humor break
everytime Beck says this I LOL 
Posted on 10/21/2009 8:32:57 AM PDT by abigail2
Please listen to this tape of Lord Monckton Click here for Lord Moncton and on Glenn Beck show...Glenn Beck interview with Lord Moncton
The Senate has to approve any treaties the Chief Exec signs. Relax for now.
humor break
everytime Beck says this I LOL
This is the Copenhagen “World Government” scheme.
Is it a Senate simple majority? If it is, nothing to be done about the rubber stamp.
If he does IMPEACHMENT MUST FOLLOW.
"He [the president] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;" US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2.
Thankfully, it is not a simple majority.
With those sitting in the Senate I feel a sword hanging over our heads.
What can we do to stop this?
I would not relax so fast...
The majority democrats have already decided that Obama can do this.
Check the date on this article
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE4BA79X20081211
Related thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2366389/posts
It has to be ratified in order to take precedent over the Constitution.
What can we do?
Make sure the Senate doesn’t ratify.
There needs to be another provision wherein the Senate can reject the treaty on the same vote, so that subsequent Senators may not ratify a treaty that’s been signed and sitting around for 20 years.
This is what is scary. Was the fed made by the cover of darkness with only a few members present? Would they do this at say the Christmas break? These people in charge scare me.
Even if ratified, it can't countermand the constitution.
That said, the constitution isn't an effective barrier to elitists taking over the country. The mechanism they have been using is to twist the plain language of the founding document, and the people accord the decisions the imprimatur of legitimacy.
AFAIK, wouldn't they just need a quorum to ratify this?
I'm afraid it does. This has been reviewed by Constitutional lawyers. The UN Rights of the Child Treaty in particular was the one that I heard a detailed analysis of this Constitution vs Treaty discussion about.
True enough, but we're looking at 60 Democrats to 40 Republicans. They still need 6 Republicans to vote with it. They may get it anyway, but if the vote falls on party lines the treaty will not be ratified.
I understand your broader point, that they might try to sneak it when there are fewer Senators present, but I'm trying to see the bright side of all this.
I agree, they don’t care about right and wrong, they will twist things to suit their purposes...but I’m glad to learn all this.
If 0bama signs the treaty and the senate ratifies, it seems it might take away from their ability to pass cap and trade legislation, which they probably wouldn’t like because the taxes would be out of their control.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-5961-0-9-9—.html
Question: The current administration and the Democratic majority in Congress has shown little regard for the will of the people. They’re trying to pass a serious government agenda, and serious taxation and burdens on future generations. And there seems to be little to stop them. How do you propose we stop Obama from doing this, because I see no way to stop him from signing anything in Copenhagen. I believe that’s his agenda and he’ll do it.
I [Lord Monckton] don’t minimize the difficulty. But on this subject – I don’t really do politics, because it’s not right. In the end, your politics is for you. The correct procedure is for you to get onto your representatives, both in the US Senate where the bill has yet to go through (you can try and stop that) and in [the House], and get them to demand their right of audience (which they all have) with the president and tell him about this treaty. There are many very powerful people in this room, wealthy people, influential people. Get onto the media, tell them about this treaty. If they go to www.wattsupwiththat.com, they will find (if they look carefully enough) a copy of that treaty, because I arranged for it to be posted there not so long ago. Let them read it, and let the press tell the people that their democracy is about to be taken away for no good purpose, at least [with] no scientific basis [in reference to climate change]. Tell the press to say this. Tell the press to say that, even if there is a problem [with climate change], you don’t want your democracy taken away. It really is as simple as that.
It's more like a snake having to unhinge it's jaws to swallow the larger united States.
All we have to do is suck it up, puff up our chest and show some backbone and it won't be able to swallow us.
Then we put a stake through it's heart and kill it.
I can’t see those democrap senators from coal producing states voting for this treaty ratification either. I think they fall way short of 67 votes for this nonsense.
Their attitude towards the Constitution is predictable if you understand the underlying assumptions about the nature of man.
“Now” man is superior in all ways to “then” man, and therefore “now” man should not be subject to the restrictions set up by “then” man.
Thanks for posting this. I’ve been looking for it.
That's quite a challenge these days :(
Sorry for the first post, used bad html
Gracias, Señor.
No. 2/3 of the Senate would be 67 senators, which goes beyond the filibuster #.
bttt
Good point!
The "now" man is a tyrant. If the "now" people kick him out, that will make him a "then" man. The "now" people can undo whatever he did "then."
Your welcome, I was surprised there wasn’t a thread on it too.
I think we already have plenty to impeach right now - words out of his own mouth - wonder how many of his fans would have voted for him way back when if they had made it their business to know the true Barry Soetoro?
Okay, so they need 66 votes. Not gonna happen.
Nothing of the sort will ever happen until the Outhouse of Chicago and San Francisco is changed to a House of Representatives.
Same goes with the SINate, to borrow a term from FReeper Just A Nobody.
Olympia Snow will definitely vote for it as she is Basically a Democrat and not even a Blue Dog one at that.....
The real underlying assumption about the nature of man splits along the "basically good, constantly improving" view vs the "tragically flawed" view where man cannot put down his flawed (sinful) nature and thus cannot be trusted with power over others.
"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature. If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to government, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In forming a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." --James Madison, The Federalist No. 51
Signing a treaty to Officially reliquish U.S.A Sovereignty, is without question an Impeachable Offense. Period, fini,done deal, your out o’ here.
This is why it's tough to believe that a "benevolent dictator" is the solution for our dilemma. Be as it may, an army general taking over or supporting and installing a civilian at the helm. The Constitution, due process and liberties in general, have to be suspended for a "temporarily" until the country in question is "cleaned up." followed by "free elections."
Anything that goes wrong in the above scenario such as "intentions", "prolonged" periods or schedules than promised, and you get a full-fledged dictatorship that can't be overturned for decades, even at the price of rivers of blood. We've got to change the Outhouse in '10 and the WH in '12, as a last attempt, that of course, if ACORN and the Chicago thugs will let us!
The infamous weekend that 0b0z0 fired the GM president, I posted that we crossed the line from Socialism to Communism. I'm afraid I was right and now worried about the torrid pace of dismantling our institutions, choking our liberties and shredding the Constitution.
Sorry for the long post, I got carried away as part of the discussion.
for a “temporarily” -——> “temporarily”
If BO signs that treaty, he should be impeached. If the Congress approves it, we should commence a revolution to restore our sovereignty.
“No. 2/3 of the Senate would be 67 senators, which goes beyond the filibuster #.”
Not true. It has to be only 2/3 of those present, i.e. 2/3 of a quorum.
“No. 2/3 of the Senate would be 67 senators, which goes beyond the filibuster #.”
Not true. It has to be only 2/3 of those present, i.e. 2/3 of a quorum.
With all the leftists in the Senate and other areas of power this concerns me MUCH more than it would have a few years ago. I think the kool-aid drinkers actually believe in this sort of thing and can’t wait to “Put America in her place”!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.