Skip to comments.Liberal Europeans Demand Right to Vote in U.S. Elections
Posted on 01/04/2008 2:06:34 AM PST by 1Peter2:16
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Thu, 2008-01-03 11:45 A quote from the editorial in the Brussels newspaper De Standaard, 3 January 2008
American presidential elections are not home affairs. American decisions have repercussions all over the globe. The American mortgage crisis affects banks in Europe. The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich. The American refusal to care for the environment causes the North Pole ice to melt and coastal areas in Asia to flood. A weakened dollar and an immense budget deficit affect the global economy.
Hence, the world should be given the right to vote. Because the current situation is a blatant case of taxation without representation, against which the Americans rebelled in 1776. But of course the world will not be allowed to vote. The best we can hope for is that the Americans choose a leader who is deeply aware of the U.S.s responsibility, as a superpower, for the rest of mankind.
The international community was able to limit Americas hegemony somewhat through organisations for international consultation, agreements and the corresponding judicial apparatus. But that system is in crisis, partly through the actions of the current American president.
The link didn’t seem to work. Try:
This one works. I think!
Admissions and confessions of those who would do us in for their own benefit...
Food for Oil.
I think the word “demand” is a little strong. They can’t demand anything, they might wish or fantasize, but that’s about it.
Oil for Food.
I'm going to bed now.
Cluster or incendiary?
Oh my yes! Wouldn’t that be fun!
Entitlement mentality gone mad. So, the Euro-whiners want the vote here because they have a stake in the outcome? Too bad. Children, convicts, and barnyard animals also have a stake in the outcome but they can’t vote here either.
There must be something wrong with the Euros’ logic.
Well, then they can walk in from Mexico, just like everyone else!
Remember the news story from 2004 that claimed if foreigners could vote, John Kerry would have won the election? My response was: Big deal, if the animal kingdom could vote, Ralph Nader would be our next president!
:)...they never consider anything like that
I demand the right to determine the editorial policies of the European media. That seems to be who calls the shots there and I have a stake in the trash they feed to their terminally gullible audience.
I also want to sit on the boards of the 10 largest European corporations. I definitely have a stake in what they do.
Huckabee is on record saying that to demand proof of citizenship before allowing someone to register to vote is racist. So I suppose the Huckster would be their man — although Huck thinks it should be illegal for a patriotic American who holds dual citizenship to vote in another country’s elections.
Ooo, Oooo. Let ME say it...
Go to HELL, Europe!
If Europeans want to vote in American elections, they will have to do it like all the rest and come here through Mexico.
They will use "international law" and organizations (they actually take the UN seriously!), and the 35% of the US population that agrees with them, to attempt to take us down.
... American greatness makes Brussels feel like little crapsters.
” 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.”
De Standaard simply printed the winning entry of the “Rant Like Olbermann” contest.
The US did this ever since WWII.
we have a better record on stopping suicide bombers then the US military.
I don’t realize how old I am until these types of whines start showing up, and I recall how little people know of diplomacy, intellectual exchange, etc.
As much as the whine is there, they don’t wish to have the right to vote so much as the right to determine which candidates we’re able to vote for. European socialists are watching this, and they’re not sure who to root for - they know a Hillary win would bring back the cold shoulder they got from Slick, an Obama win means nothing to them, same with Edwards, since neither came calling upon the European intellectuals for advice.
And heaven help the idea of a conservative in the White House again.
But I suppose it makes for better reading for them vs column inch after column inch about how their much desired multiethnic society is falling apart, how their socialized medicine is falling apart, and how quickly the tax base is shrinking vs the ever growing dependant class.
Better to hate the world’s largest economy than to contemplate the idea of making one’s own into something to be admired. That might mean losing one of those six weeks of vacation or the unsocialist idea of a 40 hour work week.
Hey Europe - - GFY!
the flaw is to demand voting rites for the presidents election - we should demand to have one common independant monetary instituion.
They can vote here. All it takes is for them to become a state. There was serious talk in the Thatcher government about not signing the Maastricht Treaty and joining the EEC, but about creating and signing on to a Trans-Atlantic NAFTA of the US, Canada, and the UK instead. It never got anywhere, but if Belgium wants to vote in US elections, then they need to pay taxes here and let us run things there. I sort of doubt that’s what they really want though.
