McCain Sending Palin to UN?

by CLIFF KINCAID September 18, 2008
John McCain may send Sarah Palin to the United Nations next week in order to “boost” her foreign policy credentials, according to media reports. The McCain campaign seems to think that having Palin rubbing elbows with the global elite and international bureaucrats will make her look good. But that’s like visiting Lehman Brothers to accentuate her economic expertise. She should tell the McCain campaign, “Thanks, but no thanks.”
 
To add insult to injury, Palin has also been told she will have to sit down for a grilling by Katie Couric, the CBS Evening News anchor who was honored in July by the National Organization for Women. The Congressional Host Committee of the Couric event, which included CBS as a “champion” sponsor, included Rep. Tammy Baldwin, the lesbian Democrat from Wisconsin. On September 16th, not surprisingly, NOW endorsed the Obama-Biden ticket.
 
One has to assume that Couric will be armed with all kinds of “gotcha” questions to spring on Palin from her allies in the feminist wing of the Democrat Party. If Charles Gibson of ABC News wasn’t able to finish her off in her first network news interview, the liberals must figure that Couric will go in for the kill. It’s difficult to see anything good coming out of an interrogation of Palin by a media feminist. 
 
When the media are not slicing and dicing her, the McCain campaign seems to be doing its best to mute her strong conservative message.
 
It is not reassuring that after the Gibson interview, during which Palin expressed her moral opposition to embryonic stem-cell research, the McCain campaign came out with a radio ad saying the McCain-Palin Administration would promote stem-cell research. McCain spokesman Brian Rogers told The Hill newspaper that the purpose of the ad was to support “all forms of stem cell research, including experiments using human embryos and those using cells from adults.”
 
By contrast, Palin told ABC’s Gibson that “we should not create human life, create an embryo and then destroy it for research, if there are other options out there.” She noted that one of the other options was adult stem-cell research.
 
Clearly, the McCain campaign is letting it be known that Palin’s “personal” views, which are strongly pro-life, will not affect the policies of the McCain-Palin Administration.
 
We don’t know Palin’s “personal” views on the United Nations, but before being dispatched to the UN, she and her “Country First” running mate may want to take a look at the Republican Party platform they are supposed to be running on. The platform calls the UN “scandal-ridden and corrupt.”
 
The GOP platform also makes reference to the possibility of a “UN-imposed tax” and declares categorical opposition to any such scheme.
 
Amid financial turmoil in the U.S. and federal financial bailouts of bankrupt institutions, is it wise to be seen at the headquarters of an organization that is seriously entertaining imposition of a global tax on America?
 
GOP opposition to a UN tax may be an indirect reference to Barack Obama’s Global Poverty Act, which lays the groundwork for such a tax through legislation to mandate federal compliance with the UN Millennium Development Goals.
 
The platform language reflects a grassroots uprising against the UN and its drive for more power and control over our lives. We saw more evidence of this in Virginia on September 16th, when the Midlothian American Legion Post voted to oppose the Obama bill. The resolution, which passed unanimously, was introduced by World War II veteran Ben Trotter, a member of the American Legion for more than 40 years.
 
Here is the language of the resolution:
 
“SUBJECT: THE GLOBAL POVERTY ACT
 
“WHEREAS, The American Legion since its founding has promoted ‘100 percent Americanism’ in all its programs; and
 
“WHEREAS, the concept that foreign governments or combinations of these governments shall be given the legal right to levy taxes on the USA is directly antithetical to this provision of The American Legion’s constitutional preamble; and
 
“WHEREAS, the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 24, 2008 passed the Global Poverty Act, Senate Bill 2433 as amended, without holding any hearings and this bill could soon reach the Senate floor for debate, and the fact that the U.S. House of Representatives already has passed a similar bill (H.R. 1302) makes widespread knowledge of the contents of S.2433 important; and
 
“WHEREAS, S.2433 does not impose any tax itself but mandates that the U.S. President enforce the monetary and other recommendations called for by an international anti-poverty ‘Financing for Development’ conference held in Monterrey, Mexico in 2002; the definitive document from this conference, called the ‘Monterrey Consensus’ committed nations to spending .7 percent of Gross National Product (GNP) on increased foreign aid to be administered by the United Nations, presumably to augment income for the world’s poorest individuals; and
 
“WHEREAS, S.2433 as amended, if it becomes law would require the USA, led by the President, to pay an estimated $65 billion per year over and above its already generous foreign aid budget and this annual amount clearly provides the background for increased federal taxes; and
 
“Now therefore be it RESOLVED, by Post No. 186, The American Legion, Department of Virginia, in regular meeting assembled in Midlothian, VA., September 16, 2008 that The American Legion shall oppose all provisions of Senate Bill 2433 and House Resolution 1302, or other legislation, which conceivably could lead to foreign taxation, including UN taxation, of American citizens.”
 
One addition to the resolution, planned by Trotter, will make it clear that the $65-billion-a-year figure is part of a 13-year plan that amounts to $845 billion.
 
McCain is not a sponsor of the Global Poverty Act, but he hasn’t opposed it, either.
 
In direct opposition to a plan to merge the economic and political systems of the U.S., Canada and Mexico, the GOP platform says that “Our strong ties with Canada and Mexico should not lead to a North American union or a unified currency.”
 
McCain has not specifically endorsed a North American Union, but he has called for fulfilling the “promise of North, Central, and South American life” and has expressed the view that “the Americas can and must be the model for a new 21st century relationship between North and South.” It is not exactly clear what he is talking about.
 
Perhaps McCain should start answering some questions on this matter before sending Palin out to meet and greet the media sharks. 
 
On another global issue, the Republican platform declares that “For several reasons, particularly our concern for U.S. sovereignty and America’s long-term energy needs, we have deep reservations about the regulatory, legal, and tax regimes inherent in the Law of the Sea Treaty.” 
 
This is an interesting plank because McCain supported the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty before he was against it. It’s not clear where he stands now.
 
The treaty’s “tax regime” is another variation of a global tax and the treaty gives the UN jurisdiction over natural resources that have already been claimed by American explorers, such as the oil, gas and mineral riches in the North Pole region near Palin’s home state.
 
It is entirely legitimate to ask where Sarah Palin stands on these issues. But if the answers are not her own, or else are treated as “personal” by the McCain campaign, then what purpose is served by doing these media interviews?
 
On the matter of the UN’s Law of the Sea Treaty, however, it is McCain who owes the public some answers. Since the liberal media favor the treaty and don’t want to make it into a controversy, the conservative media will have to vigorously press him on it. 
 
Family Security Matters Contributing Editor Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at cliff.kincaid@aim.org.

blog comments powered by Disqus

10 year FSM Anniversary

FSM Archives

More in PUBLICATIONS ( 1 OF 25 ARTICLES )