A group of Senate conservatives has gathered enough support to block any treaties that come up for a vote during the lame duck session.
A total of 36 Senators pledged, in a letter drafted by Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) to Majority and Minority leaders Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY), to “oppose efforts to consider a treaty during” the lame duck session.
Because treaties require a two-thirds majority in the Senate to reach the president’s desk, the group of Senators will be able to block any treaties considered after the Nov. 6 election.
“The writers of the Constitution clearly believed that all treaties presented to the Senate should undergo the most thorough scrutiny before being agreed upon,” the letter states. “The American people will be electing representatives and senators in November, and the new representatives carrying the election mandate should be afforded the opportunity to review and consider any international agreements that are outstanding at the time of their election.”
Some Senators had expressed hope that their house would ratify the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (commonly known as the Law of the Sea Treaty) in a lame duck session. The treaty was blocked earlier this year by Senators who noted that it would cede some level of U.S. sovereignty to an international body, force the United States to forgo some level oil and gas royalty revenue, and would produce few tangible benefits.
The Heritage Foundation’s Steve Groves testified on LOST before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
A U.N. treaty on persons with disabilities may also be considered during a lame duck session. Lee this week blocked an attempt to pass that treaty by unanimous consent. “For various reasons we don’t think any treaty should come up during the lame duck time period and we will continue to oppose any treaty passage,” Lee said. “If it is true that it is too fast to move a treaty through during a lame duck, then it’s also too fast to move it through now.”
As you can see from the foregoing link, Senator Scott Brown was a signatory to the Pledge that clearly stated that , “We request that no treaties be brought to the Senate floor during a lame-duck period, and will opposeefforts to consider a treaty during this time.”
Today, our Senator Scott Brown broke his pledge, voted for the CRPD Treaty and demonstrated his treachery.
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress – 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Question:On the Resolution of Ratification (Resolution of Ratification Treaty Doc. 112-7 )
December 4, 2012, 12:06 PM
Required For Majority:
Resolution of Ratification Rejected
Treaty Doc. 112-7
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 13, 2006, and signed by the United States of America on June 30, 2009 (the “Convention”)
Why Scott Brown Failed To Get Re-Elected by: The Angelic One
Wed Nov 07, 2012 at 10:20:09 AM EST
Although a final count has yet to be made, Democrat Elizabeth Warren last night ousted Massachusetts Republican US Senator Scott Brown.
Scott’s re-election was his to lose & he proceeded to do just that.
Was it inevitable? It didn’t have to be. But the reasons for Brown’s
failure to hold on to “the people’s seat” aren’t complex & sadly
reflect a lack of vision that tragically afflicts both the man himself
& his political party.
When Brown won his seat in a special election following the death of
legendary Democrat Ted Kennedy, he had a golden opportunity to create
a new image for the Massachusetts Republican Party that reflected an
alternative strain of the Bay State’s culture. It could be a party that
represented the culture of New England – not the culture of the American
South, or the Midwest, or even the West Coast. His initial success was
due, in part, to his ability to win over independent & Old Left voters.
All he had to do was boldly articulate a practical ideology consistent
with the values/culture of Massachusetts that would transform the Bay
State & (if successful) a blueprint for reuniting the American nation.
Such an approach would revitalize the state GOP & make him a rising star
on the national scene.
Instead Brown squandered the opportunity. He cultivated an image as a
moderate that made no ideological sense once you studied his voting patterns
on certain social or economic issues. The lack of continuity generated an
impression of opportunism. After awhile he came across as somebody who tacitly
accepted the Democrat paradigm since he refused to question its foundational
assumptions. Indeed, his “bipartisan” or “moderate” approach more often than
not validated the worldview of the democrat Party. Is it no wonder that when
presented with the “real” thing in the person of Warren that voters chose the
“authentic” voice of the Democrat paradigm over the pretender Brown?
The Angelic One :: Why Scott Brown Failed To Get Re-Elected Brown
campaigned that he “was one of us” without bothering to articulate how
he would leverage his membership in this “us” group into being a successful
national/international leader. He thus came across as too small for the office
once held by the great men of Massachusetts’ past political history. He was
too small to even bother having a prominent role at his party’s national convention
(in sharp contrast to Warren who used her appearance at her party’s convention
to bolster her brand as a rising progressive star). Massachusetts voters are proud
to be at the vanguard of changing the country (& the world). They expect their
leaders to carry out their role as thought leaders & change agents. Brown never
aspired to anything beyond being a nice guy who is willing to compromise for the
good of all.
