We have been exposed to an education lately on International Law and the Rule of Law. Everyone has been following the torture memos and some of us have a quaint understanding of how the U.S. signing the treaty at the Geneva Convention forcibly influenced laws that we were required, by the treaty, to add to our books. That treaty suits us and most of us don’t argue with the fact that we signed and ratified it.

But what if the U.S. was considering signing an international treaty that – in essence – violated our Bill of Rights? Remember. We DO have rights that some countries do not afford their subjects.

Back up. Did you know that the U.S. does not have to pass any laws to inhibit your 2nd amendment rights? If the UN sanctions an international treaty then any country signing and ratifying the treaty is under international law, bypassing our traditional balance-of-power safeguards. An international treaty signed by the president only needs to be ratified by the Senate. The House does not get to vote on it and U.S. courts cannot alter international law. It becomes law.

In 1997 Bill Clinton signed CIFTA but the Senate has refused to ratify it. This law would make it illegal for you to reload your own ammunition, register to carry your gun to go out hunting, possibly make gun clubs illegal and grant the other treaty countries the right to have you extradited to their country for prosecution on charges such as selling a gun at a gun show and that gun ending up in their very democratic (NOT) country. Article V Jurisdiction. They would know if you did anything wrong because the treaty calls for each country to openly share everything they know about you and your gun ownership and transfers with all those friendly South American countries. Article XIII Exchange of Information.

There are more anti-gun provisions in this treaty than all the gun control laws we have seen come before congress this year combined. I don’t know about you but I do not relish the thought of Hugo Chavez getting upset with one of my comments and demanding that I be delivered unto him – on some trumped up gun charge – for a heaping helping of some Venezuelan justice that could make even Dick Cheney cringe.

In Article IV, parties commit to adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms. Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and modifying or assembling any firearm in any way. And, while treaties should not trump the Bill of Rights (in contrast to what the Supreme Court held in Missouri v. Holland), they do have the force of statute — which would mean that the Obama administration could promulgate regulations on the basis of this treaty which would ban any modification or machining of any firearm in any manner whatsoever except by license of the government.

Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized acts should include “association or conspiracy” in connection with “said offenses” — which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.

Knowing that bills such as HB 45 (Bobby Rush – IL) that could put you in jail for keeping a gun anywhere your 17 year old son could reach, such as in his hand while he is squirrel hunting, will likely fail, President Obama went to Mexico and pledged to his “american idol” fan base there that he would urge the U.S. Senate to ratify this treaty, giving the United Nations the right to dictate the terms under which you may own a gun – or not.

Dianne Feinstein and Richard Durbin have been leading an effort to get this treaty ratified since February 26, 2009 and will lead the charge, along with John Kerry to push this through the Senate. There are four binding acts the U.S. Senate can execute without judicial oversight or input from the House of Representatives. Confirm Judges; Confirm Cabinet Appointments; Confirm Ambassadors and Ratify Treaties.

The administration softened up the electorate by publishing the Right Wing Extremist report and there may just be enough “lie down and surrender our rights to keep the radical conservative kooks and Ron Paul supporters away from a loaded gun” support to allow the Senate to ratify this treaty without public protest.

We must not let this happen. It is going to take action by people other than the NRA to stop this. Anyone who believes that the “rule of law” in this country should be written in this country under our system of creating law should act. That means contacting your U.S. Senators, sharing this article and urging all of your friends to take action as well.

Here are some links to give you a background on this. Share this information freely while you still have the freedom to do so.

Two minute CNN video briefly explaining it.

Gun Owners of America’s position against the treaty.

Feinstein’s Letter promoting the treaty.

The Treaty.

To ascertain with certainty that we will be joining a fine club, here is the guest list showing those who have RSVP’d.

This past week, Bill O’Reilly took a shot at long-time White House correspondent Helen Thomas. As you all know, Ms. Thomas has been in the gaggle since Jack Kennedy. She’s been treated with respect most of that time. Yes, in the later years of George Bush, she was overlooked from time to time, but even then she was part of a great skit played at the National Correspondence Dinner which showed her stalking the president to get her answers.

But did O’Reilly address her question or her view? No, he said she reminded him of the “Wicked Which of the East”…who by the way,…we never see in the Wizard of Oz outside her feet under Dorothy’s house. Margaret Hamilton played the Wicked Witch of the West.

When he came under fire for this comment by women’s groups and Media Matters he tried to deflect it as, “I said she sounded like, as in her voice…not her appearance” (paraphased). Truth is, Helen Thomas didn’t sound anything like Margaret Hamilton, this was just typical Bill O’Reilly running from his record.

