Where America's Sovereignty Ends

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
What would be the test to see whether or not a citizen loves this nation?
Seems intuitive to simply see whether that citizen is in favor of maintaining the authority of the nation.

That's called sovereignty.




1. The term sovereignty was rarely used before the 17th century, the time that people first came to think of representative assemblies as legislatures, reflecting the modern emphasis on law as an act of governing, i.e. government by consent. And during this period, discussions began about international law, the relations of sovereign nations.

In fact, the Declaration of Independence refers to such a law, in its first sentence: “…necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station…” thus assuming that nations, like individuals, have rights.
From a speech by Jeremy Rabkin, professor of law, George Mason School of Law, June 5, 2009 at Washington, D.C. sponsored by Hillsdale College.


2. " Sovereignty is the quality of having independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory"
Encyclopædia Britannica

A geographic area is described by its borders.
If a nation chooses not to control its borders, it has no sovereignty.
It ceases to be a nation.





3. There are many, far too many, even elected officials who wear the label of "progressives"…and that doesn’t just mean Democrats, who are opposed to sovereignty, nationhood, separate and distinct.
They are globalists, one-worlders.
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

From “Sovereignty or Submission,” John Fonte



4. So....when the the California Supreme Court decided to allow an illegal alien to be awarded a law license, it, in effect voted to end sovereignty.

"California illegal immigrants can get law license, state Supreme Court rules" California illegal immigrants can get law license, state Supreme Court rules - San Jose Mercury News




And so ends the great and noble experiment known as the United States of America....

...as T.S. Eliot wrote, "Not with a bang but a whimper."
 

Pennywise

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Messages
3,510
Reaction score
862
Points
190
From the article RE: Ginsberg, she also said not long back in discussing a country wishing to set up it's own form of Constitutional Government, that said entity should NOT look to the US Constitution as guide, but to other countries that are so-called free.

The stupid senile gash ought to be hung out on a ledge overlooking the Supreme Court.

We've been going down this road for well over a hundred years. America is done unless the status quo is sent packing. Anything other than a genuine small government conservative as the Republican nominee in 2016 with be another wasted vote for conservatives. I won't do it again, fuck them. Fuck Karl Rove, fuck the Bushes, the Boehners, the McCains, the Cantors, all the useless power hungry pieces of shit. People better wake the fuck up.
 

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
9,326
Reaction score
3,422
Points
360
Location
Pittsburgh
Your points are silly; the sky is not falling.

Any time a nation enters into an international treaty, one could say that it gives up a bit of its sovereignty - it acknowledges the interests of some other sovereign nation or nations and makes a mutual accommodation. Giving up the Panama Canal was an abdication of U.S. sovereignty, but approved by the Senate. Done deal. So what? Maybe you disagree, but the legal processes were followed.

This is why treaties must be ratified by Congress, as do any other undertakings that involve relinquishing any rights that the Sovereign (i.e., Federal Government) has heretofore claimed, whether legitimately or otherwise.

Consider the Kyoto Protocols and the L.O.S.T. Both have been proposed for U.S. acceptance but rejected by the Senate - so they are not binding on us, despite promises from a President or two that we would sign on.

Just because some politician proposes that we sign a treaty doesn't make them un-American.

There is nothing wrong with the Congress considering foreign laws and precedents when debating legislation, but I agree that the Supreme Court has no business taking them into consideration when ruling on AMERICAN laws.
 

Indeependent

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
44,466
Reaction score
7,550
Points
1,830
Everything the US does must also pass through the WTO.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Your points are silly; the sky is not falling.

Any time a nation enters into an international treaty, one could say that it gives up a bit of its sovereignty - it acknowledges the interests of some other sovereign nation or nations and makes a mutual accommodation. Giving up the Panama Canal was an abdication of U.S. sovereignty, but approved by the Senate. Done deal. So what? Maybe you disagree, but the legal processes were followed.

This is why treaties must be ratified by Congress, as do any other undertakings that involve relinquishing any rights that the Sovereign (i.e., Federal Government) has heretofore claimed, whether legitimately or otherwise.

Consider the Kyoto Protocols and the L.O.S.T. Both have been proposed for U.S. acceptance but rejected by the Senate - so they are not binding on us, despite promises from a President or two that we would sign on.

Just because some politician proposes that we sign a treaty doesn't make them un-American.

There is nothing wrong with the Congress considering foreign laws and precedents when debating legislation, but I agree that the Supreme Court has no business taking them into consideration when ruling on AMERICAN laws.



