John Cox has formally announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in 2008, but he appears to be having some trouble keeping it all together under the pressure of campaign life. Mr. Cox, like former Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole, has developed a habit of referring to himself as if he’s talking about someone else. It’s an interesting state of mind that allows such external self-representation, as if Mr. Cox has a second, secret identity living within his mind, named Mr. Skippy. Mr. Skippy writes about what John Cox wants to do, and what John Cox thinks, and what John Cox will do if John Cox becomes President.
This odd mental quirk is expressed as John Cox writes about himself, in a little section of his web site called American Liberty, American Independence,
“John Cox will always work to maintain our national sovereignty, and will fight against those who would hand our independence and power over to unelected international bureaucrats.”
This statement reveals another strange quirk in John Cox’s mind: Paranoia.
Who is trying to hand over American independence and power over to unelected international bureaucrats? I’ve never heard any national politician argue in favor of such a thing. Name names, Mr. Cox. Who? Is it Mr. Skippy? Is it that little voice inside your head, Mr. Cox? The one that you hear sometimes, when you’re all alone? The one that writes your political material for you?
For the sake of the American people, I think it’s time you brought Mr. Skippy out from the shadows, Mr. Cox. Declare him your running mate, if you like, or call him your “Chief of Staff” if you like. When the pressures of running for President get to be too much, Mr. Cox, you can just close your eyes and have a “cabinet meeting” with all of your “advisors”… and mommy. Mommy will be there too.
This was a very clever post, but wildly inaccurate. John Cox isn’t at all paranoid about anything. He simply understands that we must not turn over our decision-making powers to the U.N. or other world bodies, of which he is justifiably suspicious. He’s not at all a conspiracy theorist, and finds some of the things they spout to BE quite paranoid.
He’s also pro-legal immigration, and not for artificial restrictions on legal immigrants, who help build this country. He believes the free market should determine most things, including immigration, with competition lowering prices and improving competitiveness.
I cite these issues because a “paranoid” person might take a far different positions.
You ought to take a canidate’s full belief system into account, and not assume that one line on a Website (misinterpreted) is the sum total of a person’s worlview.
Oh, really, Stephen?
Do tell. What makes John Cox’s suspicion that the sovereignty and independence of the United States of America will be handed over to the United Nations justified?
Who has actually proposed such a thing?
No one.
Is he hearing voices again? Do you hear them too?
No voices, except the voice of reason and balance.
John doesn’t want to eliminate the U.N., doesn’t see black helicopters invading U.S. airspace, and doesn’t feel any paranoia about working with other nations.
Ensuring that world bodies (and not just the U.N. – NAFTA and GATT have structures that bear watching) don’t gain too much power over American business or American consumers is not paraoid. I just makes sense.
You’re barking up the wrong candidate.
So, then, Stephen, who is it that has actually proposed handing over the independence and sovereignty of the United States over to international bureaucrats?
Who?
John Cox says he’s standing against this supposed conspiracy.
Where is it? Where is the conspiracy that John Cox sees?
Is it from aliens coming from the planet Neptune? Is that where John Cox is hearing the voices from?
Saying you will not allow something to happen, if it’s proposed, is not the same as seeing a “conspiracy” that it is being pursued. Frankly, you seem intent on reading your own interpretations into it so what’s the point in arguing?
You should ask your lunatic liberal colleagues to share their conspiracy theories about 9/11 or the Iraq War with you if you’re so intent on feretting out the nutters. Start with Cindy Sheehan or Ms. O’Donnell.
Oh, okay Steve, so why then doesn’t John Cox have a point in the platform for his presidential campaign saying that he will oppose a Martian invasion of the Earth, if it happens? I mean, it’s not that it’s happening, or anything, but wouldn’t John Cox oppose a Martian invasion of the Earth?
A Martian invasion of the Earth is just as likely as American politicians forming a conspiracy to hand over American independence and sovereignty to “international bureaucrats”. You know it is, Steve. You’re just trying to make a really kooky comment on the John Cox for President web site sound like it’s not nutters.
John Cox says that if he is President, he “will fight against those who would hand our independence and power over to unelected international bureaucrats.” But, now you’re admitting that there are no such people who would hand American independence over to international bureaucrats.
So now, we’re supposed to be inspired because John Cox promises to fight against people who don’t exist? Mm hm. Sounds like John Cox is hearing those voices again.
You’re getting hysterial, and comical. Martians. Clever.
Most sane people know what is meant by the comment he made, and it has nothing to do with people who don’t exist. He’s addressing those who have recognized a internationalist mindset among some that is nowhere near widespread or powerful enough to affect U.S. laws or our sovereignty at this time. He’s simply saying it should never do so, because some have stated their belief that creeping internationalism is an immanent threat. It actually isn’t.
Personally, I see the WTO and UN to be collossal jokes that are so powerless they can’t function as originally planned. Mostly, that’s a good thing.
So, Steve, now it’s a good thing when the United Nations is dysfunctional? That’s the John Cox plan? Ooooh, let me vote for him!
I think John Cox is refering to the North American Union
If so, he’s joined the rambling conspiracy theorists of the radical right. That web page you link to talks about President Bush establishing an agreement with Mexico and Canada without the authorization of Congress, and that’s just not how it works. Such an agreement would have no power under American law. It would just be the President talking. Besides, all that can be said is that the agreement, if it’s really even being considered, COULD lead to a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.
Well, that’s not exactly living up to John Cox’s paranoid warblings about a plan to give away American sovereignty to a cadre of international bureaucrats, is it?