Also, it has never been held, by SCOTUS, the US Congress or any President, that American National interests be superseded by UN authority. The US only follows those UN resolutions that are convenient or intersect extant American policies.

From where I sit, going DIRECTLY down the road to Marxism/Fascism is NOT a worthy goal for any POTUS.

I think you were only suspended not, banned.

I don't think I'll be able to go to DC on 9.12.2009 but, I know Jim and the others would welcome your presence.

The UN isn't sovereign. And your information is inaccurate.

When we joined the UN we signed a treaty, therefor it's the law of the land.

Clause 2: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

United Nations Charter

The United Nations Charter is the treaty that forms and establishes the international organization called the United Nations.[1] It was signed at the United Nations Conference on International Organization in the Veterans Auditorium (now the Herbst Theatre) of the War Memorial Veterans Building in San Francisco, California, United States, on June 26, 1945, by 50 of the 51 original member countries (Poland, the other original member, which was not represented at the conference, signed it later). It entered into force on October 24, 1945, after being ratified by the five permanent members of the Security Council—the Republic of China (later replaced by the People's Republic of China), France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (later replaced by the Russian Federation), the United Kingdom, and the United States—and a majority of the other signatories.

Any other idiotic comments?

Study harder next time.

The War on Iraq: Legal Issues

Under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, to which the United States is a party, a nation's use of force is authorized under only two circumstances: in individual or collective self-defense, as outlined in Article 51, or pursuant to a Security Council resolution, as outlined in Article 42.

I've heard this pablum before.

Just how do you define illegal? It certainly is legal under American jurisprudence. Authorized by Congress and all that. The US is a sovereign nation. There are no extra-national authorizing authorities.

Or is it illegal because you think it is illegal. Of course you realize that is a rather arrogant position.

But I will bite on one. How does the actions of the Ohio National Guard support your position?

How many college protest did we get after Kent State?

Nothing above disproves my suggestion that neither you, nor any one else reading this, have ever seen a Conservative Riot.

Your selection of the Bonus Army as an example of conservatism is absurd. That you pick racist democrat southerners (think Robert Byrd, Lester Maddox and George Wallace) indicates your ignorance of the subject. And delving as much as 125 years into a past that no longer exists only shows the weakness of your thinking.

But I will bite on one. How does the actions of the Ohio National Guard support your actions?

. A few years ago we had Cindy Sheehan

How many sons have you given to Uncle Sam for an illegal and pointless war in the Middle East?

Goons and death squads? Loosing touch with reality, eh?

Not to familiar with American history, are you?

Bonus Army
Ludlow Massacre
Columbine Mine massacre
Kent State Massacre
Haymarket affair

Amazing the amount of working people who have been killed for having the nerve to ask for an honest day's pay…

The Tulsa, Oklahoma Race
Riot of 1921
Lynchings: By State and Race, 1882-1968 *
or the amount of people who have been killed to keep people in their place…

Just goes to show – Crazy and Stupid are not an exclusive province of the left nor the right. Both sides have their nutcases.

I had never heard of the “Brooks Brothers” riot. Was property damaged? Were people injured? Doesn't sound like a riot.

'68 democrat convention — THAT was a riot and funny to boot as the anarchists ate their own.

Face it, conservatives are usually too busy making a living and taking care of their families to riot. If fact you've never seen a conservative riot.

Brooks Brothers riot

You're right, their modus operanti generally favors intimidation through the use of goons and death squads.