I see that the We Need to Let the UN Run Our Country crowd is at it again. Dear Lord, when will the US citizenry put a stop to this foolishness. If these people want to live in a European-style country, why don’t they move to one of the EU states?

Maybe because no one would pay them any mind?

The internationalist “holier than thous” and busybodies strike again!! Waiting for their American “meddling in other people’s affairs” cahmpion, Jimmah Carter to intervene and lash the narrow minded Texans: five, four, three, two….

Have the Texas Rangers meet them at the border, handcuff them, throw them in the nearest hoosegow, let them out after the election, take them back to the border and shove them across it.

So nice to know that tools of an organization that includes Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, terrorist mooslim states and various African dictatorships are going to monitor elections in Texas.

I wonder what Andrew Jackson would have done if the Brits sent people to monitor elections in the U.S.?

God bless Texas.

“it must be cool to live in an American state that can cause an international incident.”

It must also be equally cool to live in a state that Congress, at the time of its admission, granted authority to divide itself into up to 5 new states. Why didn’t Illinois, California, and New York think of that?

As for Moses Austin, he’s buried in Potosi, Missouri and there’s a big concrete slab over his grave… put there, allegedly, to prevent Texans from, ahem, trying to reclaim him.

Please let them all wear powder blue berets.

I don’t care one way or the other about any EU-organization but it would be nice if Americans would remember that they are too foreigners outside their borders.

And to think that some of those folks hail from Belgium. Ever want to discuss their colonial history?

Moses Austin married my first cousin 7x removed Maria “Mary” Brown, hence Stephen Austin is my second cousin. You cannot, however, leave his sister, Emily Austin Perry out of the picture. She made some oversized contributions to Texas as well.

Looks like Hillarious, or should I say ‘Hillbillary’?, forgot that in a federal system each state is essentially a separate country, and that we are *not* a nation-state like the ones in Europe. Time she was reminded! Katherine was right…”God bless Texas”!

a) Just to make sure this is clear to everyone, that other “TJ” is not me.
b) I think this could solve a waste disposal problem for us. Lets take every piece of junk mail we have received in this election, put it on boats, and ship it to these guys headquarters for “further review.” Also all paper ballots, hanging chads, and 25000 old Chicago precinct voting machines.
C) To paraphrase Humphrey Bogart “Well there are certain precincts of Texas, Major, that I wouldn’t advise you to try to invade.

As an ‘unreconstructed rebel’, I second Katherine’s, ‘God bless Texas’, with this addendum, ‘God Bless the USA’!

YA-HOOOO! Go, Texas!!!

UN personnel have been observing US elections since 2002.

The UN has gotten to big for its britches. Time to put the UN out along with the Sharia promoters and sexual agendites. US Constitutional Law should be the Law here.

No to global government, no to global taxes, no to global economy, religion, etc.

Let those who want Sharia go to the hellish countries run by that barbaric system.

PS–”…an obligation to invite”– that speaks many thousand volumes about these people, doesn’t it? I hope they come to Indiana and walk into the polling place here, too. They will quickly become *world-class* (crook pinkie, simper) snipe-hunters.

What the OSCE failed to realize is that they have done the equivalent of monitoring EU elections in the UK with only EU credentials and without seeking UK coordination while trying to run their entire operation through Brussels. It’s a bit offensive.

The rest of America is too polite to chasten the rubes from OSCE. Texas seems to be more forthright as to what OSCE is doing wrong.

Bill2 I almost got my Blue Beret for Cypress in the 60′s. But I would draw the line at policing elections in the US. I would round these clowns up, find the littlest thing wrong with their visas, load the bus and head for Nuevo Laredo.

Don’t mess with Texas.

I shall add the Lone Star State to my list of possible retirement locations.

While I am deeply sympathetic to Texas in this matter, and am on the record as one of the last old school (i.e. Calvin Coolidge – Bob Taft) conservatives… which means I favor a mind our own business foreign policy while encouraging others to do the same with respect to the US, there may be legal issues here that have been left unaddressed.

