What Percentage of Our Citizens are Subject to British Law

Before, during and since the election, I made a concerted effort to watch videos and read articles from the extreme left all the way to the extreme right.  To be clear, my general views are a little left of center. I've heard some very well thought out arguments from the right, but I've also heard some of the most vitriol hate and just plain lunacy coming from that same general direction.

I will listen and discuss issues with ANYONE who takes a rational, reasoned approach to an issue, but there are times when I just have to shake my head in disbelief.  I found myself doing that repeatedly in the last few days.

Thirty-eight Republican Congressmen voted to NOT ratify a UN treaty that suggests, without any enforcement provisions, that other countries treat their handicapped the way they are already treated here.  Among the cockamamie reason they give is because they are worried they think it will give the UN the power to dictate what is best for our handicapped children.

At first I couldn't believe that they could walk past Bob Dole and ignore the members of their own party who support it, but then I began to understand.  What led me to this understanding?  Well, first Mitch McConnell filibusters his own rule. In making senate history, by being the first person to ever filibuster his own bill, he used the lamest excuse I have ever seen and I won't even dignify it with details or discussion.

My second reason is a video made by Gabe Zolna of the Western Center for Journalism, one of the right wing publications to which I subscribe to get a better understanding of how people with differing opinions think. As distasteful as it is for me to drive traffic to his video and make money for him, I'll do it for the greater good.


Call me crazy, but I thought we fought the revolutionary war, at least in part, because England considered us their subjects. I think we corrected that misconception.  Now you are saying that children born of a father who was born in a country whose population are English subjects, is also an English subject simply because England said so?. So you are saying Obama is an English subject and subject to English law.  Wow, I guess we can get rid of an entire generation of people who were born in America, but by your definition, are subject to the laws of another country.

Now I understand how 38 Congressmen felt that a UN Handicap Rights Treaty, that has no enforcement provision, and only suggests the world's handicapped be treated as the are in the US, are worried.  Heck with that kind of reasoning, a significant part of the population is subject to the laws of the country of their father's birth. 

Now I understand why Mitch McConnell filibusters his own bill.  It has nothing to do with the oath of office and EVERYTHING to do with re-election.  Are NOT serving their country.  They are serving themselves and their party, the public be damned! 

True, Congress is not doing their job.  They need to start serving their country and doing what is best for the country, not what is best for their re-election or their party. It's "Of the people, by the people, and for the people", not "Of the party, by the party, and for the party"!