"... the Supreme Court has no business taking them into consideration when ruling on AMERICAN laws."


I'll drink to that.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
125,847
Reaction score
12,648
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Funny how thing change. But they do.


Seems that those without a deep affection for this nation couldn't care less, huh.
Meh, can't get worked up about this issue.

You know what I do get worked up about?

That big corporations take American Jobs every day and ship them to Mexico, to China, to Malaysia, to India, undermining our industrial infrastructure and middle class lifestyles.

That's what I get upset about.

Not that some illegal alien got a law license.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
114,706
Reaction score
26,867
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
Funny how thing change. But they do.


Seems that those without a deep affection for this nation couldn't care less, huh.
Meh, can't get worked up about this issue.

You know what I do get worked up about?

That big corporations take American Jobs every day and ship them to Mexico, to China, to Malaysia, to India, undermining our industrial infrastructure and middle class lifestyles.

That's what I get upset about.

Not that some illegal alien got a law license.
Illegal alien with a law license...the irony
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,659
Points
48
Location
Maine
Funny how thing change. But they do.


Seems that those without a deep affection for this nation couldn't care less, huh.
You mean the INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND THE GOVERNMENT TOOLS THEY OWN?

I quite agree that the concept of nationhood is under an attack disguised as an attack on bad national governance.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Funny how thing change. But they do.


Seems that those without a deep affection for this nation couldn't care less, huh.
Meh, can't get worked up about this issue.

You know what I do get worked up about?

That big corporations take American Jobs every day and ship them to Mexico, to China, to Malaysia, to India, undermining our industrial infrastructure and middle class lifestyles.

That's what I get upset about.

Not that some illegal alien got a law license.






"You know what I do get worked up about?

That big corporations take American Jobs every day and ship them....."


Good thing we have a Democrat President who eschews such outsourcing!!!!
Wait.....


1. The Obama administration had joined the new Arab-based International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), and agreed to provide millions to support international green energy jobs. “In its fiscal 2012 budget request for international programs, the administration has asked for $5.2 million for IRENA.” U.S. Taxpayers on the Hook As Obama Joins a New International Renewable Energy Agency | CNS News How many jobs in the United States will this endeavor provide?

2. Obama regulatory and tax policies sent jobs overseas.

3. “President Barack Obama will present his “jobs plan” on Wednesday at a company which is shipping jobs overseas…. WestStar is a high-end, specialty manufacturer that just opened a new facility in San Jose, Costa Rica — creating many new jobs there, but not in the United States.” http://test.dailycaller.com/2011/09...c-company-that’s-shipping-jobs-to-costa-rica/



4. “This isn’t the first time Obama has chosen to speak at a North Carolina company outsourcing jobs overseas. In mid-June, Obama spoke at Cree LED Light Company to discuss his job creation and economic policies. Cree has been shipping jobs to China.” Ibid.

a. Cree was also a recipient of Obama stimulus funds, a portion of which was also used to send jobs overseas. Limbaugh, “The Great Destroyer,” p.27.

5. “The Department of Energy estimated that 82,000 jobs have been created and has acknowledged that as much as 80 percent of some green programs, including $2.3 billion of manufacturing tax credits, went to foreign firms that employed workers primarily in countries includingChina, South Korea and Spain, rather than in the United States.” 'Green' jobs no longer golden in stimulus - Washington Times



6. WASHINGTON -- Xerox, whose CEO, Ursula Burns, is advising President Obama on exports, last week told its product engineering employees that it is in outsourcing talks with India-based IT services firm HCL Technologies. Xerox CEO, an Obama appointee, may send jobs to Indian firm - Computerworld

7. (CNSNews.com) – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said today that he told his daughter to buy a Japanese car--a Toyota Sienna--and that she did so. U.S. Transportation Secretary: I Told My Daughter to Buy Japanese Car | CNS News




8. “U.S. funds, Arizona effort help Mexico trucks pollute less
Using EPA grant money, the state offered to refit the trucks with the new exhaust systems, replacing factory-installed mufflers with converters similar to what is required for U.S. trucks. The process takes two or three hours to complete at a cost per truck of about $1,600…. The entire cost - parts and labor - is paid by the EPA grant through ADEQ.” http://www.azcentral.com/news/artic...rizona-mexico-truck-pollution-regulation.html

9. “…Obama administration is now taking your American tax dollars and using them to fund the BBC World Service — Britain’s state-financed radio network.” The PJ Tatler » Your tax dollars now funding the BBC in addition to NPR




Good analysis, Joey....

