See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On February 4th, 2012 at 12:55 pm, prendad said:

   The money to fund these services may come from a new world tax.

   Wow, the UN wants a tax now. Isn’t that wonderful. Well, you know where you can get your tax, don’t you? Try bending over and taking a microscope and sticking it up your a$$.

2. #2
   On February 4th, 2012 at 12:56 pm, letget said:

   “It is absolutely essential to establish controls on capital movements and financial speculation

   OH really? Who gave you and your gosh horrible hate the US and Israel un the right to DEMAND we cave to help the whole friggen world have everything they want or need?

   If I wasn’t a lady I would tell you and your whole bunch ‘what to do and how to do it’! BTW, un get the he!! out of MY country! And yes I am MAD!
   L

3. #3
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:00 pm, txvet2 said:

   Of course the only country they really want to tax is the one already paying their bills – Uncle Sugar.

4. #4
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:02 pm, SignPainterGuy said:

   Doug, prendad and letget have again pretty well summed up my sentiments. I would add a question that I can`t help but ask; what small % of any tax collected would actually reach the “poor” after the Useless Nations and every third world nation`s despots have diverted their cut ? As much as 10% ? I`m trying to be optimistic here !

5. #5
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:05 pm, rocketman said:

   ***
   The “United” Nations is just a wealth redistribution scam that is “greening” the wallets of corrupt third world losers all over the world. Like its failed predecessor–the League of Nations–useless in preventing any future wars.
   ***
   The U.N. provides no real help to people being abused all over the world. The Rwanda and South Sudan murders, rapes, and ethnic cleansing proved this beyond the shadow of any doubt. It does pay lots of useless soldiers with other peoples money as they abuse the local populations for their pleasure and economic gains.
   ***
   Throw out the U.N. and defund them completely. They are an epic fail. Let them tax themselves–not us.
   ***
   John Bibb
   ***

6. #6
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:18 pm, ChapBix said:

   Deseret News: ““We will need a modest but long-term way to finance this transformation,” stated Jens Wandel, Deputy Director of the United Nations Development Program. “One idea which we could consider is a minimal financial transaction tax (of .005 percent). This will create $40 billion in revenue.”

   Don’t you just love their modest proposal? The modesty will last all of, oh maybe, ten seconds after they succeed in enacting such a tax. When they realize they can do that, they will be lined up to enact other such taxes, each more grandiose than the ones preceding them.

7. #7
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:23 pm, ChapBix said:

   The book has already been written showing that this mentality does not end with one tax, and its outcome is ugly. Those who impose such onerous taxes must resort to threats and actual violence to collect said taxes. BTW, my use of “book” is rhetorical and not literal. Please do NOT ask for the title.

8. #8
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:26 pm, happyscrapper said:

   First of all, we all know where our money would go. Mostly wild U.N. sex parties. The rest to evil dictators. The poor? NONE. This is an historical fact, so why would it be any different now?

   Secondly, this is the most successful country in history because of individual freedom and ingenuity, coupled with Capitalism!! Why would we give our money to the U.N., a body that doesn’t believe in any of that stuff?

   Thirdly, get the hell out of my country, you worthless, corrupt, lying bags of shi#.

   That is all.

   Have a nice day.

9. #9
   On February 4th, 2012 at 1:34 pm, letget said:

   This is the same un bunch, with the blessings of dear hill, that wants the whole world to be gun free but for the ‘law’! These people are doing their best to completely take over what bho hasn’t already taken from us all over the world. They want just a hand full of people all over the world to be in control of EVERYTHING! A bit like 1984 me thinks! I ha!e the whole bunch and the whole bunch ha!es the US and Israel!
   L

10. #10
    On February 4th, 2012 at 1:37 pm, prendad said:

    United Nations
    Unavailing Noddypeaks.

11. #11
    On February 4th, 2012 at 1:50 pm, SignPainterGuy said:

    Ok prendad; a quick search of my dictionaries, reg. and urban, yielded no results. Please resplain “Noddypeaks !

12. #12
    On February 4th, 2012 at 1:58 pm, WaterBoyz said:

    Is Obumer teaching the UN or is the UN teaching Obumer?

    As a kid, I would see signs every so often that read:
    Get us out of the United Nations !

    Never knew, then, what or who or why about those signs. My parents were never political so there was no conversation about stuff like that.

