Wednesday, January 2, 2008
The Secret of Ron Paul’s Success
Elections piece by
Cliff Kincaid
Many in the media are intrigued by Rep. Ron Paul’s success in the presidential campaign but usually focus on how much money he is raising. In terms of issues, some think he is rising in the polls because of his opposition to the Iraq War. That may be a factor, but my research convinces me that he is doing well primarily because he has a traditional Republican message of returning to smaller and less expensive government. More than that, however, he is talking about the threat posed by global institutions.
The media, which adore the U.N. and believe it is the last best hope of mankind, do not recognize the appeal of Ron Paul’s no-global-government message. Most reporters probably think it is rather silly. But it is becoming a major issue among the conservative Republican grassroots. It is so big that it could sink Senator John McCain, who is on record in support of U.S. participation in the U.N.’s notorious International Criminal Court (ICC).
The ICC could become a major issue, regardless of what happens in the presidential campaign, as the $6.4 billion left-wing MacArthur Foundation has indicated that it will spend tens or perhaps even hundreds of millions of dollars in a campaign to force U.S. acceptance of the ICC and “raise the profile of international justice issues during 2008.”
In a speech entitled, “The Case for an International System of Justice,” MacArthur President Jonathan Fanton declared that the ICC has jurisdiction over “hate speech,” a comment suggesting that this U.N.-backed tribunal could even be given the go-ahead to prosecute talk-radio hosts like Michael Savage for being critical of radical Islam. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has been trying to force Savage off the air by threatening his advertisers.
It just so happens that the main author of the ICC is a Muslim associated with CAIR by the name of M. Cherif Bassiouni, a Professor of Law at DePaul University.
While the ICC looms as a major issue, conservative activists have been currently trying to defeat the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which is now pending in the U.S. Senate. They found that Ron Paul had come out against it many years ago. He was way ahead of his time in confronting the dangers posed by international arrangements, treaties and institutions that sap U.S. sovereignty.
He introduced a bill to get us out of the U.N., which not only would have saved some of our sovereignty but billions of American tax dollars that ended up in the coffers of corrupt bureaucrats.
Mike Huckabee has tapped into conservative sentiment on this issue as well, such as when he told the “Values Voters” summit in Washington that he not only opposed the Law of the Sea Treaty but wanted to see federal judges impeached for using foreign law in their judicial decisions. The comments drew strong applause. After that speech, most of the Republican candidates started falling in line against the Law of the Sea Treaty. McCain, who once supported it, now suggested he was opposed but would have to study it.
Paul goes much further. His website includes an issues category labeled “American independence and Sovereignty.” Among other things, it declares, “So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites. The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned.”
Paul also denounces the U.N. for promoting a global tax on America, saying, “…if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to tax us, we will need leadership from the White House.” Such a tax was proposed at the recent U.N. climate change conference, where the Bush Administration promised to help draft a new global warming treaty tougher and potentially more damaging to our economy than the first one that it rejected.
A fascinating article has just appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on where the candidates stand on the U.N.’s International Criminal Court. In looking at Democrats and Republicans, it notes, “At one end of the spectrum is Mike Gravel, a former senator from Alaska and one of the Democrats who backs U.S. membership in the court. In a recent San Francisco appearance, he said he considers himself a ‘globalist’ and ‘a citizen of the human race, first and foremost. Only secondly do I consider myself an American.’ At the other end is Ron Paul, a Republican congressman from Texas, who said in 2002 that both the court and the United Nations ‘are inherently incompatible with national sovereignty. America must either remain a constitutional republic or submit to international law because it cannot do both.’”
“Unlike the rest of the Republican field,” reporter Bob Egelko said, “Sen. John McCain has said he would like to see the United States join the international court, although he would first require more protections for U.S. personnel.” The ICC would strip Americans of Bill of Rights protections if they were apprehended and put on trial for alleged international crimes. The article did not explain how McCain would change the institution, which is now in existence, in order to require those protections. Most of the rest of the world, led by the European Union, rejected any safeguards for U.S. citizens.
One of the most critical constitutional protections rejected by the ICC is trial by jury. Foreign judges preside over ICC cases. So it really cannot be “fixed” to accommodate American concerns.
The fact of McCain’s support for the anti-American ICC could prove fatal to his campaign, if it is widely publicized. It has gotten very little attention until now. However, I discovered a press release from the Citizens for Global Solutions (CGS) back in January of 2005 hailing McCain for his support of the ICC. While McCain was quoted as saying about the ICC, “I’m not satisfied that there are enough safeguards” for U.S. citizens, the CGS said that “his declaration at the World Economic Forum was the strongest indication to date that he would be in favor of the United States joining the ICC in the near future.”
One can understand why McCain wouldn’t want these comments publicized, as he seems to be gathering momentum in the presidential race, and why he wouldn’t want the CGS “endorsement” of his views given any publicity. The CGS is the new name of the World Federalist Association, a group that openly favors world government financed by global taxes. Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton endorsed the group’s activities when she was First Lady.
That was on the occasion of the organization giving former CBS Evening News anchorman Walter Cronkite its global governance award. Cronkite used the event to promote the Law of the Sea Treaty, the International Criminal Court, and several other U.N.-backed measures.
It is interesting to note that Cronkite’s agenda is the same as that of Hillary and most national Democratic candidates. Will any of the national Republican presidential candidates other than Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee make a big issue out of it? By doing so, they will have to endure the ridicule of the national press. But it could help them capture the White House in the end.
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report.
http://www.aim.org/aim_column/6011_0_3_0_C/
HowardWasRight 
more...
more... 