Did that attitude get him re-elected? The question answers itself. And the emphasis
of Brown’s campaign to hammer away at Warrens inconsistencies at the expense of
the good guy image he cultivated – to go “negative” – reflected a desperation
stemming from the realization that Brown had nothing to offer the public beyond
his personal charisma. To paraphrase Osama Bin Laden, he wasn’t a strong enough
horse in the eyes of the voters. There was no “there” there.
And in that regard, Brown perfectly reflected – if not personified – the consistent
shortcomings of his party. The Massachusetts Republican Party remains visionless,
bitterly disorganized, & not up to the task of governing millions of people who
will support anyone & any party – no matter how corrupt – as long as said
individuals & the party to which they belong continue to deliver a practical
ideology that offers most of them some tangible benefit to their lives.
Unless we fundamentally transform our nation by electing Senators , Congressmen and a President that will work together to refocus and redirect , our society, fiscally and morally, our country will be headed in the same direction as our European neighbors across the pond, namely Socialism.
Additionally and most crucially this election is the most critical in generations because:
1. If re-elected Barack Hussein Obama will continue molding our country into a weak, Socialist, apologetic nation while Mitt Romney will mold our country to a strong, Capitalist, trustworthy nation.
2. At least two Supreme Court Judges, who will determine the direction of our jurisprudence for several generations, will be nominated by our next President.
3. Obamacare will not be repealedunless we have Mitt Romney in the White House and majorities in the Senate and House. Additionally, It has become quite apparent that the changes to Medicare, resulting from Obamacare’s implementation, will be costly for Seniors, young workers and our economic well being. Additionally, if allowed to be implemented, Obamacare is guaranteed to override our fundamental God given and Constitutionally recognized Right-of- Conscience by imposing Anti-Religious mandates.
4. We can no longer tolerate a Chief Executive who for his own political expediency and beliefs pits one ethnicity against another, the poor against the rich, the young against the old and promotes all manner of class envy.
As stated earlier, an important issues in this election is whether America will abruptly be turned toward Socialism or remain a Capitalist society. Obamacare will not only affect the elderly but “…will impose massive penalties on young workers, small businesses and others…” Thus, Obamacare promises to not only lead us towards Socialism but also promises to further Bankrupt our already precarious financial position and to accelerate our demise over the oft mentioned Financial Cliff
We can not allow legislation like Obamacare, which came to fruition by extreme Congressional misconducts like the “Cornhusker Kickback ”, the ”Louisiana Purchase” and a host of other covert “deals”, to destroy our nation’s financial viability, our Individual Liberty and our National Sovereignty.
This is our time!The candidates that we elect will serve in office for the next two, four or six years. If we do not choose wisely, those years could be agonizing. So vet the candidates, know their core principles, choose wisely and vote for candidates that will strengthen our Constitutionalism, our Capitalism and will reject Socialism!
“Leave It Blank” and all other resistance to Senator Brown, regarding U.N. Treaties, is formally and indefinitely suspended!
This comes after an official statement from Senator Brown’s office that; “Due to the economic disaster of the “fiscal cliff” and other extremely urgent budget issues facing the Congress, Senator Brown will not allow any cloture votes on any U.N. Treaties or social issues during the “lame duck session”. Further comments from his legislative staff detailed the Senator’s commitment to focusing his full attention to working on the budget, taxes, and spending controls to assure, to the best of his ability, that these issues are resolved above all others.
As strong fiscal and social conservatives, in a very liberal state, we will not always agree 100% with Senator Brown, as he tries to represent all the people of Massachusetts, but we should all be able to agree with this official statement and place our 100% support behind Scott Brown in this very difficult race.
Elizabeth Warren Was Working for A steel Company Against Unions
While working for a major coal company, Massachusetts Democrat Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren was paid to circumvent a congressional requirement that provided millions of dollars in health care benefits to retired union coal workers.
It turns out the fair-skinned, blonde Democrat, who is already embroiled in controversy over her claims that she is Native American, worked for what liberal environmentalists, part of her base, consider the major polluter of the environment, a major coal producer, according to the Boston Globe.
Unfortunately for her campaign for the Senate, Warren has never produced a shred of evidence that she is Native American even though she listed herself as such when applying for work at universities.
On the hand, and equally unfortunate for the liberal Democrat, the Boston Globe has uncovered evidence that she was paid $10,000 for her role in attempting to take away health care funding from retired cold miners in the 1990s, according to a separate Washington Post report.
Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren lists the address for her legal practice as Massachusetts but no records show her having a license to practice law in the state, according to an Ivy League law professor.
Cornell law professor William Jacobsen says he found no law license under Warren’s last name or her maiden name, Herring, during an exhaustive search of state records. Jacobsen said he also confirmed with a clerk at the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers that Warren has never even applied for a license.
