HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » Why the Right Killed Disa...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:33 AM

Why the Right Killed Disabled Treaty


from Consortium News:


Why the Right Killed Disabled Treaty
December 7, 2012

Besides rejecting many aspects of science, the American Right despises the idea of international agreements as well, considering them infringements on U.S. “sovereignty.” That attitude among GOP senators turned back a global agreement on protecting the disabled, notes ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar.

By Paul R. Pillar


Former Senator Bob Dole, 89 years old, returned this week to the floor of the chamber where he was for many years one of the leading Republicans. He also, of course, had twice represented his party on a national ticket as the nominee for vice president and then for president.

Infirm of late and just recently checked out of Walter Reed hospital, Dole was in a wheelchair pushed by his wife Elizabeth, also a former senator. He came back to the Senate to show his support for ratification of a multilateral treaty banning discrimination against people with disabilities.

Dole demonstrated in his own career what a talented person with a disability can do. He lacked one of the common tools of a politician: a handshake with the right arm — an arm that in Dole’s case had been rendered useless by a severe injury sustained in combat in World War II.

Sen. John Kerry, as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, was the principal advocate of the treaty in the Senate debate. In his speech he appealed to his colleagues, “Don’t let Senator Bob Dole down.” It wasn’t enough. .........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2012/12/07/why-the-right-killed-the-disabled-treaty/



21 replies, 3985 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why the Right Killed Disabled Treaty (Original post)
marmar Dec 2012 OP
xchrom Dec 2012 #1
no_hypocrisy Dec 2012 #2
GatorLarry Dec 2012 #8
ChairmanAgnostic Dec 2012 #10
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #12
Scuba Dec 2012 #3
Glorfindel Dec 2012 #4
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #5
Democracyinkind Dec 2012 #6
sheshe2 Dec 2012 #7
Jefferson23 Dec 2012 #9
Cowpunk Dec 2012 #11
Ratty Dec 2012 #16
Whovian Dec 2012 #13
caraher Dec 2012 #14
indepat Dec 2012 #15
blkmusclmachine Dec 2012 #17
struggle4progress Dec 2012 #18
cbrer Dec 2012 #19
davidpdx Dec 2012 #20
yurbud Dec 2012 #21

Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:34 AM

1. du rec. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:43 AM

2. It really was a repudiation of Bob Dole and basic humanity.

Bob Dole was the republicans' choice for President in 1996. If the vote had gone otherwise, he would have been President. He made a special sojourn to the Senate to appeal for the passage of this bill, not only for himself, but for countless others in his condition of disability. And it wasn't easy or comfortable for him to be there, in a wheelchair. The present republican Senators HAD TO have noticed him as they voted. Some of them personally know Bob Dole.

And they voted against the treaty anyway. Because devotion to extreme conservatism trumps personal relationships, common decency to others who need help, and what their constituents want. And a blindness to see that while the UN is imperfect, it does good at times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to no_hypocrisy (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:34 AM

8. Warning: Kinda' Negative . . .

As a Recovering Republican, Dole got the nomination in 1996 because he was the highest-ranking Republican and they go by whose "turn" it is. You wait and float your interest, and if you're the most senior/most powerful/have the biggest IOUs to call-in, you get the office (or the nomination).

They got away from that in 2012 because none were truly heavy-hitters. It should have gone to Rick Perry but he showed himself as a helpless, hopeless empty suit.

As far as the Treaty and looking right past their "friend" BobDole . . . I can tell you the majority of Senate Republicans would be diagnosed as sociopaths.

Sorry to sound so negative, but I've become sickened by the inner-working of the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatorLarry (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:33 AM

10. Perry in 2012 compared to Perry before back surgery - 2 very different people

I have no doubt that hydrocodone played a huge role in his performance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GatorLarry (Reply #8)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:25 AM

12. Welcome to DU! Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:47 AM

3. Pandering to the tin-foil hat crowd, that's why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:49 AM

4. DU recommendation

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:56 AM

5. Symptomatic of why the US will fail under their leadership as a country for humanity. n/t



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:07 AM

6. Switzerland hasn't ratified for the same CT reasons...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:28 AM

7. K&R

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:15 AM

9. DICK THORNBURGH, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL and a Republican with a child who is disabled.

Transcript from CNN. He speaks pointedly on how despicable the Republican position is on this subject:

snip* COOPER: The idea the treaty would give the U.N. vast control over American children's lives and take away kids with glasses from their parents is just factually incorrect. Just not true. In July, testifying before the Foreign Relations Committee, former U.S. attorney general Dick Thornburgh pointed out that kind of stuff is just not true, it wouldn't have an impact on U.S. law. Mr. Thornburgh is a Republican and the father of a disabled son. He joins me now.

Mr. Attorney general, appreciate you being with us. The crux of the senator's argument really seems to be just because U.S. law hasn't ever been affected by a U.N. treaty doesn't mean it couldn't happen someday. He says under article 6 of the constitution, any U.N. treaty automatically becomes law of the land in the United States. Is that true?

DICK THORNBURGH, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, the consideration of this treaty was very carefully framed by attaching a number of restrictions, understandings and declarations that make it clear that number one, there is no need for change in U.S. law. There is not a single dime that has to be appropriated pursuant to this treaty, that the sovereignty of the United States is protected, that individual parents' rights are protected. This is -- it has one very real, clear and important purpose to this, and that is to send a message to the world that enables them to follow in the footsteps of what the United States has done in its landmark Americans with disabilities act. That's purely and simply what the purpose of the act is. It has no effect whatsoever within this country, it gives no jurisdiction to the U.N. over any individual or any government within the United States. I'm puzzled as to where these strong objections come from.

COOPER: Because what they're saying is that U.N. bureaucrats in Geneva or some office, you know, somewhere are going to be able to like take home-schooled kids and force them to go to schools in America, or take kids with glasses away from their parents if they get labeled disabled. You're saying that's just fantasy.

THORNBURGH: Anderson, I served at the U.N. as an undersecretary general and I know that it's not without fault. There are a lot of things that the U.N. doesn't do as well as it might. But there's never been any evidence of a grand conspiracy to take over parental rights or to take children away from their parents. These are pure fantasy.

COOPER: Senator Lee could not come up with any example, I mean, his whole --

THORNBURGH: Of course not.

COOPER: -- argument is based on the idea that U.N. treaties automatically become law in the United States and therein change U.S. law. He couldn't come up with a single example where that's happened. You worked at the U.N. are you aware of any examples where that's happened?

THORNBURGH: No, quite the contrary. I think the important thing is that when we adopt a treaty and we attach to it certain reservations, understandings and declarations that are in our interest and preserve our system and our rights, that's what becomes the law of the land. That's what's been done here very carefully to preserve our rights. Really, the notion of the United States relinquishing its long-time leadership role in a very important human rights area like the rights of people with disabilities is to me unthinkable. But I'm sure this will be back again for consideration either by this Senate or by the new Senate that takes office next month. But, I don't think these kinds of arguments that have been raised should carry the day.

COOPER: And you're saying that's what this is really about, the U.S. leadership to the world in terms of encouraging equal treatment of people who are disabled, because the other thing senator Lee says, and others who agree with him say, is well, if this doesn't have any impact on U.S. law, why are we even talking about it, why even sign on to this U.N. treaty. To that you say what?

THORNBURGH: It's a very good reason. The United States has always aspired to world leadership in important areas like human rights. And for us to relinquish or forfeit that leadership because of the spurious reasons that have been raised in opposition to the U.N. convention simply doesn't make any sense.

We should be proud of what we've done in the United States. We should seek to see that the 650 million people around the world who don't benefit from statutes like the Americans with disabilities act are given that opportunity, given the opportunity to join the mainstream of society in their respective countries. But that's not going to happen if the world leader turns its back on the rest of the world and says we don't support this.

COOPER: And the number you threw out there I think is an important one just to repeat, 650 million disabled people around the world could potentially benefit if the countries who sign on to this U.N. treaty followed through on it.

THORNBURGH: Absolutely.

COOPER: Six hundred fifty million people, that is a world- changing number.

THORNBURGH: And 80 percent of those come from lesser developed countries where we should be focusing our attention when it comes to human rights.

COOPER: Attorney general Dick Thornburgh, I appreciate you coming on to talk. Thanks very much.

THORNBURGH: Not at all, thank you.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1212/07/acd.01.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:56 AM

11. It's all about "American exceptionalism"

What's good for every other nation is bad for the U.S. Because we rule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cowpunk (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:24 PM

16. Don't forget the antichrist

You know, one world government, sign of the end times and all that.

I wish I was being sarcastic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:33 AM

13. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:13 PM

14. Which is why Republicans consistently oppose all those trade agreements

Defending our sovereignty...

Wait, what? They didn't block NAFTA and other deals that followed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:23 PM

15. Just another example of how the right is a malignancy on America

that needs be be excised so the patient can regain its vitality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:23 PM

17. The Christian Dominionists are against disability rights.

There isn't much that they AREN'T against!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:44 PM

18. They killed it because President Obama signed it and sent it to the Senate

No doubt there was much noisy empty rhetoric about American sovereignty, but that is prepackaged noise

The prior President, Bush, negotiated the treaty. The GOP killed it because President Obama signed it and sent it to the Senate: they intend to do nothing for the next four years except to obsctruct him, just as they have for the last four

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:03 PM

19. du rec k/r nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:31 AM

20. Dickwad Republicans

They have no idea what world leadership is about. We went from being a world leader to being hated during Shrub's term in office and have only started to recover the last 4 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:46 PM

21. they don't mind infringing on our sovereignty with TRADE DEALS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread