rights law' transcends the laws of particular countries, even those pertaining to national defense. But who should set the standards- especially against terrorists?
c. People who expect to retain the benefits of sovereignty- such as defense and protection of rights, without constitutional discipline, without retaining responsibility for their own legal system, are putting all their faith in words or in the idea that as long as we say nice things about humanity, we will be safe. Sounds as good as incantations and witchcraft.
d. In Medellin vs. Texas (2008), the International Court of Justice ruled that Texas could not execute a convicted murderer. The Supreme Court ruled that decisions of the International Court of Justice are not binding domestic law. The vote was 6 to 3 (Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg). How long before the Supreme Court throws out the Constitution?
e. In May, 2009 Spanish judges are boldly declaring their authority to prosecute high-ranking government officials in the United States, but our government has not protested this nonsense, akin to piracy, and has, in fact, accepted an internationalist atmosphere which makes this sort of thing seem plausible.
6. Tragically, this is the position Obama voters have created.
Unable to judge the future, these voters, these Brutuses, have left the rest of us in the position of one day saying...
..'Forgive them, they knew not what they did.'