Additionally he ignores that he calls her that “old woman”, then proceeds to mock the idea that he’s an ageist or sexist.

So as usual he invites someone to help him defend himself only to attack the guest in the end. This time it was author Courtney Martin. After trying to run the whole interview, she maintained her ground and in the next segment, this time populated by two other men he says, “I’m right, aren’t I”?

But…enough of the reality of things…I had to get some cathartic release out about Bill O’Reilly’s penchant for bloviation and put it into artistic terms…Here’s the “Bill O’Reilly’s Attack on Helen Thomas – The Easy Teenage Dance Mix vol. 2″
Enjoy

… Barack Obama has taken multiple positions on banning handguns and the D.C. handgun ban. He has stated his belief that handgun bans were constitutional and he supported them. Then he actually refused to state a position. Now, Barack Obama has issued a statement that some are reporting as an embrace of the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning the D.C. handgun ban while others are reporting that he is still straddling his position. [See more below.]

Even an Obama supporters, TalkLeft‘s Big Tent Democrat, attacks Obama’s “Feet of Clay.” BTD quotes Politico:

Barack Obama has crafted an image as an unconventional candidate, a change agent and a post-partisan politician who represents a dramatic break from the status quo. … when confronted with a series of thorny issues the Illinois senator has pursued a conspicuously conventional path, one that falls far short of his soaring rhetoric. Faced with tough choices on fronts ranging from public financing and town hall meetings to warrantless surveillance and the Second Amendment, Obama passed up opportunities to take bold stands. … Instead, he has followed a familiar tack, straddling controversial issues and choosing politically advantageous routes. …

Denver delegates must know that vacillating statements and actual votes that contradict those statements on Second Amendment issues are “deal breakers” for millions of voters nationwide. Memeorandum.com is tracking posts linking Politico’s “Obama: Change Agent Goes Conventional.” Most astonishing: the ABC News report by Jake Tapper on Obama’s stumbling, bumbling exchange with a Pennsylvania reporter:

Craig Layne, a reporter from WJET-TV in Erie, Penn., today asked Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, a question on the DC gun ban.

Here’s how the exchange went down.

"In November you mentioned that the DC handgun law was constitutional," Layne said. "Now you’re embracing the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision striking down that law—

"That’s not what I said," Obama interrupted, per ABC News’ Jennifer Duck.

"Your aide said that," Layne clarified.

"I don’t know what my aide said but I’ve been very consistent, I teach constitutional law," Obama said. … (Read all of Jake Tapper’s “Obama Eager to Distance Self from Campaign’s Former Position on DC Handgun Ban.”)

You think those GOP 527s — especially the NRA — won’t relentlessly attack Obama on his defensive backtracking from his all-over-the-map statements? His campaign can be derailed permanently by this one issue alone. The NRA has already begun:

From the NRA’s wryly-titled story, “Clinging to the Constitution“:

In recent days, GOP presidential candidate John McCain has highlighted Barack Obama’s comments about small-town Americans “clinging” to guns and religion. Senator McCain’s comments, though, have a different spin. In Arlington, Virginia, for instance, McCain said: “I know why [residents of small towns] embrace their constitutional rights, and why they embrace their religious beliefs, and it’s because they’re fundamentally good and decent people. ”

By referencing our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, John McCain demonstrates an understanding of this issue that has continued to escape Barack Obama. Americans don’t “cling” to their guns out of bitterness. They fight to preserve their constitutional liberties because they love this country.

If Barack Obama wants to believe that gun owners are simply bitter…he should remember something else. We’re voters too, and we don’t support those who believe in Chicago-style gun control.

That’s mild by NRA standards. They’re just warming up!

The NRA crippled Al Gore in 2000. During the days of the Florida recount, I was at a local Safeway. The barely-eligible-to-vote teen who boxed my groceries noticed the Al Gore sticker on my jacket. He said, “I would have voted for Gore, but he was going to take my guns away.”

That the NRA’s message filtered down to an 18-year-old grocery store box boy in a rural community, and got him to change his vote, is proof that the NRA knows how to demolish its perceived foes.

Accurate or not, the NRA’s campaign against Gore worked in 2000. The NRA’s campaign will have endless ways to attack Obama in 2008 because of his flip-flopping statements and his Illinois state senate voting record that, CBS News predicted, will haunt Barack Obama in a general election.