    Please tell me why we are still in the UN?

13. #13
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:11 pm, WaterBoyz said:

    Speaking of dumb and stupid ….

    Quote
    Republican candidate Newt Gingrich, who lost this week’s Florida primary to Mitt Romney, now is the target of an assault and battery lawsuit filed by a Ron Paul supporter, according to published reports.

    In addition to the former U.S. House speaker from Georgia, Dillard is suing Gingrich’s campaign and the security firm staffing his detail. He is seeking unspecified damages.
    /Quote

14. #14
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:17 pm, rightisright said:

    Without the U.S. there would be no U.N.

    Get of the U.N. NOW!

15. #15
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:28 pm, BB said:

    Does no one remember that as a US Senator Obama’s chief legislative effort was a First World tax for Third World money holes?

    Can’t recall if he was the author (ha ha) or just the dupe that introduced it, but it’s the other half of this story that no one seems to have picked up on.

    Zero and the UN are in bed together.

16. #16
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:32 pm, rambler said:

    I second that thought, rightisright!

    It is time for that money grubbing leachy organization to get the boot. Just who do they think they are? They can’t even pay their own way. Gee I guess they didn’t get enough money running that oil for food program that now they think the have the power to tax to run their programs.

    Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!!!!

17. #17
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:43 pm, Peter Hughes said:

    Ditto to all of the above. The UN is an obsolete institution that has overstayed its welcome in the USA.

    It was created by a quasi-socialist (FDR) who wanted a one-world government akin to his mentor, Woodrow Wilson. Is there any reason to think that it would not be anti-capitalist and anti-freedom?

    Regards,
    Peter H.

18. #18
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:51 pm, Mister P said:

    Guaranteed China and Russia would never be stupid enough to pay it. The Birch Society was right. We have had no business in the UN.

19. #19
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:53 pm, knucklehead said:

    I was going to make a comment with some brilliant analysis but after reading the comments all that I can say is +1 to all of the above. The useless nations needs to go!

20. #20
    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:54 pm, prendad said:

    On February 4th, 2012 at 1:50 pm, SignPainterGuy said:

    Noddypeak: fool, imbecile.

21. #21
    On February 4th, 2012 at 3:05 pm, stuckinIL4now said:

    So let’s see … Kyoto kinda fizzled so they’re not having much luck extorting money from us through the global warming scam. They haven’t been able to make those of us who are sane feel guilty enough about our standard of living so they couldn’t shake us down for the dough there. Now they’re trying to get the moolah by suggesting we tax the world to make it look equal while they try to squeeze the cabbage outta the US. And we already figured out what “greening” the world is code for. Has anybody told those UN geniuses that the USA is broke?

22. #22
    On February 4th, 2012 at 3:57 pm, Hiraghm said:

    Odd that I should catch Doug’s link to this posting while watching the following scene from “Serenity”:

    The Operative: I’m sorry. If your quarry goes to ground, leave no ground to go to. You should have taken my offer. Or did you think none of this was your fault?
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: I don’t murder children.
    The Operative: I do. If I have to.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: Why? Do you even know why they sent you?
    The Operative: It’s not my place to ask. I believe in something greater than myself. A better world. A world without sin.
    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: So me and mine gotta lay down and die… so you can live in your better world?
    The Operative: I’m not going to live there. There’s no place for me there… any more than there is for you. Malcolm… I’m a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.

    And after taking the time to look up that quote, the movie’s about reached the most significant monologue Joss Whedon ever created:

    Capt. Malcolm Reynolds: Y’all got on this boat for different reasons, but y’all come to the same place. So now I’m asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this – they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They’ll swing back to the belief that they can make people… better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin’. I aim to misbehave.

    The social engineers who’d prescribe for the globe are the enemy of every free man on the planet.

    The purported purpose of this tax is to fund “social protections”, but the actual purpose is to set the precedent for the U.N. to tax; a necessary first-step to establishing the U.N. as a global government. Before that happens, they’ll no-doubt rename it to get away from the stigma of the reputation the U.N. has already established. Probably change it to something like “The Alliance” or some such.

