Comments on: The New World Order? It’s Marxist, it’s alive and well, and it’s on its way.

By: Jesus lever » De sista tiderna /Kontrollstat

Jesus lever » De sista tiderna /Kontrollstat — Sun, 16 May 2010 20:18:31 +0000

[...] den nya världsordningen USA som håller på att totalt förvandlas till kommunism >> & >> & >> & >> [...]

By: Charles W. Dent

Charles W. Dent — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 03:35:04 +0000

Tech Question:
Q

By: The New World Order is put on hold until 2010 « The Constitutional Alamo

The New World Order is put on hold until 2010 « The Constitutional Alamo — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:40:40 +0000

[...] a legally binding climate treaty for signature. The treaty, which has become famous from its widespread denunciation by climate change skeptics like Lord Monckton, will be reconsidered in Bonn in [...]

By: Ron C

Ron C — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:42:51 +0000

Would that the US had enough people who value freedom over government handouts to rise up and oppose what is about to happen to this once great nation. But, it is not to be, quite unfortunately. We have reached the end, the demise of freedom, world-wide. There will be no great nation left in the world to oppose global tyranny of the highest and worst order.

This time has been known to be coming for centuries – but people scoffed, and still do. There is one consolation – the time of trouble ahead does end – and the bad guys do get wiped out completely.

By: publius772000

publius772000 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:19:43 +0000

Obviously, you’re correct in your assessment of the Constitutional limits on climate change. The same could be said of health care and other issues. My point is that the federal government acts as though those limits do not exist, and, therefore, any treaty enacted by the administration and the Senate will be binding in a de facto way. Until the states rise up against such tyranny, the status quo will prevail. I just don’t know if there are enough true patriots left to make such an upheaval happen. Time will tell.

By: B. Johnson

B. Johnson — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:02:37 +0000

Conservatives really need to reconnect with the Constitution and its history, particularly state sovereignty, before they’re going to be effective against space-cadet Obama, IMO.

More specifically, noting that this is not an acknowledgement that climate change is real, please consider the following. Given that the Constitution is silent about climate issues, the 10th Amendment automatically reserves government power to regulate and lay taxes for climate change issues to the states, not the Oval Office and Congress. So it’s reasonable to conclude that since Obama doesn’t have the constitutional authority to regulate climate change for the states that he can’t do as follows. He can’t use his power to negotiate treaties with foreign powers as a back door approach to regulating issues like climate change for the states.

But if you don’t believe me then perhaps you believe an expert.

“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” –Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1800. http://www.constitution.org/tj/tj-mpp.htm

The bottom line is that I’m actually happy that Obama got elected president for the following reason. Obama’s incompetence will hopefully spur Constitution-defending patriots to unite and destroy the phony powers now wrongly associated with the Oval Office and Congress.