Yeah, boyyyyyyyeee
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Funny how thing change. But they do.


Seems that those without a deep affection for this nation couldn't care less, huh.
You mean the INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND THE GOVERNMENT TOOLS THEY OWN?

I quite agree that the concept of nationhood is under an attack disguised as an attack on bad national governance.



Wow, do you have that backwards....but,I understand, dyslexics are teople poo.

Time to re-educate you.
Here's who own the government:

1. The Shadow Party was born July 17, 2003, at Soros’s estate. It created the largest and most powerful juggernaut in American history. Present were Madeleine Albright, John Podesta, John Pope (director of the Sierra Club), Andy Stern (SEIU), among others. The basic structure of the Shadow Party was a network of seven 527 organizations.


2. One part, called “America Votes” was referred to by one of its staffers as a “monster coalition” coordinating all of the left-wing grassroots groups including ACORN, Planned Parenthoood Action Fund, Sierra Club and the American Federation of Teachers and the SEIU. Soros contributed $23,700,000 in 2004.

a. As of 2004, an alphabetical list of Shadow Party groups included the following:

Air America Radio; America Coming Together; America Votes; American Constitution Society; American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; American Federation of Teachers; Anshell Media; Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now; Association of Trial Lawyers of America; Band of Progressives; Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence; Campaign for a Progressive Future; Campaign for America's Future; Center for American Progress; Clean Water Action; Communication Workers of America; The Constitution Project; DASH PAC; Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund; Democracy for America; Democratic Governors Associations; Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; Dog Eat Dog Films; EMILY's List; Environment 2004; Gore/Lieberman Recount Committee; Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees International Union; the Human Rights Campaign; INdTV; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; Joint Victory Campaign 2004; Laborers International Union of North American; League of Conservation Voters; New Democrat Network; The Media Fund; Media Matters for America; Million Mom March; Moving America Forward; MoveOn.org; Music for America; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People; NARAL Pro-Choice America; National Education Association; National Grassroots Alliance; National Jewish Democratic Council; National Treasury Employees Union; New American Optimists; New Democrat Network; Partnership for America's Families; People for the American Way; Phoenix Group; Planned Parenthood; Pro-Choice Vote; Service Employees International Union; Sheet Metal Workers International Association; Sierra Club; The Thunder Road Group; United Food & Commercial Workers Union; United Progressive Alliance; USAction; Vagina Votes; Voices for Working Families; Vote for Change; Young Voter Alliance; and 21st Century Democrats.
http://www.churchmilitant.tv/cia/02fake/102.pdf
See also FrontPage Magazine - The Shadow Party: Part II Continued 2


3. Now...this might prove to be the “Hermeneutical Key" you so sorely require:
Have you noticed who the President is??


Wise up.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
[


Good analysis, Joey....

Yeah, boyyyyyyyeee
This was the best you can come up with, "Well, well, well... OBAMA!!!"


It was far better than the Leftist propaganda that you posted.

We both know it was, because of how painful it was for you to include it in this post.


As the famed Brown Bomber said: you can run but you can't hide.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,185
Reaction score
33,028
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Your points are silly; the sky is not falling.

Any time a nation enters into an international treaty, one could say that it gives up a bit of its sovereignty - it acknowledges the interests of some other sovereign nation or nations and makes a mutual accommodation. Giving up the Panama Canal was an abdication of U.S. sovereignty, but approved by the Senate. Done deal. So what? Maybe you disagree, but the legal processes were followed.

This is why treaties must be ratified by Congress, as do any other undertakings that involve relinquishing any rights that the Sovereign (i.e., Federal Government) has heretofore claimed, whether legitimately or otherwise.

Consider the Kyoto Protocols and the L.O.S.T. Both have been proposed for U.S. acceptance but rejected by the Senate - so they are not binding on us, despite promises from a President or two that we would sign on.

Just because some politician proposes that we sign a treaty doesn't make them un-American.

There is nothing wrong with the Congress considering foreign laws and precedents when debating legislation, but I agree that the Supreme Court has no business taking them into consideration when ruling on AMERICAN laws.


"Just because some politician proposes that we sign a treaty doesn't make them un-American."

If the treaty denies American sovereignty, well, yeah, it pretty much defines un-American.
 

alan1

Gold Member
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
4,357
Points
245
Location
Shoveling the ashes
Everyday that we fail to secure our borders we lose a little sovereignty.
Every time an illegal alien is arrested and we fail to deport them we lose a little sovereignty.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top