Wanna-be president of the world
By Henry Lamb
It has to be a concern when a U.S. presidential candidate arranges to make a campaign speech in Berlin, where he tells a crowd of German youngsters that "I come to you as a citizen of the world."
Why was he campaigning in Berlin?
Why does he identify himself as a "citizen of the world?"
What does this say about the man who wants to be President of the United States?
For one thing, it says that the curriculum advanced by the UNESCO and the National Education Association for more than half a century has been effective. Since 1949, UNESCO, supported by the NEA, has been promoting a world core curriculum that teaches students that national sovereignty is evil, and that world citizenship is a virtue. This twisted idea is advanced by the International Baccalaureate program, and a close study will reveal that the Civics textbooks produced by the Center for Civic Education promotes global citizenship rather than national sovereignty.
Obama learned his "global governance" lessons well.
It has to be a concern when a U.S. presidential candidate chose to spend 20 years worshiping at the feet of a man who preaches what he calls "black liberation theology." The bottom line of this so-called theology is condemnation of America<a/>.
It has to be a concern when a U.S. presidential candidate admits that his mentor during his formative teen-age years was Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party USA, controlled directly from Moscow. Davis was identified as a "bitter opponent of capitalism" in a report submitted to a Senate committee investigating the scope of Soviet activities in the United States.
It has to be a concern when a U.S. presidential candidate, whose platform is nothing more than "change that we can believe in," supported by orchestrated chants of "yes we can." His background and his public performance, such as it is, strongly suggest that the "change" he has in mind is nothing less than a transformation to socialism for the United States. What's worse, is his apparent intention to change the United States from a sovereign nation to an obedient member of the United Nation's global neighborhood. Why else would he be campaigning in Berlin and Europe and telling his audiences "…this is our moment; this is our time."
The last Democrat administration embraced and advanced global governance. It revived the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. It signed the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Kyoto Protocol, and the U.N.'s International Criminal Court. It implemented Agenda 21 with no Congressional debate or approval. And it called on UNESCO to invoke the World Heritage Treaty to block the development of a privately owned gold mine. Each of these initiatives surrenders a measure of national sovereignty to the United Nations.
The Bush administration slowed the rush to global governance a little by revoking the U.
S. signature on the International Criminal Court and withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol. But he rejoined UNESCO, and launched the Security and Prosperity Partnership to build a multi-national regional economic unit in the same pattern as the European Union.
Barack Obama makes no pretense about America being first in the world. He touts his intention to elevate the United States in the eyes of the rest of the world. The only way to do this is to yield to the demands of the rest of the world. These demands include Obama's Global Poverty Act which will increase U.S. contributions to U.N. relief programs by $845 billion. This bill will make the U.S. conform to the U.N. dictate that each nation contributes .7 of one percent to international aid. The U.S. already out-gives the rest of the world by far.
Obama has already announced that he will yield to the demands of the rest of the world by unilaterally disarming. It has to be a concern when a U.S. presidential candidate campaigns with a promise to reduce America's military capability. This is precisely what Iran, North Korea, and the rest of our enemies want. It is precisely what the Islamic terrorists want. This may be why Obama is the preferred choice of all these countries for the presidency of the United States.
It is more than a concern; it is downright alarming that these realities can be overlooked by a major political party, and by a large number of American voters. There is no virtue in change when the change is certain to be toward a socialist economic system that embraces global governance. Change that moves away from capitalism, free markets, private property, strong defense, and absolute reliance on the U.S. Constitution, is change that must be rejected.