Citizen of the world Obama, not putting the needs of the United States first, could take some very damaging steps early in his Administration that will punch holes in our national security and endanger our troops (HT:Power Line).
[By] 63 percent to 16 percent Americans said they see the U.S. Constitution, not international law, as the highest legal authority for Americans. 83 percent think of themselves as U.S. citizens, rather than citizens of the world.
Obama doesn't think so.
.John Fonte of the Hudson Institute identifies four "transnational power grabs" that Obama is likely to push for They are: the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Rights of the Child Treaty, the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and the International Criminal Court. Agreement by the U.S. to these arrangements would make us more popular with foreigners, but only at a cost to our national security, our right of self-governance, and our rights under the Constitution.As Fonte explains, the Law of the Sea Treaty could result in maritime disputes involving U.S. defense forces being arbitrated by an international panel composed of 21 judges, some of whom would be chosen by the likes of China, Russia, and Cuba. The Rights of the Child Treaty would require uniform penal codes for minors in all 50 states. It would abolish the death penalty and life imprisonment for everyone under the age of 18. And it would limit parental rights, for example by granting children the legal right to correspond with anyone, anywhere, without interference from their parents.
According to Fonte, CEDAW would likely result in the imposition of gender-based preferences in multiple spheres, including elective offices. He says the U.N. committee that monitors compliance with CEDAW has called on the Republic of Georgia to return to its Communist-era policy of gender quotas in public offices. Britain has be told to adopt the "comparable worth" standard of "equal pay" under which bureaucrats set pay rates. Fonte also warns that CEDAW would provide a method for "overturning a vast array of federal and state laws that [feminists] do not have the votes to defeat through democratic means." [In other words, this would represent a step backward for American women.]
The ICC, according to Obama foreign-policy advisor Sarah Sewall, "represents an acid test for America's commitment to international and universal concepts of justice and human rights." The problem is that under the ICC American soldiers could be charged with war crimes and tried by a court comprised of judges whose interests and values are foreign to our own. Thus, the ICC is indeed an acid test. . .of our commitment to national sovereignty and self-governance. [As the world superpower called upon to get involved in disputes everywhere, from Bosnia to Kosovo, to Darfur as well as having to fight enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. is uniquely a target of hostile nations. Thus, the U.S. has consistently said that American forces will be subject to U.S. law.]
Fonte points to a Harris poll taken for the Bradley Foundation in which by a margin of 63 percent to 16 percent, Americans said they see the U.S. Constitution, not international law, as the highest legal authority for Americans. 83 percent think of themselves as U.S. citizens, rather than citizens of the world.
Since the U.S. so often is doing humanitarian and other vital work using the military that others are unable or unwilling to undertake (Bosnia and Kosovo are excellent examples.), our representatives should be subject to American law at all times. If involved nations do not agree to that condition, American troops should not be involved. Thus far, all nations eager for U.S. assistance have agreed that U.S. troops should be subject to U.S. laws in performing their duties. Obama would change that to the serious detriment of our troops.
A substantial majority of Americans agree. So Obama is off-base on these issues
