Since President Obama's inauguration, conservative media figures have asserted or suggested that U.S. sovereignty may give way to a one-world government. Their alarmism is part of a recent eruption of extremist anti-government rhetoric in the conservative media; as Media Matters for America has noted, since January, conservatives in the media have warned of impending socialism, fascism, communism, Nazism, McCarthyism, and Marxism, or used such language to describe Obama or other Democrats. Conservative media figures have also warned that Obama will seize their guns or have suggested that a government effort to ban guns is likely. And Fox News has actively promoted what it has branded “FNC Tax Day Tea Parties.”

The one-world government rhetoric has been advanced by some of Fox News' most familiar faces. For instance, in an April 6 column headlined, “The Declaration of Independence has been repealed,” Fox News contributor Dick Morris claimed, “On April 2, 2009, the work of July 4, 1776 was nullified at the meeting of the G-20 in London” -- an assertion Morris repeated on that night's edition of Fox News' Hannity. Additionally, on the April 2 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly stated that "[s]ome believe Speaker Nancy Pelosi [D-CA], Senator Harry Reid [D-NV], and President Obama himself are sympathetic to the one-world, global-justice view," which O'Reilly had earlier described as “requir[ing] that a one-world government seize private property and distribute it so that every human being has roughly the same amount of resources.” O'Reilly then demanded to know: “Where does Barack Obama stand?” And on the April 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Fox News host Glenn Beck asserted, “The Constitution is being taken apart piece by piece through international coalitions, through international law, and through the United Nations.”

Other examples, including statements by Morris, O'Reilly, and Beck, follow:

• As Media Matters documented, following the conclusion of the Group of 20 economic summit in London, Morris and syndicated radio host Monica Crowley falsely claimed that in signing the G-20 communiqué establishing a new Financial Stability Board (FSB), Obama ceded U.S. sovereignty to international economic regulators. In addition to his column, Morris stated on the April 6 edition of Hannity, “Basically, from an economic standpoint, [Obama's] repealed [the Declaration of Independence]. We no longer have economic sovereignty.” During the April 3 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, Morris claimed of the FSB, "[I]t effectively ceded massive areas of American sovereignty to Europe and to the global economic mavens." During the April 5 edition of the syndicated program The McLaughlin Group, Crowley claimed the G-20 communiqué is the “the first step to abrogating American sovereignty here.” In fact, the FSB referenced in the G-20 communiqué does not contain cross-border authority and thus does not in any way limit or eliminate U.S. sovereignty. Indeed, an April 3 New York Times article reported, “While the leaders agreed to create a new Financial Stability Board to monitor the financial system for signs of risks, they stopped well short of giving regulators cross-border authority, something France has long advocated.”

• On the April 6 broadcast of the nationally syndicated radio show The Savage Nation, Accuracy in Media editor Cliff Kincaid asserted that Obama's nomination of Yale Law School dean Harold Koh as legal adviser to the State Department “is beyond worrisome. This is terrifying that -- the thought of this kind of guy with these views becoming the top lawyer at the State Department. But seen in the light of the some of the other appointments Obama has made, it's consistent with his push, which is now out in the open, for the U.S. to become really subsumed into this, quote, 'new world order' that everybody keeps talking about, in which our sovereignty has been sacrificed for the, quote, 'greater good.' ”

• On the April 2 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly read from an April 1 Wall Street Journal op-ed in which former Danish prime minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen wrote, “We must keep up the pressure by demanding a globalization that works for everyone, and forge new alliances and new lines of communication across national boundaries. We must develop new, progressive ways to achieve global justice.” O'Reilly then commented: “Well, Karl Marx could not have said it better. Global justice requires that a one-world government seize private property and distribute it so that every human being has roughly the same amount of resources. The Denmark guy's vision is nothing new, but it's now being recycled as justice.” After stating that "[s]ome believe Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senator Harry Reid, and President Obama himself are sympathetic to the one-world, global-justice view," O'Reilly added: “Key question: Where does Barack Obama stand? Are the right-wing pundits correct? Is he down with the global-justice jihad? There's no hard evidence to suggest that he is, but he has not repudiated the false vision either. Until President Obama does, speculation will rage.”

• On the April 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Beck stated that Koh “believes in internationalism. He believes that we should not have a Constitution, that the Constitution is trumped by international law.” Beck later added: "[T]he idea is, have our courts answer to international law. Forget about the Constitution. Forget about your sovereignty."

