Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 2:48 am
You last visited January 24, 2017, 2:35 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

"What price popularity?

Published:

"What price popularity?

Posted by Paul at 10:16 PM

Source Powerlineblog.com 

 

"Other than the racial angle, the thing that has Barack Obama's supporters most excited is the prospect that, thanks to ascension, America will once more be liked and respected around the world. Those aroused by this prospect can be divided into two categories. The first are the folks who believe, with the naivety only a certain type of liberal can possess, that a gesture (the election of Obama) can transform, lastingly and without cost, the way the world views us. These people are fools.

The second category are those who believe that Obama will take substantive positions that please foreigners and that, in particular, he will back measures that limit U.S. sovereignty. These people are on to something.

In the November 17 issue of the National Review (not available online to my knowledge), John Fonte of the Hudson Institute identifies four "transnational power grabs" that Obama is likely to push for They are: the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Rights of the Child Treaty, the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and the International Criminal Court. Agreement by the U.S. to these arrangements would make us more popular with foreigners, but only at a cost to our national security, our right of self-governance, and our rights under the Constitution.

As Fonte explains, the Law of the Sea Treaty could result in maritime disputes involving U.S. defense forces being arbitrated by an international panel composed of 21 judges, some of whom would be chosen by the likes of China, Russia, and Cuba. The Rights of the Child Treaty would require uniform penal codes for minors in all 50 states. It would abolish the death penalty and life imprisonment for everyone under the age of 18. And it would limit parental rights, for example by granting children the legal right to correspond with anyone, anywhere, without interference from their parents.

According to Fonte, CEDAW would likely result in the imposition of gender-based preferences in multiple spheres, including elective offices. He says the U.N. committee that monitors compliance with CEDAW has called on the Republic of Georgia to return to its Communist-era policy of gender quotas in public offices. Britain has be told to adopt the "comparable worth" standard of "equal pay" under which bureaucrats set pay rates. Fonte also warns that CEDAW would provide a method for "overturning a vast array of federal and state laws that [feminists] do not have the votes to defeat through democratic means."

The ICC, according to Obama foreign-policy advisor Sarah Sewall, "represents an acid test for America's commitment to international and universal concepts of justice and human rights." The problem is that under the ICC American soldiers could be charged with war crimes and tried by a court comprised of judges whose interests and values are foreign to our own. Thus, the ICC is indeed an acid test. . .of our commitment to national sovereignty and self-governance.

Fonte points to a Harris poll taken for the Bradley Foundation in which by a margin of 63 percent to 16 percent, Americans said they see the U.S. Constitution, not international law, as the highest legal authority for Americans. 83 percent think of themselves as U.S. citizens, rather than citizens of the world.

To Obama, these views may signify a bitter population clinging to archaic concepts. But they also signify a challenge. To achieve what I take to be his transnationalist agenda, and to ensure our popularity among foreigners, Obama will have to risk some of his popularity among Americans. "

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022036.php

Entry #973

Comments

1.
Comment by Piaceri - November 9, 2008, 11:07 pm
Submitting to the International Criminal Court means our military would subject to war crimes trials instead of our own military tribunals. It would open our President, whether it is Bush or Obama to war crimes trials. If I remember right, the ICC already wanted to charge Bush with war crimes over Iraq.

These are 3rd world countries that hold these courts. What power that would give them over the US. Does anyone have any type of fantasy that says the US would be treated fairly in one of these circus courts?

Obama said he would eliminate gender discrepancy in wages. I guess that was code for CEDAW.

The Rights of the Child Treaty is unconstitutional. The US government can only make law where the states do not.

Law of the Sea Treaty - See my comments above regarding the ICC. Our military should not fall under the jurisdiction of anyone except the USA.
2.
konaneComment by konane - November 10, 2008, 9:07 am
Thanks Piaceri!! All this is a prerequisite for becoming part of the North American Union. Looks like the Illuminati have a new hand puppet to finish the job on us.

As one article I posted said ultra mega millionaires are the ones who supported Obama which should have alerted voters they were being played.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.