I’m taking bets on the probability of whether the United States will still be a free and independent nation at the end of Obama’s first term. I think it’s a toss-up at this point, 50-50 odds. Should he win a second term and hold onto the presidency through 2016, it’s a no contest. We won’t have a chance.
It would be a sucker’s bet anyway since the handwriting is all over the walls and all over the Obama administration and anyway it’s supposed to be immoral to bet on a sure thing.
By 2012, America’s national integrity will have been so undermined by internationalism, at the bottom of which is always the ungentle hand of the United Nations, that we will be gasping for air; by 2016, our nation will be unrecognizable.
Can we all join together and say, “National hari kari?”
One report reinforcing that pessimistic view is this laughable but all-too-factual account: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=48360.
Harold Koh, President Obama’s nominee to be top political advisor to Hillary Clinton’s State Department, has contrived what superficially is a novel idea, namely that the United States courts, including SCOTUS, incorporate “international laws and customs into domestic law, whether through the legislative process or through federal courts’ use of international law in interpreting the Constitution of the United States.”
Oh, really? Isn’t that just a peachy keen idea?
Koh is another of the muddle-headed aparatchiks that Obama so loves and who is so enamored of European and other international life, laws, and tribunals that they put to shame the legal thought in America.
Lest Harold believes he was proposing a unique idea, sorry to disillusion him but his partner in crime, SCOTUS Justice Stephen Breyer offered a similar proposal some years ago: http://abajournal.com/news/breyer_natl_legal_systems_are_finding_common_ground/
Try to keep up, Harry!
Their subversive and operative thinking is that our legal system is so infested with nationalism that America should scrap 220 years of our heritage and subscribe to the legal philosophies of those who know better than we as to what’s best. We should therefore become legal lapdogs for the far more urbane and intelligent systems of France, Germany, and maybe even India, Tazakhistan, and Zimbabwe.
True, many of American jurists’ opinions of the past few decades suggest that liberal-leftist judges have been more concerned with their interpretations of social justice, civil rights, etc. than they have been influenced by the meaning and intent of our Constitution and laws but this would be a giant leap backward even for most of them.
Koh’s leap toward “transnational law” would be a leap into an international cesspool and I wish him the best of luck doing the breast stroke. As for America’s adopting his precepts, I wish him only his deserved ignominy.
Why America should go that route Koh doesn’t say, aside from the implication . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com/)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment