Obama backs UN against the US - Curtains for Obama?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by FORMER_FYRDMAN, Aug 31, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    FORMER_FYRDMAN LE Book Reviewer

    Barack Obama has bowed before the UN over Arizona immigration law – Telegraph Blogs

    Telegraph think piece - Obama is apparently trying to pressure Arizona over immigration legislation by siding with the UN. Surely that has to be electoral suicide (there's talk of the Democrats losing up to 12 Senate seats) and certainly some of the comments under the piece from Americans seem pretty wild. Can any of our US colleagues enlighten us?
  2. The funniest thing about the Arizona immigration law is that all it does is restate federal immigration law at state level.

    Thus, in reality, it should be a total non-issue outside academic circles who should be discussing the constitutional issue of whether an individual state can enforce federal law in an area in which the feds have primacy.

    But, the fact is that the federal law is not being enforced (now, just think which party benefits from allowing tens of millions of illegals in to grant them amnesty later and then citizenship...) and hence the people in the border states are rightly annoyed, hence the law.

    Now, if you want an example of a really harsh anti-illegal immigration law, look at Mexico's.
  3. How the **** can the UN tell them anything?...have they even looked at what Mexico does to illegals?.....we saw what happened to 72 of the poor bastard's last week, shot and dumped.
  4. I wish I could figure it out but I join many of my countrymen in our collective amazement. the only thing I can guess is it is a rather ham-handed appeal to His "American Unexceptionalism" base.

    FORMER_FYRDMAN LE Book Reviewer

    JJH - how angry is the general populous getting? Is it a sort of British grumpiness or something more substantial? Or, on the other hand, is the whole case overblown?
  6. Another funny aspect of this (evocative of the amazing confessions of our current masters on most any of the progressive legislation foisted on the American people that the proponents have not even bothered to read the legislation ) is the immediate howls of protest from our Masters when Arizona dared pass this law in which they railed against the "racism" etc. of the law and then in yet another incredible example of their hubris, conceded they had not even looked at it.
  7. They don't read the bills they (or the party they carry water for) pass, so it's a bit much to expect the poor dears to actually bother to read a bill that someone else has passed before going on TV and criticising it.
  8. True-I regret setting such a high bar.
  9. He's going to get himself shot. Conspiracy #1 among the armed crazies is of a UN takeover.
  10. Define "armed crazies"
  11. Yeah that pretty much hits the nail on the head for me. I would have settled for "heavily armed men with military training unable to see reason or distinguish fact from opinion", but that article highlights it pretty well.
  12. As a percentage of the population they are miniscule and no doubt closely watched. There are many others here, however, who do consider the UN to be a real danger to the entire world in various ways but who also wish no harm to Him whatsoever.
  13. I agree entirely. There is one thing that really irks me. The law requires that an individual seeking naturalization must pass a test in the English Language (OK, US version, "color" instead of "colour" etc). During the Clinton years the test was dumbed down to the degree that many citizens cannot even read a ballot to vote and now there have been court orders requiring ballots be provided in Cantonese, Hmong, Khmer etc. I could understand if they required Spanish as Puerto Rico is US and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo requuires that we recognise the rights of the Spanish speaking in the states of California, Nevada, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona. If the law requires that you learn English learn English or don't vote. However the Democrats know that immigrants tend to vote for them so they want them all allowed to vote. IIRC, in Boston last year the US Justice Department required that ballots be provided in 11 languages

    The racism argument is used here in the states against anyone who opposes our Dear Leader.