Here come the U.N. treaties. Anyone have a list? A prediction?

There are some things pending that, if ratified, will be gas on the conservative fire in this country.

Obamacare is a little thing compared to some of these treaties.

Yep those UN treaties which they have the power to enforce and everything.

Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

Could we rename this thread "Conspiracy Theory Central" just to keep things organized?

You guys do realize that treaties require 67 votes to pass the Senate, right?

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

(11-11-2012 11:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

What about Obama's post election "flexibility?" Nah, we don't need to worry about an extreme left wing socialist community organizer with 4 years of executive orders in front of him, right?

(11-11-2012 11:17 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

What about Obama's post election "flexibility?" Nah, we don't need to worry about an extreme left wing socialist community organizer with 4 years of executive orders in front of him, right?

Contrary to the manchurian candidate America that you think we live in, we still have the rule of law, and Obama can't just unilaterally do whatever he wants to.

(11-11-2012 11:17 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

What about Obama's post election "flexibility?" Nah, we don't need to worry about an extreme left wing socialist community organizer with 4 years of executive orders in front of him, right?

you use this term 'extreme left-wing socialist' like you know what it means when you clearly do not.

(11-11-2012 11:18 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:17 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

What about Obama's post election "flexibility?" Nah, we don't need to worry about an extreme left wing socialist community organizer with 4 years of executive orders in front of him, right?

Contrary to the manchurian candidate America that you think we live in, we still have the rule of law, and Obama can't just unilaterally do whatever he wants to.

Yeah, the next thing you know some tinfoil ********* extremist fringer racist redneck lunatic will accuse him of killing American citizens without a trial, or having a "secret kill list" where, without any oversight or accountability, he kills people in several other sovereign countries we aren't at war with without a shred of due process, or giving support to Al Qaeda linked rebels in Libya without Congressional approval, or signing an EO granting amnesty without Congressional approval.

He's even explicitly said he'll take "executive actions on a regular basis" because he "can't wait" for Congress.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/24/obama-...e-economy/

(11-11-2012 11:58 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:18 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:17 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:07 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:02 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Can't we have a national referendum on withdrawing from the U.N.?

You want another public failure of extreme right-wing policy at the national level so soon?

What about Obama's post election "flexibility?" Nah, we don't need to worry about an extreme left wing socialist community organizer with 4 years of executive orders in front of him, right?

Contrary to the manchurian candidate America that you think we live in, we still have the rule of law, and Obama can't just unilaterally do whatever he wants to.

Yeah, the next thing you know some tinfoil ********* extremist fringer racist redneck lunatic will accuse him of killing American citizens without a trial, or having a "secret kill list" where, without any oversight or accountability, he kills people in several other sovereign countries we aren't at war with without a shred of due process, or giving support to Al Qaeda linked rebels in Libya without Congressional approval, or signing an EO granting amnesty without Congressional approval.

He's even explicitly said he'll take "executive actions on a regular basis" because he "can't wait" for Congress.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/24/obama-...e-economy/

He couldn't be doing any of that without Congress writing the checks. At any rate, I was specifically referring to some supposed onslaught of UN treaties that Obama was gonna unilaterally sign and ratify

(11-11-2012 07:01 PM)Claw Wrote:  Here come the U.N. treaties. Anyone have a list? A prediction?

There are some things pending that, if ratified, will be gas on the conservative fire in this country.

Obamacare is a little thing compared to some of these treaties.

People have been converted to sheep who think the UN is our Shepard...

Unilateral treaties are, generally, taken on by idiots. Unilateral treaties which affect domestic policy are taken on by the heir to the throne of idiots.

(11-11-2012 11:01 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Yep those UN treaties which they have the power to enforce and everything.

do you not understand what an international treaty becomes when its ratified by the senate?

and do you understand how likely that is to happen?

(11-12-2012 12:07 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:01 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Yep those UN treaties which they have the power to enforce and everything.

do you not understand what an international treaty becomes when its ratified by the senate?

Treaty ratification takes 67 votes. That is a constitutional requirement, not something that Harry Reid can change.

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 12:07 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:01 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Yep those UN treaties which they have the power to enforce and everything.

do you not understand what an international treaty becomes when its ratified by the senate?

Treaty ratification takes 67 votes. That is a constitutional requirement, not something that Harry Reid can change.

yup.

I've never understood something from the Conspiracy Theorists about Obama. How can be completely ineffectual and so over his head and then, at the same time, completely all powerful where he can get anything he wants done Congress and Constitution be damned?

I just never understood how he could be both.

(11-12-2012 08:54 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 12:07 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-11-2012 11:01 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  Yep those UN treaties which they have the power to enforce and everything.

do you not understand what an international treaty becomes when its ratified by the senate?

Treaty ratification takes 67 votes. That is a constitutional requirement, not something that Harry Reid can change.

yup.

I've never understood something from the Conspiracy Theorists about Obama. How can be completely ineffectual and so over his head and then, at the same time, completely all powerful where he can get anything he wants done Congress and Constitution be damned?

I just never understood how he could be both.

I had the same problem with the Bush conspiracy theorists. They claimed the Bush administration was the most incompetent group of men this side of Blockbusters Board of Trustees, yet they had no problem claiming he was behind 9/11 and perpetrated the most elaborate false-flag operation of all time, and kept the innumerable amount of people required to pull off such a thing quiet. It just doesn't compute.

The U.N. is simply the international version of Washington, DC .... lots of groups trying to legislate the redistribution of wealth. Any success those groups achieve at the U.N. will be at the expense of the Americans. We must be the dumbest nation on Earth for being involved in any of it.

(11-12-2012 10:45 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The U.N. is simply the international version of Washington, DC .... lots of groups trying to legislate the redistribution of wealth. Any success those groups achieve at the U.N. will be at the expense of the Americans. We must be the dumbest nation on Earth for being involved in any of it.

You guys act like the UN has any power to do anything except skip out on some parking tickets in Midtown

(11-12-2012 10:49 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 10:45 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The U.N. is simply the international version of Washington, DC .... lots of groups trying to legislate the redistribution of wealth. Any success those groups achieve at the U.N. will be at the expense of the Americans. We must be the dumbest nation on Earth for being involved in any of it.

You guys act like the UN has any power to do anything except skip out on some parking tickets in Midtown

The UN has the power that its member nations allow it to have. I think the point is that this member nation should not acquiesce in allowing it any more.

Could you enumerate any of the supposed powers that the UN has on US soil?