Replies

You've referred me to your own writing as authoritative before. Sorry if I'm slow to buy it.

With regard to my work, Malcolm Wallop bought it, so I guess you are just slow. I guess you'd prefer to let the MSM determine who is a worthy presenter of fact. In that book, I explain at great length and in enormous detail how treaty law plays the key role in this nascent system of global governance.

But never mind my "authority," allow me to quote that same article re Patrick Henry's take on the matter of treaty ratification:

The power of making treaties, by this Constitution, ill-guarded as it is, extended farther than it did in any country in the world. Treaties were to have more force here than in any part of Christendom; for he defied any gentleman to show any thing so extensive in any strong, energetic government in Europe. Treaties rest, says he, on the laws and usages of nations. To say that they are municipal is, to me, a doctrine totally novel. To make them paramount to the Constitution and laws of the states, is unprecedented. I would give them the same force and obligation they have in Great Britain, or any other country in Europe. Gentlemen are going on in a fatal career; but I hope they will stop before they concede this power unguarded and unaltered.

He is referring specifically to the unfortunate (and very clever) punctuation of the supremacy clause.

[snip]

HENRY: I say again that, if you consent to this power, you depend on the justice and equity of those in power. We may be told that we shall find ample refuge in the law of nations. When you yourselves have your necks so low that the President may dispose of your rights as he pleases, the law of nations cannot be applied to relieve you. Sure I am, if treaties are made infringing our liberties, it will be too late to say that our constitutional rights are violated.

Which has already happened to a degree he might never have imagined.

[snip]

The Senate, by making treaties, may destroy your liberty and laws for want of responsibility. Two thirds of those that shall happen to be present, can, with the President, make treaties that shall be the supreme law of the land; they may make the most ruinous treaties; and yet there is no punishment for them.

So you have a choice: Admit that you were wrong in that this did begin well before you realized, or descend to the status of pompous moron. Don't get me started on how Madison was behind the idea that later became our misbegotten 14th Amendment.