[timmac]

Obama: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')arack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University Class of ’83). I tried to warn the country that virtually all of my classmates and professors were Marxist or socialist, despised America, and wanted to bring down capitalism. I tried to warn the country that Obama would follow the detailed plan of two Columbia professors named Cloward and Piven- a plan designed to damage or destroy capitalism by overwhelming the U.S. economy with government spending, regulations, entitlements, taxes and debt.

[americandream]

Thanks to Raegan, Bush and all that free racketeering crowd who sent your industries in China (where they churn out the goodies for peanuts) and got you fellows hooked on debt. Now you want more of the fix, like a typical addict. Don't worry, America is going to take up free market libertarianism with a vengeance so I would keep your knickers on.

[Ibon]

This thread and the other most active threads currently at PO.COM read like commentaries you would read on a CNN Blog. Shame on all of you for being entertained with such boring dumb polarized unintelligent trashy posts.......

Can we not raise the bar just a little bit higher PLEASE

[Ferretlover]

Amen!

[rangerone314]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'T')hanks to Raegan, Bush and all that free racketeering crowd who sent your industries in China (where they churn out the goodies for peanuts) and got you fellows hooked on debt. Now you want more of the fix, like a typical addict. Don't worry, America is going to take up free market libertarianism with a vengeance so I would keep your knickers on.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'T')hanks to Raegan, Bush and all that free racketeering crowd who sent your industries in China (where they churn out the goodies for peanuts) and got you fellows hooked on debt. Now you want more of the fix, like a typical addict. Don't worry, America is going to take up free market libertarianism with a vengeance so I would keep your knickers on.

[AgentR11]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'M')ore than likely given the ultimately neo-feudal character capitalism will assume in its last days (brute force). Arbitrary government, definitely.

[Tanada]

http://www.examiner.com/article/another ... government

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he United States signed and ratified the Vienna Convention. "Any treaty signed by the United States but not yet ratified by the Senate is binding on our country--as if it had been ratified--until it is either rejected by the Senate or renounced by the president," according to Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security policy. Laws can be repealed but we can only get out of treaties two ways: if the other signatories (usually 190 nations) let us or by passing a constitutional amendment. A treaty remains pending in the senate until it is rejected or ratified. It does not expire. The version 103-39 of LOST as submitted to the senate on October 7, 1994 by William Clinton has been pending in the senate for a while.

Here is what the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST)would do:

give the United Nations control of the oceans, seas and all minerals and fish beneath them
give the International Seabed Authority (ISA) power to tax offshore gas and oil wells with the monies collected going to the third world country of its choice (Part VI Article 82)
give the power that the United States Navy used to have of protecting freedom of the seas to the United Nations' tribunal
give other countries free access to U.S. offshore drilling technology
probably force the U.S. to abide by rules on carbon emissions like the Kyoto Treaty and the global cap-and-trade system

[AgentR11]

Tanada, while I share your dislike on that proposed treaty, I think its also unfair to suggest that simply because the Senate has not voted to reject it, that it has a chance of ratification. Every Senate final vote in our era takes weeks or months to make happen. I see no reason that any of them would be particularly interested in wasting that much time just to reject a treaty that few in the US have an interest in seeing ratified. It is quite dead, and will remain dead.

One other point on treaties; while they do carry a very high precedence with regard to law; they can contain an "opt out" clause in the treaty text itself. ABM treaty is an example that was exercised. And there is precedent for breaking off a treaty by joint resolution / executive decision.

Understanding Treatment of Treaties Trusted To The True Test of the Tumultuous Senate

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', 'T')anada, while I share your dislike on that proposed treaty, I think its also unfair to suggest that simply because the Senate has not voted to reject it, that it has a chance of ratification. Every Senate final vote in our era takes weeks or months to make happen. I see no reason that any of them would be particularly interested in wasting that much time just to reject a treaty that few in the US have an interest in seeing ratified. It is quite dead, and will remain dead.

One other point on treaties; while they do carry a very high precedence with regard to law; they can contain an "opt out" clause in the treaty text itself. ABM treaty is an example that was exercised. And there is precedent for breaking off a treaty by joint resolution / executive decision.

Understanding Treatment of Treaties Trusted To The True Test of the Tumultuous Senate

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'G')o back and re read the first paragraph I quoted, under existing treaty law any treaty signed by the President but not explicitly rejected by the US Senate has the force of a ratified treaty until such time as it is rejected by the Senate or withdrawn by the President.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'G')o back and re read the first paragraph I quoted, under existing treaty law any treaty signed by the President but not explicitly rejected by the US Senate has the force of a ratified treaty until such time as it is rejected by the Senate or withdrawn by the President.

[Cloud9]

The statists have dreamed of one world government control by the great houses of plutocrats since the dawn of time. Technology and mass culture are making that likelihood seem all the more plausible. At the other end is the very real fact that the last two centuries of centralization were built on cheap and abundant fossil fuels. As much as the statist wish, they cannot keep all the balls in the air. The rise of the Chinese power house has witnessed the collapse of the industrial base in the west.

The central planner’s hope of a one world government managing every minute of our lives is a wet dream. Our future is not some brave new world controlled by an uber state. The statist’s dream is based on the perpetual growth machine. Energy constraints will dim the lights around the world. Entropy will not be denied. Detroit is the model of 21st century urbanization.