Is the United States (I pray not) obligated by some ill-considered treaty to allow these foreign clowns to monitor our elections? If the answer is no, then Texas should politely but firmly show them the door marked “EXIT.”

If the answer however is yes, then things get a bit dicier. Texas (contrary to some opinions) IS part of the United States. And that means it is also subject to the Constitution of the United States. Which regrettably brings me to Article VI section 2 of the aforementioned Constitution…

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, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

The rub here is are we bound by a duly ratified treaty to allow this? If we are then Texas is sunk. In all honesty I don’t know the answer to this since I haven’t had the time to research the question.

Ad Orientem: is the treaty “duly ratified”?

Even if it is, nullification is a legitimate option among civilized men. It’s only when nullification is no longer an option that we must resort to, ahem, more forceful means.

I’m not a fan of social contract theory, considering it so much bunk. But, in so far as the US is an experiment in social contract theory, when the gov’t has violated the compact, it becomes null and void. I don’t consider the resolution of the Late Unpleasantness nearly 150 years ago to be dispositive on such a question.

Don’t know why people are referring to the UN in this context. OSCE is not a UN body.

The OSCE is a post-cold war forum for discussing issues related to the former east and west block nations of Europe. It is an association, not a treaty entity and has not been involved with US elections monitoring until the 21st century.

As for us in Texas, they can go monitor Europe as is their charter. The laws of Texas trump any courtesy extended by the US State Department.

Daniel in Texas

Christopher, in the event of the secession of several states, I would suggest a new name for the American republic: the Federal Union. The initials would be an apt response to those who object.

Ad Orientem, please reread Article VI section 2. The phrase “anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.” can nullify the wording of treaties is the way I interpret it.

All that has been reinforced by AG Greg Abbot is that these folks may approach to 100 feet of a polling place but no closer. They may not enter it nor that zone. Same goes for any partisan activity. In Texas, of which I claim residency and live in, one will see political signs to a point and then nothing. Often there is a sign marking the 100 foot point (30.48 meters for those folks using the metric system). As a matter of fact, elsewhere I read that the State law of Texas states that one must be a resident of the county (or district) and a legal voter to proceed beyond this line. Wether legal or not, out of compassion, minors below voting age are allow to accompany parents into the 100 foot zone.

I think the hubbub is that these folks wanted to enter polling places, stick their noses around and question people. I am not even allowed to do that. So Greg Abbot told them politely to go whiz up a rope.

Christopher Johnson,

I must correct you

The Republic of Texas

I believe we would have to revise the Constitution of the Republic of Texas to accomodate additional states.

Dave Wells — Brilliant. FU NA.

Ref: OSCE Copenhagen document of 1989 referenced in the article http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304 (emphasis added:

“(8) The participating States consider that the presence of observers, both foreign and domestic, can enhance the electoral process for States in which elections are taking place. They therefore invite observers from any other CSCE participating States and any appropriate private institutions and organizations who may wish to do so to observe the course of their national election proceedings, to the extent permitted by law. They will also endeavour to facilitate similar access for election proceedings held below the national level. Such observers will undertake not to interfere in the electoral proceedings.”

“to the extent permitted by law”

It sounds like this is not a treaty obligation so I think Texas is on solid ground here. With respect to “nullification,” that is just code for anarchism or “I will obey the law if I feel like it.”

On a side note this whole affair strongly reinforces my view that we need to withdraw from the UN except perhaps as an observer nation and discontinue our support for it and ALL foreign aid excepting that of the purely humanitarian kind. Likewise we need to leave NATO which has evolved into an aggressive military alliance, not defensive, and whose raison d’etre has long since expired. When you go around sticking your nose into other people’s affairs one can hardly cry foul when they deem it within their rights to do the same in return.

Ad Orientem: Positive Law must have an objective root in Natural Law. In so far as nullification is meaningful, it means rejecting any Positive Law that doesn’t conform to Natural Law. This is a moral duty.

That criterion is the rational check on the radically individualistic reductionism at the heart of the invalid critique that nullification is just another species of anarchy.