In addition, Jacobsen said he could find no record of Warren getting a permit to practice law at the address – her law professor office at Harvard in Cambridge, Mass., he wrote Monday in his blog legalinsurrection.com. Jacobson also posted several legal documents that included the Harvard address.
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered state prison officials to provide taxpayer-funded sex-reassignment surgery to a transgender inmate serving life in prison for murder.
Michelle Kosilek was born male but has received hormone treatments and now lives as a woman in an all-male prison. Robert Kosilek was convicted of murder in the killing of his wife in 1990.
U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf is believed to be the first federal judge to order prison officials to provide sex-reassignment surgery for a transgender inmate.
Kosilek first sued the Massachusetts Department of Correction 12 years ago. Two years later, Wolf ruled that Kosilek was entitled to treatment for gender-identity disorder but stopped short of ordering surgery. Kosilek sued again in 2005, arguing that the surgery is a medical necessity.
In his ruling Tuesday, Wolf found that surgery is the “only adequate treatment” for Kosilek’s “serious medical need.”
“The court finds that there is no less intrusive means to correct the prolonged violation of Kosilek’s Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care,” Wolf wrote in his 126-page ruling.
Prison officials have repeatedly cited security risks in the case, saying that allowing Kosilek to have the surgery would make him a target for sexual assaults by other inmates.
But Wolf, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1985, found that the security concerns are “either pretextual or can be dealt with.” He said it would be up to prison officials to decide how and where to house Kosilek after the surgery.
Diane Wiffin, a spokeswoman for the prisons department, said the agency would have no immediate comment on the ruling.
“We are reviewing the decision and exploring our appellate options,” Wiffin said.
In a telephone interview last year with The Associated Press, Kosilek said the surgery is a medical necessity, not a frivolous desire to change his appearance.
“Everybody has the right to have their health care needs met, whether they are in prison or out on the streets,” Kosilek said. “People in the prisons who have bad hearts, hips or knees have surgery to repair those things. My medical needs are no less important or more important than the person in the cell next to me.”
Wolf noted in his ruling that the Department of Correction’s own medical experts testified that they believe surgery was the only adequate treatment for Kosilek.
The department’s ex-commissioner Kathleen Dennehy testified that providing Kosilek the surgery would present insurmountable security concerns, but Wolf said Kosilek had proven that those purported concerns masked the real reason for denying surgery: “a fear of controversy, criticism, ridicule and scorn.”
Kosilek’s lawsuit has become fodder for radio talk shows and lawmakers who say the state should not be forced to pay for a convicted murderer’s sex-change operation — which can cost up to $20,000 — especially since many insurance companies reject the surgery as elective.
Inmates in Colorado, California, Idaho and Wisconsin have sued unsuccessfully to try to get the surgery, making similar arguments that denying it violates the U.S. Constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
Wolf noted that Kosilek’s gender-identity disorder has caused Kosilek such anguish that he has tried to castrate himself and twice tried to commit suicide, including once while on Prozac.
Kosilek’s lead attorney, Frances Cohen, called the decision courageous and thoughtful.
Please join us in signing our Mass Tea Party’s Petition to Scott Brown so that we may learn his positions on several UN treaties that would have a devastating effect on our National Security and Sovereignty. We need to understand the Senator’s position on these treaties before November 6th. As you may know Senator Brown Did Not join 34 Senators in signing Senator DeMint’s letter to Harry Reid repudiating the Law of the Sea Treaty.
President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are entering negotiations over — or seeking ratification of — five treaties that could radically limit our national sovereignty and the reach of our democratic institutions. Particularly scary is that the treaties, once signed and ratified, have the same status as constitutional law and cannot be altered or eclipsed by Congress or state legislatures. And their provisions must be enforced by U.S. courts.
Those who wish to preserve our sovereignty and democratic control over our future must rally to block these treaties, either by pressing Obama and Clinton not to sign them or by blocking their ratification.
Call Your Senators and tell them to vote NO!
Senator John Kerry Senator Scott Brown
Washington Office Boston Office Washington Office Boston Office (202) 224-2742 (617) 565-8519(202) 224-4543 (617) 565-3170
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++• International Criminal Court— Clinton has reversed George W. Bush’s policy and entered into negotiations over U.S. participation in the court. Specifically, the leftists who are sponsoring the court wish to create a new crime of “aggression,” which is essentially going to war without the approval of the United Nations. If we submit to the court’s jurisdiction, our presidents and Cabinet officials could be prosecuted criminally for going to war without U.N. approval. This would, of course, give Russia and China a veto over our military actions. Clinton says she will stop our military’s hands from being tied, but we all must realize that once we accept the International Criminal Court, we go down a slippery slope. The court could even prosecute Americans who have been cleared by our own judicial system.
