If the UN takes over the world this is a good thing, because than Christ will return really soon, look for George Bush and Prince Charles to take the lead.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

[...] highly unlikely at the undeniable cost to American taxpayers in a mid term election year. And, as I pointed out late October, much of the success of Copenhagen depended upon Obama and the US Congress, implementing American [...]

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Carl,
I believe Obama wants to be KING, not president. If he helps the USA to fail and be taken over, he believes he will be crowned KING. You can’t be king in a republic. We are not a democracy. The propaganda news media calls it a democracy because they don’t want us to be reminded of the Republican party.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I just read the document and it is a nightmare. The world “Conference of the Parties (COP)” can legally take land, change zoning, charge penalties and override establed laws in any signing nation.

The EBT (Executive Body on Technology) will be the strong arm of the COP implementing what they’re told.

How these bodies are elected is so vague it’s frightening.

Developed nations foot the cost and pay penalties for years of being high emitters. Third World countries get the money for not polluting. The COP have vote to change any law in any country, pick on any industry if they can related it to global climate

This document is the end of democracy. Read the entire document before you support it. If Obama sign on, it’s becasue he’ll try to be the leader of the new world order!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

” Amazing how all the ‘enlightened’ liberals in our country are so eager to throw their money at these people”

Correction:

“Amazing how all the ‘enlightened’ liberals in our country are so eager to throw *our* money at these people”

Most of them will be exempt!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

For example where I live: we (the citizens) voted down a ‘storm water’ tax. It didn’t pass. The city shortly thereafter, put it to an internal vote and decided we all needed it anyway, and made it law. So even though it didn’t go through (failed by a large margin) the politicians knew what was ‘right’ and passed it anyway. In short, they needed to expand their budget for the city, and this was one way to do so. When it got voted down, so did their funding for extravagant lunches.

Now they are coming out and saying that if we don’t vote for yet another tax increase, we loose our firemen, police officers, and the parks will start shutting down (a little exaggerated of course – but not far from the mark). They also said the same thing 2 years ago, and everything turned out great! They ended up having to budget. It actually made news. To me, I simply ask: if you can’t handle the budget that you have, what is going to happen with a bigger one? Seems all we do is fund endless waste. Once the money runs out, we apply a name to the waste (such as global warming) and then funnel in more funds to the crooks. Amazing how all the ‘enlightened’ liberals in our country are so eager to throw their money at these people. I guess when you’re spineless, your brains end up spending a lot of time on the floor in belly button lint and old macaroni and cheese.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Obama wants to be king, not president. He can’t be king in a republic. We are not a democracy.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

SC Chris, it’s always wise to let your representatives know where you stand… even when they ignore you. LOL But you have to remember most of the nation is very simplistic on their politics. If the “energy” bill gets passed, and no one is raising a stink about it now, what makes you think a Copenhagen treaty is going to cost them their re’election?

As I said in my headline…. it’s stealth political BS. No one connects the dots for Joe and Josephine Q. Public between this bill that snuck thru the House during the summer, and will now sneak thru the Senate while we’re battling over health care, Afghanistan and Fox news.

Also, if you read the treaty language, you’ll find they are creating an official advisory bond between “science” and “politics” by mandating any nation’s laws are based on “sound” science. This is a serious deviation from the very foundations of science itself, and I find it hard to believe that the industry has become so corrupt as to even consider this unholy alliance. Which, of course, brings up the second burning question… just who is it that determines just what science is “sound”? Ah, the dichotomy reigns supreme in this int’l doublespeak.

In your world, we’re hoping that China remains obstinate, and India refuses to allow the UN to quash their own rise to an economic superpower. That may be entirely possible. In which case, the treaty will become a “suggestion” (the accepted alternative by the Danish PM) instead of “international law” (which is the stated quest, along with all authority and power). If you read the treaty text, you’ll see a lot of “shall/should” choices in there. The obvious being one is another UN worthless resolution without teeth, and the other is one gifted with powers of enforcement and penalty.

I gotta tell you, Chris… I pine to live in your world INRE India and China. But the back room politics, side business deals and pressures often surmount the logical. It’s a risky bet, guy. We’re all just mushrooms, sitting in the dark under a pile of international manure with keyboards and mice in hand.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@MataHarley:
You do, of course, have a point Mata, with regards to the lack of outward dissent amongst some so-called”Republicans” in Congress about the ‘climate change’ hokey pokey. I guess I’d have to bank on that they, as well as Democrats, would think twice if they know that votes in the future depend on their decisions now. And, that means that we need to contact our Senators and Congressmen and let them know how we feel. I’m sure they know this isn’t popular amongst most Americans, but it wouldn’t hurt to remind them, and in fact, we need to do just that. I want to start demanding they provide us with scientific evidence on their claims on climate change. I know it’s not about evidence to them, but some grander power grab, but there’s got to be some common sense left amongst our representatives, and I truly believe there is.

I’m removing all doubt now about my ignorance on this topic, but I don’t think anything has changed with regards to India and China, and I’d think that would still be a huge obstacle.
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE58747420090908 .

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Yes, SoCal Chris. It would, to my understanding. Any foreign treaty needs to be ratified by Congress.

I guess the burning question here would be, since so many so-called “conservative” Republicans support “climate change” legislation, why would you not think it would fly thru easily with the current Congressional make up of Liberal/progressives and RINOs? After all, they already passed the groundwork “climate change” legislation in the house, and the ready-and-waiting sister bill is in committee in the Senate? ( with eight Republican’s help in the House)

In other words…. how many “conservative” Republicans have you heard say they are against climate change regulations? If this bill passes in the Senate and is sent to the Oval Office desk, there is little for them to dissent against with the UN regulations. Remember, they don’t read anything, and it doesn’t take a lot of un’conservative GOP’ers to send it on it’s merry way.

Like or Dislike: 0  0