Skip to comments.John Bolton on Law, "International Law," and American Sovereignty
Posted on 01/15/2011 12:37:45 PM PST by pissant
To President Obama, the concept of international law is palpable, as his September 2009 speech to the U.N. Security Council emphasized: "[W]e must demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced." Many in his administration are doing their utmost to subvert America's well-deserved reputation as an adherent of the rule of law by subordinating it to the dangerous concept that international law, as defined by its high priests, overrides our domestic law, including in the judiciary.
What is or is not legally binding about international law, particularly customary international law, is wide open to dispute. Customary international law used to refer to "state practice" in international affairs, a generally sensible way of deciding such questions as navigation protocols, reflecting what seafaring states have done over the centuries. In recent decades, however, the academic Left has seized on customary law as a fertile field for imposing its own ideological standards internationally and binding countries to "laws" they never explicitly approved.
Because democratic debates in constitutional systems like ours are so unsatisfying and often so unproductive for America's statists, they have, in essence, launched an international power play to move outside of our legal systems. They find much greater prospects for success in international forums like the United Nations than in the U.S. Congress. Hence, the role and limits of international law, determining what is legally binding for our international conduct and domestic policy, will be a critical area of debate in the coming years.
(Excerpt) Read more at aei.org ...
If anyone still has doubts about Obozo NOT having the best interests of American at heart -- they are beyond reasoning with.
And Socialism is Suicide!
It is depressing to see new tea reps willing to compromise.
This is a very necessary discussion. Politicians and citizens need to be very clear about the consequences of the loss of sovereignty and anything that impinges on it.
I think a lot of people have been naive in the past about the purposes and consequences of multi-lateral agreements but we can’t afford that kind of naivety at this stage of affairs. Bolton is a very welcome addition to this discussion; just by being in the race he is going to force everyone to think about things they’ve been content thus far to ignore or leave to the elite.
Palin is quicker in getting her words out than any politician in the last 50 years, this is a sign she says what she believes! Finally, someone who tells the Truth!
Some people seems to think a woman cant run this country, thats another reason why she needs to be the first woman President!
She would do a lot to hurt the men having sex with men lifestyle, Normal would be back in again! Thats probably the biggest reason that the anti Palin freepers keeping spurring out all the same negatives Reagan lived with, yes, our token liberal democrat Trolls and with their sick lifestyle!
Best Thread Posted in the last year!
Order For Palin To Lose, Someone Must Beat Her (To the PDS Chorus: Put up or Shup up)
2/21/2010 | Brices Crossroads
Posted on Sunday, February 21, 2010 9:31:41 PM by Brices Crossroads
For a number of weeks now, I have noticed here on Free Republic an increase in the number of posters who say that former Governor Sarah Palin is unelectable. he reasons proffered are usually two fold: First, her resignation as Governor of Alaska forever brands her as a quitter, and the American people will never elect a quitter. Second, she has been so damaged by the hostile MainStream Media, and will be further damaged in another campaign that she can never defeat Barack Obama in a general election. Leaving aside the criticisms of her for the moment (inasmuch as they have been addressed and debated in numerous other posts), I maintain that the 2012 election will be a referendum on Barack Obama. If he has succeeded, he will likely be returned to office. If, on the other hand, he has failed, he will be defeated, in effect fired by the American people. The GOP nominee, whoever that is, will in all probability become the 45th President of the United States. In a word, the GOP nomination will be worth having.
Which begs the question, and I address it specifically to those posters among you who have been quick to point out your perception of Palins flaws, including and especially her alleged unelectability: name the potential candidate(s) you believe a) would be a better President; and b) have the political skills and appeal to defeat her in a GOP primary. As the saying goes, you cannot beat something with nothing.
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.