Obama’s remapping of his policy issues to take more “advantageous routes,” as characterized by today’s hot Politico story, will be derailed by relentless campaigns by the NRA and other 527s. Obama will end up cut off at the knees once his all-over-the-map views and his Illinois state senate voting record on gun rights are exposed.

::::::::::::::::::::::::

Here’s a fascinating timeline of Obama’s conflicting statements on the Second Amendment, via a McCain campaign press release. (Clearly, this is “oppo research” that the McCain campaign had ready to issue once the SCOTUS ruling came in yesterday morning, and this press release was issued immediately afterwards.)

A TIMELINE OF POLITICAL POSITIONING ON SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

… Please find below a timeline of Barack Obama’s support for the D.C. handgun ban and subsequent reversal:

SEPTEMBER 1996: In Response To A 1996 Independent Voters Of Illinois Questionnaire, Obama Indicated That He Supported Banning The “Manufacture, Sale And Possession Of Handguns.” Question: “Do you support state legislation to … ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?” Obama’s Response: “Yes.” (Independent Voters Of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization 1996 General Candidate Questionnaire, Barack Obama Responses, 9/9/96)

2004: Barack Obama Voted Against “Letting People Use A Self-Defense Argument If Charged With Violating Local Handgun Bans.” “[Obama] opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation.” (Ryan Keith “Obama Record In State Legislature Offers Possible Ammunition For Critics,” The Associated Press, 1/17/07)

NOVEMBER 2007: The Chicago Tribune Reports That The Obama Campaign Says Barack Obama “Believes The D.C. Handgun Law Is Constitutional.” “[T]he campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he ‘…believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.’” (James Oliphant and Michael J. Higgins, “Court To Hear Gun Case,” Chicago Tribune, 11/20/07)

FEBRUARY 2008: During An Interview, Barack Obama Acknowledged His Support For The D.C. Gun Ban. Questioner Leon Harris: “One other issue that’s of great importance here in the district as well is gun control. You said in Idaho recently – I’m quoting here – ‘I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns,’ but you support the D.C. handgun ban.” Obama: “Right.” (Leon Harris and Sen. Barack Obama, Forum Sponsored By ABC And Politico.Com, Washington, DC, 2/12/08)

· In The Same Interview, Barack Obama Indicated He Feels The D.C. Gun Ban Is Constitutional. Harris: “And you’ve said that it’s constitutional. How can you reconcile those two different positions?” Obama: “Oh, because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it is important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of people, law-abiding citizens, use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have violence on the streets that is a result of illegal handgun use. And so, there is nothing wrong, I think, with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets …” (Leon Harris and Sen. Barack Obama, Forum Sponsored By ABC And Politico.com, Washington, DC, 2/12/08)

· In This Interview, Barack Obama “Didn’t Dispute The Characterization That He Believes The Ban Is Constitutional.” “But a colleague points out that Obama took a question about the constitutionality of the gun ban from WJLA’s Leon Harris during the Potomac Primary, and didn’t dispute the characterization that he believes the ban is constitutional.” (Ben Smith, “Inartful,” The Politico, 6/26/08)

· Watch The Interview Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wu9jE1MnAE

FEBRUARY 2008: Barack Obama “Declined To Take A Position For Or Against Its Constitutionality.” “Today Obama reiterated his support for tighter enforcement of laws already on the books – such as stronger background checks and enhancing programs to trace the provenance of guns used in crimes. He would also seek to close the loopholes that currently apply to firearms purchased at gun shows. But asked today about the DC handgun ban currently being reviewed by the US Supreme Court, Obama declined to take a position for or against its Constitutionality but did express broad support for the rights of local jurisdictions to make such decisions for themselves.” (David Wright, Ursula Fahy And Sunlen Miller, “Obama: ‘Common Sense Regulation’ On Gun Owners’ Rights,” ABC News, 2/15/08)

MARCH 2008: Obama Campaign “Would Not Elaborate On Whether The Senator Supports The D.C. Gun Ban.” “Jen Psaki, a spokeswoman for Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, said Mr. Obama ‘believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he greatly respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms.’ ‘He also believes that the Constitution permits state and local governments to adopt reasonable and common-sense gun safety measures,’ she said, but would not elaborate on the whether the senator supports the D.C. gun ban.” (Gary Emerling, “Nation Awaits D.C. Handgun Ruling,” The Washington Times, 3/17/08)

