Posted on 09/13/2016 6:23:36 AM PDT by VitacoreVision
YES!!
Mike Rogers just made my good list
Great try Congressman Rogers but the efforts will go no where. Plus, odumbo would veto it immediately should it pass.
Well, there is good news occasionally.
Don’t you think Trump will take care of that? Elect him first.
Double YES !!!!!
Because Obama will probably be the next Secretary-General of the UN.
PRyno could cut off funding.....
BitWielder1: Not going to happen.
...
The UN just picked a fight with Trump. Trump supporters can take the UN down.
UN “Human Rights” Boss Equates Trump, Farage With ISIS
09 September 2016
http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/24026-in-bizarre-meltdown-un-leader-equates-trump-with-isis
“the United States makes up almost a quarter of the U.N.s annual budget, the U.N”
Why? There is close to 200 members. We should be paying about 1/20th of the annual budget...start there.
US out of the UN
UN out of the US
So here’s the downside of that:
The US is currently one of the permanent members of the Security Council, with veto power. If we exit the UN, we lose that element of control, which means a couple of things:
First, we hang Israel out to dry. The US is generally the only voice in the UN supporting them, and frequently has to exercise its veto to override UN resolutions condemning or otherwise attacking Israel.
Second, we open ourselves up to all kinds of hassle. If we’re not participating, and not able to block other nations from imposing their petty vendettas against us, any two-bit tinhorn dictatorship can impose UN sanctions on the US. It’s easy to dismiss such concern, given the general ineffectiveness of the UN, but the US depends on a lot of the world to handle the production and service of its economy, and buy its debt. It would be very easy for our “partners” to use UN influence to restructure their relationships with us to be more favorable to their side, and we’d have little to no recourse.
I’m all for pushing the UN offshore, and for scaling back our financial support of an organization that has little interest in favoring our interests, but we should not relinquish our own influence.
Rogers of Alabama has been a Yes vote on all the assorted trades deals during his tenure including TPP. He wasn’t worried about US sovereignty during all those votes.
I don’t know if he has serious Democrat opposition, but this bill will go nowhere and looks like something to try and score a few phony sovereignty points, sort of like Rove and W throwing out a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in February of 2004, that had no chance of passage, as a sop to conservatives. Now what was going on in 2004?
Finally someone with some balls in Congress.
YES, YES, and Oh Hell YEAH!
“”Rep. Rogers noted that many of his constituents in East Alabama would likely agree with his position that U.S. government participation in the UN should end immediately.””
It would be a dream come true. Why on earth is he not including the entire state of AL - constituents in East Alabama??? I think the whole country would be in favor!!! I would hope it would include CLOSING UP SHOP and moving elsewhere!
Tell the 47% it would mean money saved and more welfare for them to get them on board.
I’m not promoting Mike Rogers, I’m just supporting this Bill and similar bills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.