• On March 30, The Fox Nation linked to a March 30 New York Post article using the headline “Scary! Obama nominee wants one world order.” In the article, Post reporter Meghan Clyne asserted that Koh is a “fan of 'transnational legal process,' arguing that the distinctions between US and international law should vanish.”

• On the March 27 edition of his radio show, Beck hosted Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to discuss her proposed constitutional amendment “to prohibit the President from entering into a treaty or other international agreement that would provide for the United States to adopt as legal tender in the United States a currency issued by an entity other than the United States.” During the interview, Beck stated: “I don't want to believe that there are people in our country that would trash our dollar like this. And what's going to happen is if you start to talk about a global currency, which I'm telling you, there's no way out of what we're doing now besides devaluing the dollar to pay off our debt and then have a new currency. There's just no other way.” He added, "[W]hat happens is when you stand up, and when you say those things, then you're deemed a kook. Then you're deemed a militia member." Later in the interview, Bachmann asserted: “The president is committing us so much now, and Congress is committing us to so much spending, that the only way out will be for him to continue to print money and have wild inflation. And once that collapses, then it's a global currency. Well, then we are no more as a nation. We cease at that point.” Beck responded, in part, “I have something that I wish somebody in Washington would consider, that they would be willing to just fall on their sword to show the American people this is real,” and “I believe it. But convincing everybody else may be a different story.”

• On the March 24 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Charles Payne asserted: “Listen, one day I think that we are heading toward a one-world sort of government. I think Obama probably likes that.”

• During an interview with former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton on the March 24 edition of his Fox News program, Beck asserted, “Ambassador, everybody is calling for global currency. I think part of this is a game, but I think, also, part of it is a -- I mean, now the U.N. is saying, you know what? We should have a global currency. It's also a movement to tie the entire globe together into one big government. Am I wrong or right?” Later during the interview, Beck stated: “So -- so help me out on this. You're known as a fighter. I mean, you are a guy in there, man, you were just taking the fight right to them. So, what does the average person do? I mean, the average person, they hear, you know, I might be losing my sovereignty. ... What -- who do -- who's on our side?” Bolton responded: “Well, you know, I think it's important we understand what we mean by sovereignty. To Europeans and many left-wing intellectuals in this country, it's just kind of an abstract concept that doesn't mean much. But I think to most Americans, sovereignty means our control over our own government. It's about self-government.” Later in the interview, in response to Beck's statement, “Ambassador, when you say world government, it does sound nuts. And because everybody knows, nobody is for world government,” Bolton responded: “That's why they don't call it world government anymore. And they'll try and find these other phrases. But you have to look underneath of it. And it's on a range of issues, not just the money supply, but gun control, the death penalty, abortion, all -- global warming -- all of which are issues we can and should debate in our -- in our constitutional democratic framework. We don't need to decide them internationally. But that's what the agenda is of many people very close to the Obama administration.”

• In an interview with Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano on the March 18 edition of FoxNews.com's online program Freedom Watch, syndicated radio host Alex Jones stated that he was talking about “how hundreds of mainstream news articles a week are saying there is a new world order, a global government. It will be run by the very banks that are collapsing society by design, and we will pay carbon taxes to them.” He later stated: "[T]he good news is, I've never seen an awakening this big. And I'm seeing, you know, people like Glenn Beck talk about the new world order on Fox. I'm seeing you talk about it for years before him. We're seeing [CNN host] Lou Dobbs talk about it. We're seeing, you know, mainline talk-show hosts -- [radio host Rush] Limbaugh is even talking about global government now. [Radio host] Michael Savage is talking about how he thinks, you know, Obama may stage crises to bring in martial law."

• On the March 17 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck, National Review deputy managing editor Kevin Williamson asserted that Carol Browner, assistant to the president for energy and climate change, belonged to a group that was “arguing for ... the same stuff that the left is always arguing for, which is transferring wealth and power out of citizens' hands and into the government's hands.” Williamson went on to state, “You know, the left always needs an emergency because they can't get this stuff done through normal democratic means. So, in the '30s, it was the Depression, and then it was World War II. Then it was the Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation. And then after the Soviet Union fell apart, it became the environmental movement.” Beck responded: “Right. Let me -- I'm going to have them take you someplace that I like to call 'one-world government.' ” Beck later stated that Browner “was involved in a socialist organization” that “wants one-world government.” Williamson replied, “Yeah, they're big on what they call, you know, global architecture, transnational architecture, which is just another way of saying sort of U.N.-style bureaucracies that would be international in nature and would de-emphasize American power and global leadership.”