APRIL 2008: Barack Obama Says “I Confess I Obviously Haven’t Listened To The Briefs And Looked At All The Evidence.” CHARLIE GIBSON: “Senator Obama, the District of Columbia has a law — it’s had a law since 1976; it’s now before the United States Supreme Court — that prohibits ownership of handguns, a sawed-off shotgun, a machine gun or a short-barrelled rifle. Is that a law consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms?” OBAMA: “Well, Charlie, I confess I obviously haven’t listened to the briefs and looked at all the evidence. As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, and, you know, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use i t. And I think that it is going to be important for us to reconcile what are two realities in this country. There’s the reality of gun ownership and the tradition of gun ownership that’s passed on from generation to generation. You know, when you listen to people who have hunted, and they talk about the fact that they went hunting with their fathers or their mothers, then that is something that is deeply important to them and, culturally, they care about deeply. But you also have the reality of what’s happening here in Philadelphia and what’s happening in Chicago.” (Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate, Philadelphia, PA, 4/16/08

JUNE 2008: Barack Obama Says He Wants To “Wait And See How The Supreme Court Comes Down.” OBAMA: “What I have said is that I do not — what I have said is, is that I’m a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but I do not think that that precludes local governments being able to provide some commonsense gun laws that keep guns out of the hands of gangbangers or children, that local jurisdictions are going to have different sets of problems, and that this is a very fact-intensive decision that has to be made. But I do think that the Second Amendment is an individual right. So, what I would like to do is wait and see how the Supreme Court comes down, and evaluate the actual reasoning in the case to see how broad or narrow the decision’s going to be.” (Barack Obama, Press Conference, Chicago, IL, 6/25/08)

JUNE 2008: The Obama Campaign Says An Unnamed Was “Inartful” In Telling The Chicago Tribune That Barack Obama Thought The Handgun Ban Was Constitutional “With the Supreme Court poised to rule on Washington, D.C.’s, gun ban, the Obama campaign is disavowing what it calls an ‘inartful’ statement to the Chicago Tribune last year in which an unnamed aide characterized Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., as believing that the DC ban was constitutional. ‘That statement was obviously an inartful attempt to explain the Senator’s consistent position,’ Obama spokesman Bill Burton tells ABC News.” (Teddy Davis And Alexa Ainsworth, “Obama Camp Disavows Last Year’s ‘Inartful’ Statement On D.C. Gun Law,” ABC News, 6/26/08)

JUNE 2008: ABC News’ Jake Tapper Says Barack Obama Is “Embracing The 5-4 Decision, Written By Justice Antonin Scalia, That Struck Down The DC Handgun Ban As Unconstitutional.” “Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, may have a long record of supporting gun control measures, and he may have seemed to have previously endorsed the DC Handgun Ban. But just now he issued a paper statement embracing the 5-4 decision, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, that struck down the DC Handgun Ban as unconstitutional.” (Jake Tapper, “Obama Embraces Supreme Court Decision As ‘Well-Needed Guidance,’” ABC News, 6/26/08)

JUNE 2008: Politico’s Jonathan Martin Says Barack Obama “Plainly Trying To Straddle Here.” “He’s plainly trying to straddle here. It actually sounds – especially the ‘Cheyenne and Chicago’ language – quite a bit like the language Howard Dean used in ’04 when trying to reconcile gun views tailored for pro-gun Vermont with a Dem primary.” (Jonathan Martin, “Obama Careful On Heller,” Politico, 6/26/08)

JUNE 2008: Now, This Afternoon, Barack Obama Says “I’ve Been Very Consistent, I Teach Constitutional Law” Despite His Numerous Contradictory Positions. “Craig Layne, a reporter from WJET-TV in Erie, Penn., today asked Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, a question on the DC gun ban. Here’s how the exchange went down. ‘In November you mentioned that the DC handgun law was constitutional,’ Layne said. ‘Now you’re embracing the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision striking down that law—’ ‘That’s not what I said,’ Obama interrupted, per ABC News’ Jennifer Duck. ‘Your aide said that,’ Layne clarified. ‘I don’t know what my aide said but I’ve been very consistent, I teach constitutional law,” Obama said. What I said was that I believe 2nd Amendment as being an individual right and have said that consistently. I also think that individual right is constrained by the rights of the community to maintain issues with public safety. I don’t thi nk those two principles are contradictory and in fact what I’ve been saying consistently is what the Supreme Court essentially said today.’” (Jake Tapper, “Obama Eager To Distance Self From Campaign’s Former Position On DC Handgun Ban,” ABC News, 6/26/08)

###