• The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) has been signed, and the Obama administration — with the aid of RINO Sen. Richard Lugar (Ind.) — will push for its ratification as soon as Lugar’s primary in Indiana is over this year. LOST requires that the United States pay an international body half of its royalties from offshore drilling. The body would then distribute the funds as it sees fit to whichever nations it chooses. The United States would only have one vote out of 160 regarding where the money goes. LOST will also oblige us to hand over our offshore drilling technology to any nation that wants it … for free. Our own Senator Kerry is leading the charge for this treaty on behalf of the Obama Administration! Senator Kerry has held hearings on the Treaty and allowed 16 People to testify in favor of the treat and only 2 people to testify against the treaty. He is playing hardball, perhaps he is seeking favor to lock in his next venue as part of the Obama Administration, should they prevail in November! The word on the street from reliable sources is that Republican Senators who face an election in November have told Senator Kerry that if the treaty is brought up for a vote before November 6th hey would have to vote nay, but after they would vote yea! Ala Obama to Russia’s President Medvedev on an open mic.
President Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.
President Medvedev:” Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…
President Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”
President Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”
The American public is being played once again!!!
We must vet our Senators including Senator Brown before the election. After the election will be too late!
Senator Kerry: Called 7/24- Supports Treaty Senator Brown: CALLED 7/23, 8/14 BUT WILL NOT SAY
• Small-arms control — Clinton is about to negotiate on a global ban on export of small arms. It would only apply to private citizens but, of course, most small-arms deals come not from individuals or private firms but from governments, specifically those of the United States, Russia, China and Israel. The treaty would require each nation to adopt measures to stop exportation of small arms. It is easy to see how this could be a backdoor way to require national registration of all guns and to assert federal regulation over firearms. It would also require the registration of all ammunition to track its source once a gun is fired. The Second Amendment be damned!
Senator Kerry: CALLED 7/23 BUT WILL NOT SAY Senator Brown: Called 7/23 – Will not support Treaty
• Outer Space Code of Conduct— Under the guise of stopping debris from accumulating in outer space, the European Union has enlisted Clinton in negotiations over a code of conduct. The code would prohibit activities that are likely to generate debris in outer space — space littering. The code might inhibit or prohibit the United States from deploying anti-missile missiles on platforms in space, denying us the key weapon we need to counter Iranian, Chinese and North Korean missile threats. European leftists reacted angrily when G.W. Bush opted out of the ABM treaty banning defensive weapons. Now they seek to reimpose it under the guise of a code of conduct.
Senator Kerry: CALLED 7/24 BUT WILL NOT SAY Senator Brown: CALLED 7/23 BUT WILL NOT SAY
• Rights of the Child— Even more fanciful is a treaty Clinton plans to negotiate setting forth a code of rights for children, to be administered by a 14-member court set up for the purpose. The draft treaty obliges rich nations to provide funds for shelter, food, clothing and education for children in poor nations. This provision could create grounds to litigate to challenge the level of foreign aid we give as inadequate to meet our treaty obligations. Already, leftists in the United Kingdom are using the treaty to attack welfare cuts by the Cameron government.
• CONVENTION on the RIGHTS of PERSONS with DISABILITIES
Trick or Treaty
Our very own SENATOR KERRY once again is advocating for “…the global community[which] could force America to sanction sterilization or abortion for the disabled–at taxpayer expense! Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) tried to neutralize the threat yesterday during the mark-up in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Unfortunately, his amendment (which would have stopped the treaty from forcing abortion policy on countries that sign) was thwarted by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)
It’s the latest threat to parents’ rights that no one knows about–and yesterday, the Senate moved one step closer to making it the law of the land. Like most U.N. treaties, this one sounds harmless enough. But make no mistake–its innocuous name, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), masks a cunning attack on parental authority, unborn life, and U.S. sovereignty. Of course, this is a favorite strategy of liberal administrations: using treaties to get radical policies through the country’s backdoor. In this instance, it would bring our nation even closer to President Obama’s apparent goal of putting America under global governance.
As Phyllis Schafly points out, the U.S. already enacted the strongest piece of disabilities legislation in the world. This idea that the U.N. “can provide more benefits or protections for persons with disabilities than the U.S. is bizarre,” she writes in an excellent column that debunks the need for such a treaty. “The United States always treats individuals, able or disabled, rich or poor, innocent or guilty, better than any nation.” Democrats argue that it would help the rest of the world “catch up” to our standards. But, as Sen. Jim DeMint and others have made clear, the U.S. doesn’t need to sign away its rights to provide leadership in that area.
