United Nations Loses

Defeating the CRPD (United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) is the best news Americans can expect to get in the foreseeable future.

Incidentally, quick cruises of the Net yesterday evening and this morning looking for results found scant mention of the CRPD’s defeat. One of the FOX Network shows I bumped into did report the defeat in one sentence. I cannot say how much coverage a United Nations defeat got on all of the networks. I suspect that it was little to none.

The only thing losers learn from victors is “Don’t lose.” In war and politics victors already know how to win; so they concentrate on learning a lot about the losers. Now, let’s apply that philosophy to yesterday’s losers.

First, no other United Nations treaty could have exposed the true loyalties of US senators in so definitive a way as did the CRPD. Not one word in that treaty would have helped disabled Americans in spite of Kerry’s canard. Note that Kerry had to go foreign to make his case:

Assuming advocating for Rights is doublespeak for protection from abuse somebody should have asked Kerry how many disabled US veterans and citizens are being abused in foreign countries. The followup question is obvious: Why can’t American embassies protect the Rights of ALL Americans in foreign countries? Here’s a scenario making my case for NOT ratifying:

Let’s say a foreign government is arresting and executing Americans under the laws of that country. Hussein goes to the United Nations seeking permission to send in the marines to rescue Americans waiting to be executed. What do you think the UN will say? My guess is the UN will offer to send in inspectors.

Before accusing me of violating another country’s sovereignty let me say that Americans should not be in foreign countries that hate them. American citizens staying out of harm’s way lets this country concentrate on minding its own business.

Next

Maybe this is why McCain lost to Hussein in 2008:

Bob Dole, former senator and big time loser in presidential races, came out of retirement to join John McCain in support of the treaty. Surely, those two on UN treaties is a classic example of a loser learning from a loser.

Interestingly, Dole, a disabled veteran who was severely wounded in WWII, could not beat a dirt bag like Clinton. War hero McCain could not beat a Communist with a life story that would make Charles Manson blush. Something happened in those elections that public trough intellectuals and paid pundits either missed or deliberately ignored.

Finally, here is the lesson learned. Everybody who voted for the CRPD thought they could hide their treason behind the disabled. No other United Nations treaty sitting on the shelf like a rattlesnake waiting to strike offers a humanitarian cover story as compassionate as does the CRPD. By voting for the CRPD they showed that global government administered by the United Nations is their first loyalty. That’s no great revelation with Democrats, but the CRPD vote did expose these eight:

Brown, Lugar, and Snowe are leaving. John McCain does not count because everybody knows he is the poster boy for RINO. Now that Snowe is history, Susan Collins takes over as poster girl for distaff RINO.

Sadly, voting for a UN treaty trivializes all of the conservative positions held by Ayotte, Barrasso, and Murkowski. Senators, more than members of the House, must come with a core belief that puts America’s sovereignty above everything else. Voting for a UN treaty under any pretext says the opposite.

Senate rejects United Nations treaty for disabled rights in a 61-38 vote
By Ramsey Cox and Julian Pecquet - 12/04/12 12:29 PM ET

A United Nations treaty to ban discrimination against people with disabilities went down to defeat in the Senate on Tuesday in a 61-38 vote.

The treaty, backed by President Obama and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), fell five votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for confirmation as dozens of Senate Republicans objected that it would create new abortion rights and impede the ability of people to homeschool disabled children.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) argued the treaty would infringe on U.S. sovereignty, an argument echoed by other opponents.

“This unelected bureaucratic body would pass recommendations that would be forced upon the United States if we were a signatory,” he said.

Supporters of the treaty argued that the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities would simply require the rest of the world to meet the standards that Americans already enjoy under the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act.

The treaty was negotiated and first signed under former President George W. Bush and signed again by Obama in 2009. At least 153 other countries have signed it.

Republican Sens. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), John Barrasso (Wyo.), Scott Brown (Mass.), Susan Collins (Maine), Dick Lugar (Ind.), John McCain (Ariz.), Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) voted with Democrats in favor of the treaty.

Democrats and advocates for those with disabilities argued that recommendations from a panel created by the treaty would be advisory only, not binding, and that the treaty did not create any new legal rights in state or federal courts. Democrats brought in several Republican senators, including Dole, a disabled veteran, to help make their case.

Republican opposition was led by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.).

Speaking on the Senate floor Tuesday, Lee said he was concerned that U.N. committee recommendations “often fall well beyond the treaty’s goals.”

“I and many of my constituents who homeschool or send their children to religious schools have justifiable doubt that a foreign body based in Geneva, Switzerland, should be deciding what is best for a child at home in Utah,” Lee said.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) said the U.N. committee recommendations would be nonbinding, prompting Lee to ask, “If this does nothing, then why would we ratify it?”

Kerry countered that the treaty would allow the United States to serve on the committee to advocate for the rights of U.S. veterans and citizens living or traveling abroad.

“I have not said it does nothing,” Kerry said. “I said it does not change U.S. law; that is different from saying it doesn’t do anything. If it didn’t do anything I wouldn’t be here, nor would President Bush have signed it.”

In September, 36 Senate Republicans called on the leaders of both parties not to consider any treaties during the lame-duck session. Democrats countered that the current Congress is the best-equipped to approve treaties because its members are the ones who did the work to pass it out of committee over the summer.

McCain, a treaty supporter, argued senators who signed the letter shouldn't feel bound to vote against the treaty because the letter only opposed consideration of treaties, not passage.

“There is no reason we shouldn’t have a vote on this,” McCain said Monday. “The letter says they oppose consideration ... but we have adopted consideration.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-aff...rejects-un-treaty-for-disabled-rights-in-vote

 

Jerry McConnell over at Canada Free Press should have titled his piece Rogues Gallery:

​

Now that #1 ——Lugar —— & #2 —— Snowe —— on the most unwanted list are toast, I suggest moving John McCain into the number one spot. More than anyone else he should have known better.

McConnell also listed a ninth RINO but did not provide a mug shot:

Eight Traitor RINOs Cuddle Up to Treasonous LibDems But Fail to Approve U.N. Treaty
Jerry McConnell
Thursday, December 6, 2012

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51583

Here’s an appropriate photo of Kirk; appropriate because all he had to do was vote no to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic:

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) participates in a reenactment of his swearing-in ceremony in the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington on November 29, 2010. UPI/Kevin Dietsch​

 

I vote that we withdraw from the U.N. and throw the dirtbags out of New York City.