Flambeaux
The problem is that your rational has no final arbiter beyond individual conscience. Ergo we are back to anarchy. No coherent and orderly society can survive on that basis. It is like Marxism and its counterpoint in radical Libertarianism. It sounds great as a utopianistic concept. But in the real world it doesn’t work.

Seems to me the underlying issue here is pride. I don’t see how observers threaten US security in any way. However, if allowing (dare I say “welcoming”)observers makes it possible for American observers to attend elections in other states, where democracy is fragile and their presence could be the difference between totalitarianism and freedom, then perhaps pride can be swallowed?

Michael
I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer so explain to me slowly exactly what business it is of mine, yours or our country whether elections in Mongolia are free and fair?

hi Ad,

Well, the US did pursue a policy of neutrality and non-engagement for a long time, so I guess that’s an option. However I think US intervention (at tremendous personal cost for many and $ cost for all) in Iraq and Afghanistan was beneficial for the world and thus for US interests. So current US willingness to be involved internationally can (arguably) be justified.

Given a willingness to engage, I think support for democracy in far-flung states can be justified if it has the reasonable hope of making those places more democratic, and thus more civilized.

“In any conflict between the civilized man and the savage – back the civilized man”.

Ad Orientem: I can see that we disagree and that this isn’t the forum to hash this out.

Although I will concede that I am an anarchist in the same way that Tolkien was.

Michael D, apparently Texas has numerous restrictions on what you can do in a polling place if you are neither a voter nor an election worker. OSCE sounds like they’re saying ‘we need to thoroughly inspect the process’ and Texas seems to be saying ‘obey our laws or sod off.’

Michael,
Well, the US did pursue a policy of neutrality and non-engagement for a long time, so I guess that’s an option. However I think US intervention (at tremendous personal cost for many and $ cost for all) in Iraq and Afghanistan was beneficial for the world and thus for US interests. So current US willingness to be involved internationally can (arguably) be justified.

I wonder if we inhabit the same plane of existence. In the world I live in our unprovoked and premeditated invasion of Iraq has left this country near bankrupt, with around 6,000 killed and some 32,000 seriously wounded (many maimed for life). Those figures do not include psychological trauma. Of Iraq the most conservative estimates suggest around 200,000 killed with about half of them civilians. Most estimates are much higher. Iraq’s infrastructure is unlikely to recover for another decade or longer. The weak government now in place seems increasingly tied to Iran. And we have infuriated most of the Muslim world by our invasion and occupation of another Muslim country that never attacked us under clearly false pretenses.

You will have to elaborate on what you see as the positive effects of this war as I see none that justify the slaughter and expenditure of treasure. George Bush should be tried as a war criminal.

As for Afghanistan, a compelling argument can be made that we had to go in after 9-11. But Bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda has been scattered and reduced to a shadow of its former self. What we have now is one of the most corrupt regimes in the world being propped up by the US Army and an endless bleeding war with no end in sight. And it is worth noting that 9-11 would never have happened if the United States has not been meddling in the Middle East without end since World War II. The people who blew up the World Trade Center are the same people we were arming and training under Ronald Reagan. 9-11 was the fruit of a poisonous tree called interventionism. Or in simpler language, what comes around goes around.

Given a willingness to engage, I think support for democracy in far-flung states can be justified if it has the reasonable hope of making those places more democratic, and thus more civilized.

Who made the United States the arbiter of what the rest of the world should look and behave like? If someone wants to have a theocracy is it our duty to end that? Are we supposed to overthrow monarchy in other countries because its undemocratic? While I personally hope that other people’s will embrace democracy on some level consistent with their culture and heritage, that is entirely up to them.

“In any conflict between the civilized man and the savage – back the civilized man”.

That sounds like a very slightly modified version of the old argument for enlightened imperialism advanced so eloquently by Rudyard Kipling who wrote the following in tribute to America’s conquest of Cuba and the Philippine Islands in 1899…

Take up the White Man’s burden–
Send forth the best ye breed–
Go bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives’ need;
To wait in heavy harness,
On fluttered folk and wild–
Your new-caught, sullen peoples,
Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man’s burden–
Have done with childish days–
The lightly proferred laurel,
The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers!

I agree, Ed, the UN should obey Texas law, as I assume them obey the law in Mongolia. Because hand in hand with a commitment to democracy must be a commitment to the rule of law (let those TEC bishops that have ears to hear, listen).

Civilization and all that.

Ad Orientum – do you think I’m a white man?

Michael
I have no idea what your ethnicity is. But I see great similarities in your political philosophy to that of the proponents of enlightened imperialism.

Flambeaux
Fair enough.

I gotta go with Texas on this one.

Bring it, minions of the UN and sock puppets of liberalism!

When I go to vote at my nearby Texas early voting location, I sincerely hope that someone tries to interfere with me. I’ll have a video camera rolling, and will be quite willing to post whatever transpires to the Internet.

I’d like nothing better than to have supporters of Obama and the Democrat Party yelling and screaming at me to “do the right thing”. It would galvanize me into doing exactly what they say – voting the straight Republican ticket.

What matters most is to get out the vote – if there’s not a concerted effort to elect Romney, then we’ll be condemned to another 4 years of Obama. I’d rather leave my [male parts] to the mercy of a sledge-hammer wielding maniac than have to be a victim of a 2nd term for “The One”.

Ad, perhaps I do support “enlightened imperialism” insofar as:

I think we should in general support and encourage democracy.

And I think we should in general impose sanctions on murderous tyrants, including those who shoot little girls in the head because they want an education.

And I think we should encourage and aupport those who preach the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ around the world. Given the current state of Christianity in North America and Europe, I certainly would not call this a “white man’s burden.”

And frankly I think we should stop sending our wealth overseas to support regimes who seem intent upon destroying our civilization and relacing it with a misogynist, homophobic, xenophobic, anti-semetic, and anti-Christian dark age.

But I also know that our civilization is deeply flawed, as evidenced by abortion, third-world exploitation, euthanasia, sexual addiction, rampant narcissism, etc. etc.

Texas, Our Texas! all hail the mighty State!
Texas, Our Texas! so wonderful so great!
Boldest and grandest, withstanding ev’ry test
O Empire wide and glorious, you stand supremely blest.
(chorus)

Texas, O Texas! your freeborn single star,
Sends out its radiance to nations near and far,
Emblem of Freedom! it set our hearts aglow,
With thoughts of San Jacinto and glorious Alamo.
(chorus)

Texas, dear Texas! from tyrant grip now free,
Shines forth in splendor, your star of destiny!
Mother of heroes, we come your children true,
Proclaiming our allegiance, our faith, our love for you.

Chorus

God bless you Texas! And keep you brave and strong,
That you may grow in power and worth, throughout the ages long.
God bless you Texas! And keep you brave and strong,
That you may grow in power and worth, throughout the ages long.

US Constitution, article IV, section 3:

“New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.”
In other words, any state may be divided as long as it’s own legislature and Congress agree on the division.

Texas came in to the Union with the provision that it could divide itself up into five states(I think) if it ever desired to so if Texas, for whatever reason, ever does so decide, I assume that the Congress would be legally obligated to honor their decision.

I have lived in Texas and can attest that the attitude of “Don’t mess with Texas” is very much alive in the minds and spirits of Texans. Certainly Texans have the support of their like minded SC secessionist brethren. Long live the South!

“Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may.” Sam Houston

“I’ll bet it must be cool to live in an American state that can cause an international incident.”

It is.
And this isn’t the first International Incident Texas has caused in recent history. There was a little matter of executing a Mexican national, who was a convicted murderer, a couple of years back. State Department was trying hard to get Rick Perry to
halt the execution right up until
the criminal was pronounced dead.
Don’t mess with Texas isn’t just a
marketing campaign, down here.

I think the name of the new nation should be Federal Union of America,
or FUA.
Southners will immediately recognize that is the plural of FU.
Marie

Ad Orientem: You mistook what I was saying. I believe the interpretation of Article VI section 2 falls to State Law (Constitutional or otherwise) trumping what is in a treaty. I was not speaking to jury nullification.

When I was a kid back in the late 1800′s or so, my family used to visit an aunt and uncle in the Longview-Tyler-Beckville area of east Texas. Very whiney-piney area with a Southern flavor, but still very much Texas. And very, “Don’t mess with Texas” attitude.

John: The UN observers won’t have much luck “observing” elections here. The dark, swirling smoke from our coal-powered power plant would obscure the view too much. Cough, hack, weeze, weeze.

Texas came in to the Union with the provision that it could divide itself up into five states(I think) if it ever desired to so if Texas, for whatever reason, ever does so decide, I assume that the Congress would be legally obligated to honor their decision.

As a native Texan, I was surprised to find out just a few years ago that this is not true.

By the way, I have no idea about other states, but the one-hundred-foot limit is pretty sacred. The only possible exception that I have ever seen is early voting in public buildings where it might be too much to ask constituents to walk around.

Daniel,
Busy being a foreigner at the moment

It’s not a myth at all. This is from the 1845 Congressional Joint Resolution Annexing Texas to the United States: “Third, New States, of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of the said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the federal constitution.” Full text is here: http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/annex.htm

I once had the “pleasure” of seeing a candidate of my own party repeatedly trespassing over the hundred-foot limit. I warned him. Other people warned him. Everybody reported him. He got his butt fined and the police escorting him away. Good freaking riddance, too.

This guy only went over the hundred-foot limit by about two, three feet. He wasn’t standing in the polling place pushing his weight around, as this OSCE team seems to propose to do.

Don’t mess with any of the states’ electoral processes. We voters will not be amused.

This was in the parking lot, btw — not inside the polling building, even.

The ultimate hypocritical irony in all of this — which I am absolutely sure Hillbillary is completely aware of — is that Belgium, the home country of the leader of the OSCE surveillance team, has a very stringent voter ID law.

I don’t understand the fuss. All the Texans need to do is say, “Of course we welcome you to observe our voting process. And here’s your set of binoculars to do it with.”

Most states have laws about who can be in polling places similar to what I’m reading about Texas. You can’t just march in there unless you are voting, assisting an individual voters, or you’re an authorized poll worker or observer. In North Carolina only registered voters can be observers, and there are strict rules as to what observers can do. In a well-run election international observers will have little to do other than stand outside the 100-foot line and watch people going in and out.

God, How we need another James Monroe! Strict isolationism doesn’t sound too bad in the face of this foolishness!

Kyrie eleison!

Fr. Chip

Chicago is OK? and Texas isn’t?

Oh, that’s right Texas isn’t expected to stuff the ballot box for Obama.

“Chicago is OK? and Texas isn’t?”

Actually there will be a team of two observers (one from France and one from Germany) assigned to Illinois and Wisconsin. The chart showing who’s assigned where is posted in one of the stories over at Gateway Pundit. The “duty stations” for each observer are the capitals of the states to which they are assigned. Whether this particular team will do any observing in Chicago is anyone’s guess, but it’s certainly possible.

In Canada a candidate’s representative who may be present at the polling station during the voting and counting of the ballots. Often called a scrutineer.

They are the only ones allowed to observe the voting other than election officials.

135. (1) The only persons who may be present at a polling station on polling day are

(a) the deputy returning officer and the poll clerk;
(b) the returning officer and his or her representatives;
(c) the candidates;
(d) two representatives of each candidate or, in their absence, two electors to represent each candidate;
(e) an elector and a friend or relative who is helping him or her by virtue of subsection 155(1), only for the period necessary to enable the elector to vote; and

(f) any observer or member of the Chief Electoral Officer’s staff whom he or she authorizes to be present.

Ick. Does this mean Jimmy Carter will be in *this* country to watch the election? Ewwwwwwww.

Just in case anybody is still reading this, I should clarify that Texas could have been admitted as five states — in fact its territory was used as part of several states — but now it is governed by the US Constitution, it no longer has that superpower.