    Teacher: The Central Planets United Nations formed the Alliance. Ruled by an interplanetary international parliament, the Alliance was a beacon of civilization. The savage outer planets United States were not so enlightened and refused Alliance control. The war was devastating, but the Alliance’s victory over the Independents ensured a safer universe. And now everyone can enjoy the comfort and enlightenment of our civilization.

23. #23
    On February 4th, 2012 at 3:58 pm, Misscheryl said:

    Ron Paul is looking better every day. I wonder what he would say? Better yet, I wonder what he would do? Though I know it isn’t practical or feasible, I’d like to bring all of our troops home. Close our borders. Close down overseas bases and kick the UN out of our country. Call me an isolationist if you want but this one world ideology will do nothing but hurt the US – the sole purpose is bring us down to the level of every other country. We would lose and are losing our great nation status. Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama are all guilty in pushing this movement forward to our detriment.

24. #24
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:00 pm, Hiraghm said:

    On February 4th, 2012 at 2:43 pm, Peter Hughes said:

    Ditto to all of the above. The UN is an obsolete institution that has overstayed its welcome in the USA.

    It was created by a quasi-socialist (FDR) who wanted a one-world government akin to his mentor, Woodrow Wilson.

    Hey… I want a one-world government. The difference is, I want that government to be based on the U.S. Constitution and ruled from Washington DC, not New York.

25. #25
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:00 pm, Misscheryl said:

    One more thing, unless you haven’t noticed, except for its money, the United States of America doesn’t matter much anymore. We are just a small piece of a larger world..

26. #26
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:02 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:

    The UN stands for UnAmerican, Un@#&$%ingbelievable, and totally Unacceptable!

27. #27
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:06 pm, Hiraghm said:

    On February 4th, 2012 at 3:58 pm, Misscheryl said:

    With Ron Paul in the White House, we’d be ruled by the U.N. within 4 years.

    He doesn’t view the U.S. as superior, so he’ll fall victim to the forces of globalism by not understanding American exceptionalism.

28. #28
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:06 pm, 123upnorth said:

    Worldwide tax would mean worldwide welfare programs and also would mean no borders, because, if I am paying for the general welfare of people living in Nigeria, would I not qualify to immigrate there to live and cohabitate? Also, vice versa, if there is a worldwide tax and welfare system, would Nigerians not qualify to come to the U.S. at will?

29. #29
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:08 pm, Hiraghm said:

    Misscheryl brings up a good question though.

    Will Mitt Romney get us out of the U.N.?
    Will Newt Gingrich?
    Will Rick Santorum?
    I’m betting none will. But, Gingrich definitely won’t, Romney probably won’t, and I’d like to hear Santorum’s response to the question.

30. #30
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:09 pm, 123upnorth said:

    With Ron Paul in the White House, we’d be ruled by the U.N. within 4 years.

    Ron Paul would defund the U.N.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697ZOIq34OE

31. #31
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:13 pm, 123upnorth said:

    Hiraghm, if you throw away your pom-poms and seek your own answers, Ron Paul will hold a higher place in your judgement.

32. #32
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:15 pm, 123upnorth said:

    unless you haven’t noticed, except for its money, the United States of America doesn’t matter much anymore

    You try to be Mr. Nice Guy to everyone, even when you know your opponents are beding you over to rape you. You could matter more if you demanded more.

    Also, if you think it is bad now, wait until you guys go bankrupt.

33. #33
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:17 pm, Hiraghm said:

    Based on a fairly brief internet search, Santorum favors defunding U.N. organizations that undermine American interests. This is not the same as getting us out of the U.N., however.

34. #34
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:20 pm, 123upnorth said:

    Secondly, this is the most successful country in history because of individual freedom and ingenuity, coupled with Capitalism!!

    If freedom, ingenuity and capitalism is what made you so successful (I agree those things did), why wouldn’t you vote for the candidate that would bring those things back in the most profound way?

    Ron Paul is that candidate. Rick Santorum isn’t. Rick is for big government. Rick doesn’t believe in what you profess to believe in. At least he doesn’t in his public life.

35. #35
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:26 pm, Hiraghm said:

    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:13 pm, 123upnorth said:

    Hiraghm, if you throw away your pom-poms and seek your own answers, Ron Paul will hold a higher place in your judgement.

    What pom-poms? I always seek my own answers; it’s what makes me so incredibly popular around here. /sarc

    Ron Paul would hold a very high place in my judgment if he were indeed a patriot. But, he’s not. He’s a prick. A prick for the rulebook (the Constitution). That’s all.