While this is a noble cause that embodies the American ethic–treating people with dignity and respect–it gives the U.N. a profound stake in U.S. law and the rights of people across the country. Specifically, the CRPD takes aim at parents, declaring that an international body–not moms and dads–will be the ultimate authority on issues like education. The treaty slips in phrases like “best interest of the child,” which, as Sen. Rick Santorum pointed out with me on last week’s radio show, are “red alert alarm words.” They mean that government officials or courts will be in the position of deciding what’s in your child’s best interest–not you. Under CRPD, the government would supersede parents in setting course plans for both gifted and special needs kids. The Homeschool Legal Defense Association is concerned–and rightly so. It maintains that this Convention signals a dramatic turnaround in parental rights.
And, of course, it wouldn’t be a U.N. proposal if it didn’t include a backdoor to greater abortion access. “The feminists saw to it that this treaty about disabilities includes language in Article 25 that requires signatories to ‘provide persons with disabilities… free or affordable health care,” Phyllis notes, “including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and population-based health programs.’” Translation: the global community could force America to sanction sterilization or abortion for the disabled–at taxpayer expense! Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) tried to neutralize the threat yesterday during the mark-up in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Unfortunately, his amendment (which would have stopped the treaty from forcing abortion policy on countries that sign) was thwarted by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) after a debate that you can watch here:
Although Sen. DeMint managed to delay the CRPD a week, the Committee, including three of its Republicans–Sens. John Barrasso (Wy.), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Johnny Isakson (Ga.)–voted yesterday to send the treaty to the Senate floor, where it could be ratified as early as next week. Between now and then, it is absolutely critical for people to see that what’s at stake in this debate, which is nothing short of our authority as parents–and as a nation. By law, the Convention will need 67 votes to pass, which means we need to persuade at least 34 senators to defeat it. Contact your senators today and urge them to vote down this deadly infringement on U.S. sovereignty. Your rights depend on it.
Senator Kerry: Is in Favor of this Treaty
Word on the street from reliable sources is that Our Senator Kerry will attempt to push this Treaty thru the Senate in early September as soon as they return to Washington. Our Senator believes that he has the votes to sneak it through while everyone is preoccupied with the election and children returing to school.
The fact of the matter is that this treaty would not benefit a single American!
New Questions About Elizabeth Warren’s Daughter’s Role in Voter Registration Lawsuit
MA is mailing 500,000 voter Registration forms to Welfare Recipients. The mailing was not sent by the MA Secretary of State but rather by the Welfare office and no other state has taken such dramatic action.
Elizabeth Warren’s Daughter’s Role in the Voter Registration Lawsuit is discussed byMichael Graham on America Live
President Obama’s utter disregard for our Constitution has now migrated to the lower echelons of our government bureaucracy. The chief of the Boston Patronage Machine, the inimitable Mayor “Mumbles” Menino, flexed his unconstitutional authority in an attempt to deny Chick-fil-A from opening a store in Boston. Menino’s rebuke is ostensibly because of the company’s “Christian values”.
In usual far-left fashion, Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel came out and backed Mumbles assault on Chick-fil-A, saying in a statement that Chick-fil-A would be unwelcome in his city.
Then of all people, Senator Scott Brown comes to the inimitable Mayor Menino’s aid and wrote from in his South Boston Headquarters that “I disagree with what the CEO from Chick-fil-A said. I was glad he spoke further and said that his company does not discriminate.” Come on Senator, you know better than to conjure up unjustifiable images of discrimination.
What Dan Cathy, president of the Christen rooted Atlanta-based company, said in an interview is that, “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.” Cathy’s father founded the chain and instilled biblically-based principles in its operations, including the practice of closing on Sundays in respect to the Christian day of worship.
Oh my gosh! A chain that closes on Sundays to respect biblical teachings and supports biblically based tenets! These guys must be a threat to our National Security so to hell with their 1st Amendment Rights!
Enter stage left, Mayor Michael Bloomberg who appears to arrive from a SYFY Episode because he disagrees with Mumbles and sides with Chicken-fil-A and their incontrovertible right under our Constitution to operate a store in Boston.
Even stranger than Mayor Bloomberg’s SYFY Episode is the Boston Globe’s editorial statement that, “The president of Chick-fil-A opposes gay marriage. While this view goes against the grain in a state that made history by embracing it, it’s no reason for Mayor Thomas M. Menino to oppose a Chick-fil-A restaurant in Boston.”
This episode once again proves that politics can indeed be stranger than fiction!