Posted on 05/13/2007 9:59:47 AM PDT by upchuck
Thanks. I missed that.
Then the Secretary of State is a liar.
CONDI IS LOST AT SEA http://www.conservativeusa.org/bushwatch.htm “During her confirmation hearings, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was asked a question that got lost in the Barbara Boxer brouhaha: Did the administration favor the ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty, or LOST? “Rice said the administration ‘would certainly like to see it pass as soon as possible.’ Assuming she was authorized to say that by President Bush … the question is why?”
REAGAN SAID NO TO UNLOST, BUT GWB IS PUSHING IT
“LOST was a bad idea when President Reagan refused to sign it in 1982 and actually fired the State Department staff members who helped negotiate it. It was drafted at the behest of Soviet bloc and Third World dictators interested in a scheme to weaken U.S. power while transferring wealth to the developing world.”[snip]
"The Reagan Administration also saw serious constitutional questions."
How about that.
The ONLY president to win a ruling against abortion. The ONLY president to break 12000 and now 13000 on the Dow. Unemployment low, taxes low, your ungrateful ass has not been blown up here at home and the only POTUS to go on the offense against terrorism. GW gave us Roberts and ALito on the supremem court. Who did the great Reagan (which I liked) give us, O’Connor that voted with the rats half the time. Oh, how we take our ball and go home complainers forget. Freepers like you are ungrateful and will never be happy. Pathetic.
“The ISA courts would have even wider jurisdiction than the International Criminal Court (to which, fortunately, we do not belong)”
Yet.
I guess blood is thicker, since you asked...how would you
know if he did or not? MSP would not cover his remarks,
is called the “Clinton doctrine.”...no upset the Dems. jj
I'M SO SICK OF THE BUSHES!!!
But hey...he's all for war in Iraq, so that makes him a great conservative.
U.S. Should Scrap Law of the Sea Treaty
Schlafly, Phyllis
The people who want to dissolve or diminish U.S. sovereignty and replace it with global governance never give up. Their modus operandi is to work toward their one-world goal incrementally through United Nations treaties.
America elected President George W. Bush to stand tall for the United States, and he did exactly that when he saved the country from two treaties that would have driven gaping holes in U.S. sovereignty. He withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty-signed by former President Richard Nixon, a Republican-that prevented the United States from defending its cities against incoming nuclear missiles.
Then he “unsigned” the International Criminal Court Treaty-signed by former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat-that would have subjected U.S. troops to political prosecution in a foreign court. Now Americans need Bush to “unsign” another dangerous UN treaty that would massively compromise U.S. sovereignty: the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty.
We thought we were rid of Clinton, thanks to the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but his love affair with UN treaties and global integration has come back to haunt us. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R.-Ind.) is trying to get the Senate to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty signed by Clinton in 1994.
Lugar knows that such a giant giveaway of U.S. power can’t be publicly defended. So he held a quiet hearing at which only treaty proponents were permitted to testify. What’s more, he is refusing to allow other relevant Senate committees to hold hearings.
Recently, Lugar managed to get the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to vote out the Law of the Sea Treat unanimously. It’s hard to see how the other Republicans could have voted for the treaty unless they were told that the president wants it.
But others who spoke to the president the same week say that he is opposed to the treaty. We eagerly await White House clarification. Some speculate that Republican pressure is coming from Vice President Dick Cheney.
Lugar and Clinton-both Rhodes Scholars ever eager to toady to internationalist goals-know perfectly well that the Law of the Sea Treaty was examined and emphatically rejected by then-President Ronald Reagan in 1981. When Reagan discovered it was due for signing right after his inauguration, he not only repudiated it but fired the U.S. State Department staff that had negotiated it.
Agitation for the Law of the Sea Treaty during former President Jimmy Carter’s Administration caused alert Republicans to specifically condemn it in the 1980 Republican Party Platform and promise that “a Republican administration will conduct multilateral negotiations in a manner that reflects America’s abilities and long-term interest in access to raw material and energy resources.”
The Law of the Sea Treaty can’t meet that test because it cedes sovereign control over practically all the riches at the bottom of the world’s oceans to an International Seabed Authority. Its one nation, one vote governing setup assures control by Third World countries, while Uncle Sam is expected to pay all the technology and investment costs to bring the sea’s minerals to the surface.
The treaty gives the International Seabed Authority the power to set production controls for ocean mining on more than three-fourths of the earth’s surface, to control ocean exploration through permits and regulations and to adjudicate disputes. Even worse, the authority claims direct global taxing power and is touted as a model for other resource-related treaties that aspire to enjoy the power to levy taxes.
The treaty is a trap that would compel the United States to pay billions of private-enterprise dollars to an international authority while socialist, anti-American nations harvest the profit. Its international control and regulations would deny U.S. companies access to strategic ocean minerals that are essential to U.S. industries and defense.
The treaty would be a sellout of U.S. interests far greater than even Carter’s giveaway of the Panama Canal. It would be a surrender to the world government advocates whose goal is global socialist governance in order to integrate U.S. prosperity with Third World poverty until they are leveled.
The Law of the Sea Treaty would be a giant giveaway of wealth, sovereignty, resources needed to maintain our economy, capacity to defend ourselves, and even the U.S. Navy’s ability to gather intelligence necessary to national defense. Tell your U.S. senators to vote no on the Law of the Sea Treaty.
Mrs. Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and the author of Feminist Fantasies.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200403/ai_n9383289
bookmark
just a placemarker...
New world elitist order ping
"Just about"?
When is enough enough for y'all?
This maroon has been wagging his finger at "the base" for the last 7 years. And they meekly roll over and say, "gimme another, Georgie".
Must be the Stockholm Syndrome.
Nice rant. Thanks for adding to the discussion. That’s what this place is all about.
The border security issue is Bush's single greatest failure to conservatives. Rather than throw him under the bus and hand our government to the demcorats completely, why not praise and promote those like Hunter (who is still in the legislature) who have a sound alternative to the president's policy ... why tear down the president to promote our agenda?
After boiling it all down, this is whats left.
bttt
It is a little too late for earth and its seas, but outer space is going to sit forever undeveloped all the way to the Hubble limit if the UN Outer Space Treaty remains.
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.