Palin Damned by LOST Letter? [Vanity]

Office of Governor of Alaska [archived at globalsolutions.org] ^ | September 13, 2007 | Gov. Sarah Palin

[backwoods-engineer]

But the facts remain unchanged. Palin employs as her foreign policy adviser a man who has been on Soros’ payroll for years.

It's almost not worth it, refuting Trig Truther Tom, but does anyone want to take a shot? I mean, he's conceded the LOST letter thing, because he's changed tactics for the second time today.

Can we agree that neither Randy S. or Sarah Palin support George Soros' goals? Can we start there, Triple T?

[dforest]

What this tells me is that in 2007, Palin was in line with many Republicans. They, along with most democrats, were for ratification of this treaty.

Conservatives have never been for the treaty.

I don’t think Palin is damned by this, but it does say that in 2007 she wasn’t too deep into conservative thought.

[EternalVigilance]

Whatever Scheunemann’s agenda really is, he’s taking large sums of money from a man who more than any other I’m aware of is devoted to destroying my country.

Your other junk isn’t even worth addressing. It’s pissant level nonsense.

[dforest]

What this tells me is that in 2007, Palin was in line with many Republicans. They, along with most democrats, were for ratification of this treaty.

Conservatives have never been for the treaty.

I don’t think Palin is damned by this, but it does say that in 2007 she wasn’t too deep into conservative thought.

[dforest]

What this tells me is that in 2007, Palin was in line with many Republicans. They, along with most democrats, were for ratification of this treaty.

Conservatives have never been for the treaty.

I don’t think Palin is damned by this, but it does say that in 2007 she wasn’t too deep into conservative thought.

[EternalVigilance]

She’s never recanted her support for LOST. So, if, as you say, she was not a deep thinker then, she still has not explored the depths of what it means to be a conservative, apparently.

Same goes for several other important foundational constitutional matters she’s always had wrong.

[Al B.]

Thanks, just trying to lay the pros and cons out there and provide some info and historical context on the treaty so people can form their own opinions.

[calcowgirl]

Conservatives have been fighting UNCLOS/LOST for 3 decades now. Palin needs to gracefully reverse positions on this. That FReepers are actually trying to justify LOST as a good thing is nauseating and scary.

The assertion that UNCLOS improves mineral rights is just crazy and wrong. Establishing a new UN “International Seabed Authority” and declaring underwater resources the “common heritage of mankind” makes us no better off. But it does create a permanent revenue source for the UN through taxing authority and make us prone to international tribunals, which often act in blocs against U.S. interests.

Please educate yourself. It has little to do with Sarah and everything to do with sovereignty. There are years worth of articles here at FR to read, thousands of them. Read the comments and you will see almost universal opposition to this treaty, long before Sarah Palin was on the scene.

Here are a few that give some history:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1390635/posts
Ed Meese: Reagan Would Still Oppose Law of the Sea Treaty
Human Events ^ | April 25, 2005 | Edwin Meese
Posted on Monday, April 25, 2005 7:56:31 AM by bigsky

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1859216/posts
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: (Ed Meese opposes Bush)
The Heritage Foundation ^ | May 16, 2007 | Edwin Meese III
Posted on Sunday, July 01, 2007 10:13:28 AM by Founding Father

http://www.aim.org/guest-column/unclos-or-lost-a-bad-idea-resurfaces/

“UNCLOS” or “LOST” ? A Bad Idea Resurfaces
By Paul M. Weyrich | May 30, 2007

[calcowgirl]

...in 2007, Palin was in line with many Republicans.

Very few were for it. Lugar, McCain, Snowe... the typical RINO bunch. Reagan killed it and it stayed pretty dead until Lugar brought it up again during GW's second term. And GW went soft on it until he was met with a wall of opposition from Republicans so it stalled. Nothing has changed to make it any more palatable than in 1982, IMO.