    He does not distinguish between Americans and mere human beings. I’m shocked that he’s not a mass-adulterer; the only explanation must be that no woman other than his wife would bed him. Not because he’s a hound-dog like Clinton, but because the concept of holding one’s own people, such as a wife or children, as superior to other people and special would draw a blank stare from him.

    Americans are special. Iran is not our equal. He warns of what Iran would do in retaliation to our just will (and questions our just will), knowing that we have at least 5,000 nukes still in our arsenal. Let them worry about our retaliation for not submitting to our will.

    He doesn’t realize that, even as far strayed from the Constitution as we have become, we’re still far, far superior to any other nation on Earth. He doesn’t accept the fact that the Constitution was written as a contract between American citizens and our government, designed to protect American citizens and nobody else.

    I wonder how he’d react if, after I have a car accident, I try to apply his insurance policy to me? And will he worry how his refusal to apply it to me might make me mad at him? Will he “warn” his family of the possible consequences of his refusal?

36. #36
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:33 pm, 123upnorth said:

    The money to fund these services may come from a new world tax.

    “We will need a modest but long-term way to finance this transformation,”

    Printing money very, very S.L.O.W.L.E.Y.

    The facts:

    1)America is the largest economy in the world, representing about 30% of world gdp – 15 trillion from 50 trillion

    2)America is massively indebt and can’t meet their previous commitments by way of GDP growth and fiscal responsiblitly

    3) Everyone else is in debt too, so all that is happening is that money is being moved around to cover date-sensitive debt maturity payments.

    4)America will default, and it will be in one of three 3 ways, which include:

    a) Printing money
    b) Reneging/Cancelling their
    commitments similar to how GM and
    Chrysler did to their
    bondholders(maybe that was
    a practice run for Obama)
    c) Traditional default where they
    simply fall behind on payments,
    refuse to concede to reality and
    have their creditors call the loans
    and cut off lending

    When America defaults, everyone, who also is in debt, will be forced to default.

    The only thing separating America from Greece is a printing press. How will you guys afford things when inflation crushes your buying power?

37. #37
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:35 pm, 123upnorth said:

    P.S. I love America. I am not hating, just frustrated.

38. #38
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:40 pm, 123upnorth said:

    Here is your debt problem explained in a better way. The only thing this explanation left out is the printing press.

    http://matadornetwork.com/change/the-u-s-debt-crisis-in-plain-english/

39. #39
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:43 pm, BK said:

    I think we need to tax UN Cronies to pay for this tax.

40. #40
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:45 pm, DonkeyHoatie said:

    When asked where she expected the money to provide all needy people with a basic income, healthcare, education and housing would come from, Fatima Rodrigo, one of the presenters at the forum, mentioned the “very small tax of .005 percent.”

    She added, “There is plenty of money, we just need to stop spending it on militaries and wars.”

    Typical liberal, stuck on stupid. First response to any problem: RAISE TAXES! Second response to any problem: CUT THE MILITARY!

    Let’s all sing kumbaya and hold hands around a talking drum and everybody will get along. Muslims and Jews, bloods and crips, everybody sing along now…

41. #41
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:49 pm, Mister P said:

    Ron Paul would hold a very high place in my judgment if he were indeed a patriot. But, he’s not. He’s a prick.

    You seem to have a lot in common.

42. #42
    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:51 pm, Mister P said:

    Hey… I want a one-world government. The difference is, I want that government to be based on the U.S. Constitution and ruled from Washington DC, not New York.

    This explains why you are a gingoist, pretending to be a conservative.

43. #43
    On February 4th, 2012 at 5:15 pm, Hiraghm said:

    On February 4th, 2012 at 4:51 pm, Mister P said:

    Hey… I want a one-world government. The difference is, I want that government to be based on the U.S. Constitution and ruled from Washington DC, not New York.

    This explains why you are a gingoist, pretending to be a conservative.

    You mean “jingoist”? No, I’m not a jingoist.

    Yes, I am indeed a prick like Paul. The difference is, I’m not blinded by my “prick-ism”.