• In a February 10 Human Events Online article, contributor Thomas Kilgannon wrote: “Globalists were dismayed because [President] Bush's rejection of the ICC [International Criminal Court] was a vote for American sovereignty -- a refusal to cede authority to international government and a court that is not bound to the principles of the U.S. Constitution, far less our laws. That could change under the Obama administration. Two weeks ago, hope returned to the House of Hammarskjold when U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice, in a closed Security Council meeting, voiced support for the ICC.”

From April 6 edition of the nationally syndicated radio show The Savage Nation:

KINCAID: And the main gripe about Harold Koh is that he doesn't believe in the supremacy of U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution. Instead, he wants to subordinate our legal system to what is euphemistically called international law. Well, that's worrisome enough. But what we've discovered is that his mentor -- in fact, his law professor -- was a guy named Louis Sohn, S-O-H-N. And I have the whole story up on AIM.org about this relationship.

And Louis Sohn, although he carries some fancy academic titles and was a professor and international lawyer himself for many decades -- was even in on the founding of the U.N. -- that he's been called a respected scholar, but he really is a crackpot. And I mean that, because this guy Louis Sohn -- and remember, here's the guy who taught Harold Koh everything he knows about international law -- Louis Sohn was a believer in world government. I mean, that's not just my opinion. This is what he believed. And he was a major figure in creating and crafting the Law of the Sea treaty and other so-called global constitutions for U.S. and human affairs. Sohn, who was a professor at Harvard, wrote a book, and I got a hold of it. It's an incredible book, hard to find, but it's called World Peace Through World Law.

[...]

KINCAID: This is the guy who was the teacher and mentor for Obama's nominee as the top legal adviser for the State Department -- again, Harold Hongju Koh, the dean of Yale Law School. And, I mean, this is beyond worrisome. This is terrifying that -- the thought of this kind of guy with these views becoming the top lawyer at the State Department. But seen in the light of some of the other appointments Obama has made, it's consistent with his push, which is now out in the open, for the U.S. to become really subsumed into this, quote, “new world order” that everybody keeps talking about, in which our sovereignty has been sacrificed for the, quote, “greater good.”

From the April 2 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: Some conservative pundits actually believe President Obama is a star chamber guy, a man who secretly wants to turn America into a progressive country modeled on Western Europe. Also, they think, he wants to lessen the power of America and sign up for a one-world combine of governance. In the past, that kind of thinking was labeled loony, but that's changing.

Writing in today's Wall Street Journal, the former prime minister of Denmark says, “In Europe, we have been protected from the worst effects of the economic crisis thanks to welfare states built up over the past 60 years to cushion citizens from the threats” -- from the threats, from the threats -- “posed by the free market. We can all count on state health care, social housing, education, unemployment support, and other universal tax-funded services. The simplistic dictum of more markets and less government championed by Reagan, Thatcher, and their ideological heirs has failed on a momentous scale. I am hopeful that the G-20 will make progress. We must keep up the pressure by demanding a globalization that works for everyone and forge new alliances and new lines of communication across national boundaries. We must develop new, progressive ways to achieve global justice.”

Well, Karl Marx could not have said it better. Global justice requires that a one-world government seize private property and distribute it so that every human being has roughly the same amount of resources. The Denmark guy's vision is nothing new, but it's now being recycled as justice.

In America, there are a number of powerful people who subscribe to the theory, including billionaire George Soros, former Obama and Clinton adviser John Podesta, and Vermont Senator -- a senator -- Bernie Sanders.

Some believe Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senator Harry Reid, and President Obama himself are sympathetic to the one-world, global-justice view. By the way, I wrote about this in my book Culture Warrior. And now, the far-left movement is gaining power, as I predicted it would.

Key question: Where does Barack Obama stand? Are the right-wing pundits correct? Is he down with the global-justice jihad? There's no hard evidence to suggest that he is, but he has not repudiated the false vision either. Until President Obama does, speculation will rage. And that is the “Memo.”

From the April 1 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:

BECK: We have a guy now that is -- is been nominated by our president to be the head of the legal for the State Department. This is the guy that's going to be brokering all of our treaties. This is the guy that's going to oversee all the legal things at the State Department. International relations.

