There are always calls for that in the UN. Repeating them in an essay does not support the author's premises that there's a Trend Toward Totalitarian Government. We have a president that made marginal progress toward reducing government funding as a percent of GDP until the Senate slipped back to the Democrats. He gave them half of what they wanted in hopes of gaining it back, and prospects look good.
We are at worse treading water, but that of course won't stop the kooks from posting the same tired and slippery "Republicrat" platitudes with lots of explanation points in response to this. I've defeated them to many times to respond again.
We have a president that made marginal progress toward reducing government funding as a percent of GDP until the Senate slipped back to the Democrats.
From the above article:
The U.S. officially opposed it, but not in principle: it merely opposed adopting it “at this time.”
That's the position of the Dubya administration. The only difference between Dubya and the socialists who push this garbage is that Dubya's handlers know that the only way to achieve such goals is to go slow. The leaders of socialist philosophy introduce the broad concept and leave it to people like Dubya to cut it back, knowing that he will not stand firm for capitalism and the Constitution and they will get yet another small piece of socialism enacted. He never has stood firm for the Constitution and likely never will.
The Dubya administration opposes the ITO "at this time". But, count on it. They do not oppose it in principle. Just like his daddy, Dubya will allow himself to be beat down and agree to unconstitutional compromises that lead to ever larger government, instead of vetoing bad legislation and using the bully pulpit of the Presidency to hold the Senate's feet to the fire. Klinton faced down two houses of Congress held by Republicans and made them bow to his wishes on the budget. But, don't expect such boldness from the current occupant of the Whitehouse, even though he only has to face down one house. And, it's not because he doesn't have the spine (though we have no indication that he does). It's because he too, is wants to see bigger government. The only difference is that he wants to be the one in control.
I'm just hoping that I can find someone better than Harry Browne to vote for in two years. He lost my vote with his antics a week ago and Dubya never had my vote. Hopefully the Constitution Party or the Libertarians will nominate a real leader. Although I grant that Dubya has done a little better in prosecuting the War on Terrorism, than algore would have, he has wreaked havoc on the Constitution by signing the USA Patriot Act (not to mention Campaign Finance Reform). As long as the Republican voters continue to accept pseudo-conservatives like Dubya, we will indeed continue the trend toward Totalitarian Government. We need a true constitutionalist in the Whitehouse, who will put the country ahead of his own poll numbers. But alas, I fear that may never happen.