    And I’m not pretending to be a conservative; I am one. I want American citizens to be protected from our government as per our contract (the prick part) and I don’t give a crap about the rest of the people on the planet; their freedom is their problem. If they want to enjoy individual liberty, acquire a republican form of government and apply for Statehood.

    I am, however, convinced that the United States has come upon, that our Founding Fathers designed, the best form of government yet devised. Why would I be willing to compromise on the point? Yes, other peoples may disagree. Some people think the Catholic religion is the correct one, some think the Moslem religion is the correct one; some think it’s Judaism. but only one can be correct. If I were Catholic or Moslem or Jewish, I would not treat other religions as equal to my own. I wouldn’t necessarily be hostile to their followers, provided their followers didn’t interfere with my exercise of my religion. And it won’t keep me from arguing the superiority of the one religion that is correct; mine.

    (This is not a particular problem; the only thing necessary to change my religion, or my view of government, is to convince me that another is correct or superior. I used to say, “I’m always right, because when I discover I’m wrong, I change my mind”).

    Likewise, if other peoples want to wallow in their inferior forms of society, enjoy. When those other forms of interfere with my enjoyment of individual liberty, they have a problem.

    And yes, since I believe in what the Founding Fathers gave us, I see no evil in spreading it to the rest of the world, as it is the best form of government yet devised by Man. The best way to ensure my ability to continue exercising individual liberty is to spread the “gospel” of our form of government to everyone on the globe.

    Having studied history (like Gingrich), I recognize that the most successful form of government is Empire. I further recognize that the U.S. is largely based upon the Roman Republic, and that said republic fell into empire halfway through its life-cycle.

    When our time came, we blew it. We settled for hegemony when we were meant to have a global empire, the first in history. We made ourselves a servant to the world, and then become hurt and confused when they treat us as such.

    There is a difference between a global American empire based upon our Constitution and the concept of individual liberty, and the west European Roman empire based upon oligarchy and the 12 tables of Roman law.

    Now, with our oligarchy firmly entrenched, there’s little hope that a globe-girdling American empire based upon the Constitution could be created. What we are looking at now is a globe-girdling empire based upon oligarchy and the charter of the U.N.

    I note that, in spite of calling me a jingoist, you fail to point out any flaws in my assessment of Paul, or in the idea of America as superior.

    Are we or are we not a superior form of society, being based upon individual liberty? Does Paul, or does he not, consider America to be superior to the nations of whom he’s afraid of retaliation? What evidence has he given?

    (And if it weren’t for his “unAmericanism”, I would be supporting Paul).

44. #44
    On February 4th, 2012 at 5:28 pm, Hiraghm said:

    There’s another important fact about Rome that people don’t seem to realize. Most seem to view Rome as a conquering empire, crushing the peoples it conquered under the heel of oppression.

    The fact is, the Dark Ages came after Rome fell…

    Why are the Jews condemned for killing Christ by bigoted rednecks? Because Pontius Pilate, the governor of Judea, washed his hands of the matter and left it to the locals.

    This was a Roman tradition. When Rome would conquer a people, it would leave them to rule themselves as they had all along… so long as the tax revenues kept coming in. In exchange, Rome would provide transportation systems to promote trade, military power to protect said trade, infrastructure such as aquaducts to raise the standard of living, the rule of law where ever there was none, and generally left the people better off than when the Romans came.

    Of course, to hear the locals talk, Rome was evil incarnate; oppressive and cruel.

    Sounds kind of like Iraq and Afghanistan, yes? Except… where’s the tax revenues?

45. #45
    On February 4th, 2012 at 6:25 pm, SignPainterGuy said:

    prendad #20,

    Thank you; that`s a totally new term for me; I wonder of its origins. As I said, I couldn`t find it anywhere ! It`s certainly fitting of the Useless Nations !

    I used to believe we needed to stay in the UN so we could in some way control things for the better, but now it`s apparent we have little or no control, so, let`s get out, force them out of the US and tell them to pucker up and kiss our collective arses ! They are demonstrating clearly that they are our enemies !

46. #46
    On February 4th, 2012 at 8:26 pm, drfredc said:

    The United Nations is one of the best examples of how not to operate or manage social marketplaces.

    Successful social marketplaces are individually driven and are sensitive to marketplace rules, not driven by central command determined by political whim.