This man does not believe -- he's from the -- he's the former head of Yale Law. He believes in internationalism. He believes that we should not have a Constitution, that the Constitution is trumped by international law. He believes that the judges in this country -- if you can't get same-sex -- this sounds crazy, but it's happening.

California. How many times now have you said no to same-sex marriage? That doesn't make you a hatemonger. That doesn't mean that you hate gay people or you don't want gay couples to be together. I mean, this is Barack Obama's position. Barack Obama's position is no gay marriage, but civil unions. Fine. Absolutely fine.

Now, California has said that twice. Both times it went to the court. Now, the first time the court decided, “No. You've got to throw that out because you're overreaching here in the language.” Fine. So what they did is they redefined it. I believe Proposition 8 was, like, one sentence. “Marriage is defined between a man and a woman.” It doesn't say, “No civil unions,” it says nothing. It just -- “Marriage is defined between a man and a woman.” Done. People vote on it, they pass it yet again, and what happens? They throw it into the courts.

Now, if the court doesn't reject it this time, what recourse do the people who want gay marriage to be a law -- what recourse do they have? Well, in any republic, what they do then is just try to keep changing people's minds. But that's not what happens. There is another show. And I'm only using this as one example. There's a different show that's going on, and it is at the international level.

The international level says gay marriage is acceptable. That's international law. So, now we're in violation of international law. So, the idea is, have our courts answer to international law. Forget about the Constitution. Forget about your sovereignty. Your sovereignty and your Constitution -- you can vote on whatever you want to vote on. That's cute. That'll keep everybody happy. You vote on whatever you want. But if it's in conflict of international law -- where you've had nothing to do with international law. You didn't vote for the people who are making those laws over in Europe or anyplace else. No -- you have no -- absolutely no contact with international law. You abide by the Constitution.

The Constitution is being taken apart piece by piece through international coalitions, through international law, and through the United Nations. Now, if that's what you want, it is your right as Americans to stand up and say, “You know what? I think the Constitution was good for 1789, and it's not necessarily good today. And I think we should be international -- we should have international law. And if the rest of the world says no to the death penalty -- well, then, if that's what they've decided at the Hague, then I'm totally fine with that. If the rest of the world says we can't do these things, well, that's fine. If the rest of the world says, 'You're going to run your economy this way,' well, then I'm totally fine with it.”

If you're -- if you feel that way, then now is the time to rise up and stand up and say, “Yes. I am for international law.” But I am telling you, the British are coming, the British are coming.

From the March 27 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program:

BECK: May I just say, the frustration that I think most Americans have, or the same frustration that I have -- I don't want to believe that there are people in our country that are intentionally doing these things. I don't want to believe that there are people in our country that would trash our dollar like this.

And what's going to happen is if you start to talk about a global currency, which I'm telling you, there's no way out of what we're doing now besides devaluing the dollar to pay off our debt and then have a new currency. There's just no other way.

BACHMANN: Well, but we can stop that. I --

BECK: Wait a minute. Congresswoman, what happens is when you stand up, and when you say those things, then you're deemed a kook. Then you're deemed a militia member. And there are too many people in America that will still listen to the mainstream media. They will still listen to, you know, to those in Washington on both sides of the aisle that say, “Oh, no, well, that's never gonna happen.”

And so they sit there and do nothing. And those who would do want to do something are afraid because they don't want to be deemed a kook. And they also are tired of being played by politicians in Washington.

BACHMANN: Well, Glenn, I have experienced that throughout my political career -- being labeled a kook. It just happened yesterday again in a big story in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. But all we have to do is point to the Treasury secretary on tape -- on camera. This is not Michele Bachmann being a kook. This is our Treasury secretary on tape and on camera.

And also we now have countries across the world asking for this. That's why I went to my fellow colleagues, and I dropped a bill the day before yesterday that would bind the president's hands, that wouldn't allow him to enter into a treaty or an international agreement to take us off the dollar and put us on an international currency, because once that -- you've exactly stated it right. The president is committing us so much now, and Congress is committing us to so much spending, that the only way out will be for him to continue to print money and have wild inflation. And once that collapses, then it's a global currency.

