1. The name at the top of the ballot means naught,...this is the choice: A. Income equality, economic central planning, global governance under worldwide socialism. B. Equality before the law, free market capitalism, the United States Constitution. 2. Here's why: "Shariah Law and American Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases, published by the Center for Security Policy, is one of the most comprehensive studies ...covers more than 600 pages of material. The following summary statement is shocking: Our findings suggest that Shariah law has entered into state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy. Some commentators have said there are no more than one or two cases of Shariah law in U.S. state court cases; yet we found 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate published cases. Others state with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy; yet we found 15 Trial Court cases, and 12 Appellate Court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in the case at bar. The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with Constitutional protections. This is a serious issue and should be a subject of public debate and engagement by policymakers." http://shariahinamericancourts.com/...aw_And_American_State_Courts_1.4_06212011.pdf 3. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is acknowledging the growing effect of international law on Supreme Court decisions, particularly in the areas of the death penalty, race admissions and gay sex: Our island or lone ranger mentality is beginning to change, Ginsburg said during a speech to the American Constitution Society, a liberal lawyers group holding its first convention. Justices are becoming more open to comparative and international law perspectives, said Ginsburg, who has supported a more global view of judicial decision making. Ginsburg cited an international treaty in her vote . . . to uphold the use of race in college admissions. Sharia Law Deciding American Court Cases*|*Godfather Politics 4. "In 1919 there was an international conference to establish the International Labor Organization (ILO). The plan was that members would vote on labor standards, and member nations would automatically adopt those standards. The American members declined, saying that this would be contrary to the Constitution, specifically, it would be delegating the treaty-making power to an international body: we would be surrendering Americas sovereignty as derived from the Constitution. 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?" From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 Let us be clear...this is what your vote means: either you see the United Stateds Constitution as unique, as responsible for the liberty we have enjoyed, or, as explained by a proponent of global governance, "he believed in American exceptionalism. He said he did, "just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."