47. #47
    On February 4th, 2012 at 9:48 pm, sbw999 said:

    The United Nations has turned into some parody of science fiction government bodies like the United Federation of Planets, or the Jedi High Council, the (Star Wars) Senate, or Asimov’s Galactic Empire. These pompous gasbags walk around like they have all the knowledge of the universe, and that mankind is ready to just live in harmony and peace with one another. These elites look down on everybody. Well, the United Nations can kiss my American a$$. We should kick this bunch of incoherent, delusional fruitcakes out of the United States yesterday.

48. #48
    On February 4th, 2012 at 10:00 pm, WarTip said:

    Isn’t there any real support in the establishment to get this UN-American ORG OUT of the US and back to the “United” nations where it is still wanted … for whatever reason!?

49. #49
    On February 5th, 2012 at 7:15 am, happy2behere said:

    When you put a bunch of “diplomats” in an expensive building on pricey real estate with unlimited funds, what do you expect?

    If it actually went to the poor, maybe. But it won’t go past the third world dictators. Imagine funding Hamas, North Korea, Putin, and the Muslim Brotherhood with American tax dollars. Oh wait.

50. #50
    On February 5th, 2012 at 10:01 am, thejim said:

    I am beginning to suspect that December 21, 2012 may be the total realignment of world governance

51. #51
    On February 5th, 2012 at 10:16 am, NotTheMama said:

    No great Fire Fly/Serenity quotes (love that series and movie),   just a simple   NO.

52. #52
    On February 5th, 2012 at 10:56 am, Wade said:

    How about the UN packing bags and getting their sorry ass out of the USA.

53. #53
    On February 5th, 2012 at 11:26 am, LOBOMAN said:

    The time is long overdue to tell the UN to stick it—– We should drop out or reduce our participation to $5.00 per year and tell the UN to move their orfices to another (solicalist) country where they can be happy.

54. #54
    On February 5th, 2012 at 2:25 pm, rocketman said:

    ***
    HI LOBO_MAN–#53. “Relocating” the U.N. to just outside Mogadishu, Somalia–or Ponying, North Korea sounds just fine to me.
    ***
    They can “live off the land” there. With the post WW1 French response when they want someone else to foot the bills for their lifestyles. “Pas un sou!” Not a penny! I understand they like the French approach to doing things.
    ***
    I read that there is a big special on surplus French rifles. Cheap–in excellent condition. Never fired–just dropped once! Great for arming the Blue Helmet forces.
    ***
    John Bibb
    ***

55. #55
    On February 5th, 2012 at 2:45 pm, yaymm said:

    I agree that the U.N. has outlived it’s usefullness. The goals of that august Body back in the 1950′s sounded laudible and in fact, were pretty well though out back than. And the U.N. has ccomplished some very basic things, like improving the living conditions of some of the poorest people on the Planet.

    However most of the members have also lined their pockets heavily as well. And they are immoral.

    As for getting out of the U.N., not only no, but hell no. We need to maintain our membership as long as we have single Nation veto power. Should anything end that factor, then we need to bail out.

    In the meantime, we veto the tax idea. We veto whatever needs to be halted in it’s tracks before it starts, whenever it is possible. Let’s not cut off noses to spite our faces, at least not yet.

56. #56
    On February 5th, 2012 at 3:15 pm, hawkeye54 said:

    How about the UN packing bags and getting their sorry ass out of the USA.

    First, or second Executive Order from our new President, or so I dream.

57. #57
    On February 6th, 2012 at 4:27 pm, FirstSkirt said:

    Wait a minute….I remember being told that the reason the UN was situated in the U.S. is that our so-called government believed we could keep an eye on them and what they were doing. Well, that hasn’t worked out well, has it? Our government has turned a blind eye to the corruption, graft, and a myriad of horrendous crimes committed by UN “diplomats”, their staffs, and their “soldiers”. From rapes to torture to murders, UN soldiers have commited a variety of war crimes, usually in small African countries. These are nothing but tinhorn dictators under the guise of diplomacy. When it’s time to go, it’s time to go….just because we have a one-state veto vote doesn’t justify having these moochers on our soil. Let some other schmuck country welcome them in…then we’ll see how long they last.

    The goal of a vast majority of these so called UN diplomats is:

    1. To live in the US.
    2. To steal from the US Taxpayer (and anyone else they can.)
    3. Diplomatic immunity from crimes.