Well, then we are no more as a nation. We cease at that point. So we still are at a point of pulling back, but, I mean, right now the secondhand is right up to midnight on our freedom, and so people have to act. This is not -- this is not just a radio show call or this is not a gimmick. This is reality now. This is our call to arms. So that's why I dropped this bill, so that -- which means I filed this bill on the floor -- so that we can get this passed so we can bind the president or his designee, so they cannot put us --

BECK: All right.

BACHMANN: -- into a global currency.

BECK: Congressman, I -- we -- we're up against a hard network break, but I have to tell you -- do you have time? Could I -- I don't have time even on the other side. Could I -- do you have something at 10? Could we call you back about 10:05?

BACHMANN: Yeah, you can. I'm just cleaning the house today.

BECK: Oh, you are? OK. You know what? I see that I have Senator [Jim] DeMint [R-SC] on, but maybe I'll put you on with Senator DeMint.

BACHMANN: Sure.

BECK: Could I put the two of you on together? Because I -- I have to tell you, that I have something that I wish somebody in Washington would consider, that they would be willing to just fall on their sword to show the American people this is real. Because I think everybody still think -- a lot of people still think that this is a game.

BACHMANN: Oh, no, no, no.

BECK: And if you don't mind --

BACHMANN: This is real.

BECK: I -- I know that.

BACHMANN: This is it now.

BECK: I know you -- I know you believe it --

BACHMANN: This is it.

BECK: -- and I believe it. But convincing everybody else may be a different story. So hang on the phone. We'll -- we'll try to get you back.

From the March 24 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: Joining me now is former ambassador to the United Nations and senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, Ambassador John Bolton.

Ambassador, everybody is calling for global currency. I think part of this is a game, but I think, also, part of it is a -- I mean, now the U.N. is saying, you know what? We should have a global currency. It's also a movement to tie the entire globe together into one big government. Am I wrong or right?

BOLTON: Well, I think there are a lot of different motivations. If you look at China, they are worried about U.S. inflation, devaluing the debt that they hold. And they're unwillingness to buy more of it actually may help save us from ourselves.

BECK: Yes.

BOLTON: But I do think there are other people in Europe, many in the United States as well, who don't prize sovereignty, particularly American sovereignty, as much as most Americans do. And the real test I think we're going to see here in the next few years is where the Obama administration comes out on some of these globalization proposals.

BECK: You know, he wrote a paper. I'm trying to remember. I mean, his plan is like the next big plan or something like that, but there was a -- there is a secondary title to it. Do you know what I'm talking about? The Obama --

BOLTON: Well --

BECK: Go ahead.

BOLTON: A lot of his advisers have talked about concepts like responsible sovereignty -- whatever that means -- and it's a way of preconditioning people to get used to a lessening of the decision making that we do in Washington, of transferring responsibility to international organizations.

Now, they're never going to say that. They're never going to say, “You know, we think we need less American sovereignty.” They are going to characterize it very differently. But the net impact of moving in a number of these directions will have exactly that effect.

[...]

BECK: Yeah. OK. So -- so help me out on this. You're known as a fighter. I mean, you are a guy in there, man, you were just taking the fight right to them. So, what does the average person do? I mean, the average person, they hear, you know, I might be losing my sovereignty.

How do we -- how do we fight that, especially when -- there was a story today about [Gov.] Haley Barbour [R-MS]. I mean, here's a guy who's a Republican. Haley Barbour is not -- originally, I saw the headline, I thought he was fighting against eminent domain. I thought he was actually going in and saying, hey, hey, now eminent domain is important for some stuff but not for new casinos. And the Republicans aren't even standing up against eminent domain. What -- who do -- who's on our side?

BOLTON: Well, you know, I think it's important we understand what we mean by sovereignty. To Europeans and many left-wing intellectuals in this country, it's just kind of an abstract concept that doesn't mean much. But I think to most Americans, sovereignty means our control over our own government. It's about self-government.

BECK: Yes.

BOLTON: So, preserving sovereignty means keeping control over what the politicians are doing. And I have to say, I am optimistic on this score, because I think when Americans understand what the risks are, they will stand up and tell their members of Congress --

BECK: But --

BOLTON: -- “Don't even think about it.” But we've got to get organized. There's no about it.

BECK: Ambassador, when you say world government, it does sound nuts. And because everybody knows, nobody is for world government. But again, if you add the emergency --

BOLTON: And that's why they don't call it world government.

BECK: Pardon me? I know.

BOLTON: That's why they don't call it --

BECK: I know.

