There are 21 Democrat seats, 10 Republican seats, and two seats held by independents being contested in this year’s Senate races. Irrespective of the outcomes the LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty) stands a good chance of being ratified: Kerry: No vote on Sea Treaty before election By Julian Pecquet - 05/23/12 10:27 AM ET Kerry: No vote on Sea Treaty before election - The Hill's Global Affairs That means the vote to ratify the LOST will probably take place after the election and before January 3, 2013. That’s just shy of two months to get it done. That window of opportunity means every Democrat can vote to ratify. Ditto enough RINO to reach 67 yea votes. Those who are leaving like Lugar and Snowe will vote to ratify because they are leaving anyway. Incidentally, don’t be fooled by the same media Kabuki Dance the public got with the New START Treaty before it was ratified. Kerry and Harry Reid would not consider bringing up the LOST for a vote unless they were sure they could get the required 67 votes. Democrats, whether they are running this year or not, afraid to ratify during a campaign season are counting on voters not punishing them for a ratification vote when they do come up for reelection. That is the problem. Ordinarily, single issue voters are few and far between. Ratifying a UN treaty should be the exception because it says everything about the senator who does it. If a man or woman thinks so little of America’s sovereignty they will vote for the United Nations over their own country they will certainly betray the country on every less dramatic sovereignty issue that goes unnoticed and unreported. Some of those senators have been there for decades and look what’s happened to America’s independence since the UN Charter was ratified. This country’s eroding sovereignty did not happen by accident or because of UN treaties. A lot of senators had to betray this country to the UN many times to bring the country to where ratifying the LOST is possible. Bottom line: Voting against a senator who ratifies a UN treaty is never a single issue vote. A president also benefits from the single issue flaw in the system. No matter what a president does it takes more than one issue for voters to run him out of office. Even a major disaster like Hillarycare II would not be enough. It has to be cumulative as it is in Hussein’s case. Hussein’s over 40 approval rating in spite of Hillarycare II proves my case. Happily, Hussein will be leaving on January 20, 2013 unless Romney snatches defeat from the jaws of victory which is very possible. Assuming Romney doesn’t fumble on the one yard line Hussein has to get the LOST ratified before the new Congress is sworn in. Should the LOST not be ratified it will be presumed dead until the global government crowd can accumulate the required votes again. I said presumed because there is no guarantee New World Order Romney won’t push for ratification in a Republican-controlled Senate. The number of seats true conservatives hold next year might not be enough to overcome a “bipartisan” vote driven by the foreign policy mindset in the US Senate and among Executive Branch bureaucrats. If you read this article you’ll see why Romney leaves a lot to be desired: No Apologies by Hope Hodge Posted 05/23/2012 ET No Apologies - HUMAN EVENTS Romney talks a good game, but he never addresses UN treaties, or US membership in the UN. Biden even helps him out with a misguided view of what he, Biden, thinks conservatives want to hear: Americans want reliable allies —— they don’t want the UNIC (United Nations/International Community) choosing those allies for them. Romney is strong on rhetoric and weak on firm proposals just like he is on the domestic front. Until he says he will deal with the United Nations much differently than did both Bushes, Clinton, and Hussein nothing is going to change for the better in foreign policy. Finally, Romney offers no proof that he has a legitimate reason for piggybacking on Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy.