This will finish off the US Constitution if ratified.

Article 20:

•Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

If Obama becomes the appointed UN president of the US before 2016, there will be no more elections. At least nothing we are familiar with.

The sheer volume of stuff we don't know about is almost overwhelming.

http://www.oas.org/OASpage/eng/Documents/Democractic_Charter.htm

There are two main belief systems that libs espouse that are incredibly naive, which makes them dangerous.  The first is, "the government would never do that to us." The second is, "If something was really happening, the media would report it."

            

There are two main belief systems that libs espouse that are incredibly naive, which makes them dangerous.  The first is, "the government would never do that to us." The second is, "If something was really happening, the media would report it."

But the "libs" have been really pissed at government over the last few years for lying etc, and they've also been pointing out that the medias lies as well..  Though I do know people on both the Lib side, and the Conserv side, that believe the way you describe, they're just few and far between.

Where are the libs that have been pissed off at government and the media bias over the last few years?

I haven't seen it.

There are plenty.. I know many myself. Just like I know plenty of Conservs that think the same way.

The folks I get along with the most are the Libs and Conservs that believe ALL media are hiding truths and misleading people. The people that love fox, MSNBC,  or CNN over the others are seemingly just picking a Media side that best suits their political mindset, but even then they're actually just being played by big media business supported by rich players that really just have profit on the brain, not the suited demographic they're pandering toward. 

To address the theme of the OP, I think ceding control to the UN on various issues is a big deal right now and will be one of increasing concern. There is a tremendous push from the left to further integrate the United States into a global network of laws, treaties, regulations, and so on. People who support this have no affinity for the concept of the nation state, seeing it as an antiquated and even tribal notion. I couldn't disagree more, I think the concept of the independent nation state is the surest safe guard for liberty in the world.

In global system there is no recourse if injustices do take place, if every nation has been brought into the web of a globalized system, there is no redress for our grievances, there would have been no France coming to our aid in the revolution in such a system, because France would be part and parcel to the tyranny that was taking place bound by international agreements to not intervene. This is the case with the United Nations, and the more the internationalist elements in this country entangle us in the global network of laws and regulations the less free we will be. Take for example all of the bogus climate laws and regulations that are being proposed at the global level that will have an effect on us domestically, and take a look at the UN arms treaty that is generating a lot of controversy over fears that it will undermine the 2nd amendment here at home.

Imagine a scenario where globally the UN eradicates civillian ownership and manufacturing of firearms, and only in America do we retain those faculties. Under such a scenario we wouldn't be able to import weapons since they would not longer be manufactured for civilians, and domestically I can certainly see a scenario unfolding where the left tries to get around the second amendment by putting high regulations and outlawing certain gun/ammo manufacturers that makes it nearly impossible to have a viable business in that field. This would essentially cut gun owners off from acquiring new weapons in ammo if done at a large enough scale.

These are the sort of international regulations that worry me, we have elements in this country, even those in power who want to undermine American sovereignty and further integrate us into a global system. To me, this is simply treason, and yet proponents of this call it progress. We should keep a sharp eye out for attempts to undermine our liberties here at home by binding us to treaties that are so distant from the concept of true American freedom.

The SKY IS FALLING!  you know what happened to the kid who cried WOLF too often?Because your PARANOID, means your probably WRONG most of the time.
Paranoid types read one thing and see "The SKY IS FALLING!" instead.
See, your paranoia is at work here.
Care to give some evidence that Obama has a lot more respect for UN dogma than he ever had for the constitution.
YOUR flapping gums don't FACTS make!

No flapping involved.

I first started digging into the UN while in a debate over climate change. The branch called the IPPC. What I found was amazing.

I'm the cook today, so I don't have time to take your hand and walk you through the facts right now.

Lets just say that the UN is actively working on gaining control of global industry, energy and currency. As well as implementing a set of global laws that supercede things like the US constitution.

As far as Obama is concerned, the UN and the Nobel prize people are completely intertwined. I know you don't ever question anything that comes from left field, but didn't you ask yourself, (just a little), how Obama was able to garner a Nobel peace prize for doing absolutely nothing?

I really wish you were capable of doing your own research. It would save a lot of time. But since you aren't able, we'll tackle this subject when I get some time. Today and tomorrow I'll be pretty tied up, but we'll do it, I promise.