Logic, we dont need no steenkin’ logic
I didn't read further than this. What a load of whining DUmmy crap.
Then it would be between Kucinich and Paul.
Those darn entangling alliances...
notice how they gloss over the fact the south pole is freezing up. The south pole ice is expanding.
(that must be for next week)
Cluster or incendiary?
W-78 for Brussells. I never really liked the "Mouse That Roared" movie, anyway. Like a Yorkshire Terrier on crack, they have this delusion that they are going to Rule The World by nipping everyone's ankles.
..guess that depends on whos' meaning of the word "stop" ..is it stop like in delay?....or stop like in "pick out your virgin"
So, basically, they are now in line with the opinions of Walter Cronkite and the rest of the liberals in this country...
WALTER CRONKITE PROMOTES DEMOCRATIC FEDERAL WORLD GOVERNMENT
Received W.F.A.’s Norman Cousins Global Governance Award on 19 October 1999
I am greatly honored to receive this award for two reasons: first, I believe as Norman Cousins did that the first priority of humankind in this era is to establish an effective system of world law that will assure peace with justice among the peoples of the world; second, I feel sentimental about this award because half a century ago Norman offered me a job as spokesman and Washington lobbyist for the World Federalist organization, which was then in its infancy.
I chose instead to continue in the world of journalism. For many years, I did my best to report on the issues of the day in as objective a manner as possible. When I had my own strong opinions, as I often did, I tried not to communicate them to my audience. Now, however, my circumstances are different. I am in a position to speak my mind. And that is what I propose to do.
Those of us who are living today can influence the future of civilization. We can influence whether our planet will drift into chaos and violence, or whether through a monumental educational and political effort we will achieve a world of peace under a system of law where individual violators of that law are brought to justice.
For most of this fairly long life I have been an optimist harboring a belief that as our globe shrank, as our communication miracles brought us closer together, we would begin to appreciate the commonality of our universal desire to live in peace and that we would do something to satisfy that yearning of all peoples. Today I find it harder to cling to that hope. For how many thousands of years now have we humans been what we insist on calling “civilized”? And yet, in total contradiction, we also persist in the savage belief that we must occasionally, at least, settle our arguments by killing one another.
While we spend much of our time and a great deal of our treasure in preparing for war, we see no comparable effort to establish a lasting peace. Meanwhile, emphasizing the sloth in this regard, those advocates who work for world peace by urging a system of world government are called impractical dreamers. Those “impractical dreamers” are entitled to ask their critics, “what is so practical about war?”
It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order. But the American colonies did it once and brought forth one of the most nearly perfect unions the world has ever seen. The circumstances were vastly different, obviously. Yet just because the task appears forbiddingly hard, we should not shirk it. We cannot defer this responsibility to posterity. Democracy, civilization itself, is at stake. Within the next few years we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war and ever more destructive weaponry to a new system governed by a democratic U.N. federation.
Let’s focus on a few specifics of what the leadership of the World Federalist movement believe must be done now to advance the rule of world law. For starters, we can draw on the wisdom of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution of 1787. The differences among the American states then were as bitter as differences among nation-states in the world today. In their almost miraculous insight, the Founders of our country invented ‘federalism,’ a concept that is rooted in the rights of the individual. Our federal system guarantees a maximum of freedom but provides it in a framework of law and justice. Our forefathers believed that the closer the laws are to the people, the better. Cities legislate on local matters; states make decisions on matters within their borders; and the national government deals with issues that transcend the states, such as interstate commerce and foreign relations. That is federalism.
Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. We need a system of enforceable world law —a democratic federal world government— to deal with world problems. What Alexander Hamilton wrote about the need for law among the 13 states applies today to the approximately 200 sovereignties in our global village: “To look for a continuation of harmony between a number of independent unconnected sovereignties in the same neighborhood, would be to disregard the uniform course of human events, and to set at defiance the accumulated experience of ages.” Today the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy. We must replace the anarchic law of force with a civilized force of law.
Ours will neither be a perfect world, nor a world without disagreement and occasional violence. But it will be a world where the vast majority of national leaders will consistently abide by the rule of world law, and those who won’t will be dealt with effectively and with due process by the structures of that same world law. We will never have a city without crime, but we would never want to live in a city that had no system of law to deal with criminals.
Let me make three suggestions for immediate action that would move us in a direction firmly in the American tradition of law and democracy.
1. Keep our promises: We helped create the U.N. and to develop the U.N. assessment formula. Americans overwhelmingly want us to pay our U.N. dues, with no crippling limitations. We owe it to the world. In fact, we owe it as well to our national self-esteem.
2. Ratify the Treaty to Ban Land Mines, the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Most important, we should sign and ratify the Treaty for a permanent International Criminal Court. That Court will enable the world to hold individuals accountable for crimes against humanity.
3. Consider, after 55 years, the possibility of a more representative and democratic system of decision making at the U.N. This should include both revision of the veto in the Security Council and adoption of a weighted voting system for the General Assembly. The World Federalists have endorsed Richard Hudson’s Binding Triad proposal. George Soros, in “The Crisis of Global Capitalism,” has given serious attention to this concept which would be based upon not only one-nation-one-vote but also on population and contributions to the U.N. budget. Resolutions adopted by majorities in each of these areas would be binding, enforceable law. Within the powers given to it in the Charter, the U.N. could then deal with matters of reliable financing, a standing U.N. peace force, development, the environment and human rights.
Some of you may ask why the Senate is not ratifying these important treaties and why the Congress is not paying our U.N. dues. As with the American rejection of the League of Nations, our failure to live up to our obligations to the U.N. is led by a few willful senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation’s conscience. They pander to and are supported by the Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing. Their leader, Pat Robertson, has written that we should have a world government but only when the messiah arrives. Attempts for world order before that time are the work of the Devil! This small but well-organized group has intimidated both the Republican Party and the Clinton administration. It has attacked presidents since F.D.R. for supporting the U.N. Robertson explains that these presidents are the unwitting agents of Lucifer.
The only way we who believe in the vision of a democratic world federal government can effectively overcome this reactionary movement is to organize a strong educational counteroffensive stretching from the most publicly visible people in all fields to the humblest individuals in every community. That is the vision and program of the World Federalist Association. The strength of the World Federalist program would serve an important auxiliary purpose at this particular point in our history. There would be immediate diplomatic advantages if the world knew that this country was even beginning to explore the prospect of strengthening the U.N. We would appear before the peoples of the world as the champion of peace for all by the equitable sharing of power. This in sharp contrast to the growing concern that we intend to use our current dominant military power to enforce a sort of pax Americana.
Our country today is at a stage in our foreign policy similar to that crucial point in our nation’s early history when our Constitution was produced in Philadelphia. Let us hear the peal of a new international liberty bell that calls us all to the creation of a system of enforceable world law in which the universal desire for peace can place its hope and prayers. As Carl Van Doren has written, “History is now choosing the founders of the World Federation. Any person who can be among that number and fails to do so has lost the noblest opportunity of a lifetime.”
I must have missed that particular passage in the U.S. Constitution...
If they get to vote in ours, do we get to vote in theirs? It’s only fair.
If space aliens could vote - Kucinich???
... and noone said it will be female virgins.
oh come on - you can’t even vote correctly in your’s.
Liberal Europeans DEMANDS the right to vote in US elections. Jeez, sorry Europeans — the only way is by 2 ways — 1) you INVADE us or 2)You move to the USA and become a US CITIZEN - and when you do, you’ll find out (if you got any brains) that FREEDOM is SPECIAL.
I know #1 would never happen because you are LETTING MUSLIMS INVADE your countries, as opposed to US as we are TRYING to keep ILLEGALS (and TERRORISTS?) from INVADING us - thou 90% of our congress don’t care about BUILDING THE FENCE!!
Sorry LIBERAL EUROPEANS — but you would rather have the UN as the GOVERNMENT, but we want THE PEOPLE to be the GOVERNMENT!!
In other words, LIBERAL EUROPEANS, DROP DEAD!! You ruin Europe — we DO NOT WANT YOU TO RUIN THE USA!!
“Children, convicts, and barnyard animals also have a stake in the outcome but they cant vote here either.”
Oh yeah? Just wait ‘till November!
Typical Euro-Socialist: saying America is responsible for them and for the rest of the world. Oh, how deeply I despise socialists!