BOLTON: That's why they don't call it world government anymore. And they'll try and find these other phrases. But you have to look underneath of it. And it's on a range of issues, not just the money supply, but gun control, the death penalty --

BECK: Global warming.

BOLTON: -- abortion, all -- global warming -- all of which are issues we can and should debate in our -- in our constitutional democratic framework. We don't need to decide them internationally. But that's what the agenda is of many people very close to the Obama administration.

BECK: OK. Thank you very much. I appreciate it, Ambassador.

From the March 18 edition of FoxNews.com's Freedom Watch:

NAPOLITANO: OK, New York hears you loud and clear. Welcome to Freedom Watch, Alex. What are you talking about today?

JONES: Oh, just how hundreds of mainstream news articles a week are saying there is a new world order, a global government. It will be run by the very banks that are collapsing society by design, and we will pay carbon taxes to them.

Here is a Time magazine headline “New World Order,” and they say a new bank of the world will rule the United States. Here is the Financial Times of London: “And now for a world government” is the headline. They're openly announcing that the banks will rule the planet and we'll pay our carbon taxes to them for the phony global warming.

And I just had a state rep on confirming the modern militia movement document, MIAC, saying Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, anybody with a Ron Paul bumper sticker are dangerous terrorists, that the North American Union doesn't exist, that anybody that talks about freedom or liberty issues is basically an evil terrorist. So, we're exposing the new world order here, Judge.

NAPOLITANO: I appreciate what you're exposing. And Ron Paul, whom you just mentioned, will be on Freedom Watch with me in about 20 minutes.

I must tell you that there was a time when the types of things that you are warning against was not discussed openly and publicly. But I was scandalized when British Prime Minister Gordon Brown tipped his hand when he spoke to a joint session of Congress two weeks ago and said he was looking for -- these are the words that caused me a couple of sleepless nights, Alex, and I bet you as well and many of the folks watching and listening to us -- “a global new deal.”

Now, what under the sun is a global new deal, unless it consists of the type of thing that you have just warned against? In which American taxpayers will be enriching banks and banks will be deciding what we can pay, but it will be happening irrespective of the boundaries of the United States of America and other countries as well.

[...]

JONES: This is the birth of the new world order, and so you've got all these different honchos from the private central banks, the private Federal Reserve and others, all meeting, deciding on the final architecture of the world government. The very banks that have engineered the economic collapse are now posing as our saviors, bringing this in.

But the good news is, I've never seen an awakening this big. And I'm seeing, you know, people like Glenn Beck talk about the new world order on Fox. I'm seeing you talk about it for years before him. We're seeing Lou Dobbs talk about it. We're seeing, you know, mainline talk-show hosts -- Limbaugh is even talking about global government now.

NAPOLITANO: Right.

JONES: Michael Savage is talking about how he thinks, you know, Obama may stage crises to bring in martial law. So, all the things that I was talking about in the wilderness 10-plus years ago is now hitting mainstream, and it is great.

So, it shows me the sleeping giant that is the United States and all of this liberty and freedom -- we're rediscovering our roots, our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution. You called for states to -- not secede, but, you know, re-declare their 10th Amendment, Ninth Amendment. You're a judge; you know the Constitution well, constitutional scholar. And so they're trying to get the feds back in line. The battle lines are being drawn here.

NAPOLITANO: Right.

JONES: And the American people are finding out that Washington's been seized by offshore banks.

From the March 17 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: And what was it they wanted? I mean, besides the world to be able to --

WILLIAMSON: Well, if you go back and look at, you know, what they're arguing for, it's the same stuff that the left is always arguing for, which is transferring wealth and power out of citizens' hands and into the government's hands.

You know, the left always needs an emergency because they can't get this stuff done --

BECK: Sure.

WILLIAMSON: -- through normal democratic means. So, in the '30s, it was the Depression, and then it was World War II.

BECK: Mm-hmm.

WILLIAMSON: Then it was the Cold War and the threat of nuclear annihilation. And then after the Soviet Union fell apart, it became the environmental movement.

BECK: Right. Let me -- I'm going to have them take you someplace that I like to call “one-world government.”

WILLIAMSON: Yeah.

BECK: Yeah. We'll do that here in just a second.

[...]

BECK: OK. So she's the climate czar.

WILLIAMSON: It is, yes.

BECK: And she said in U.S. News & World Report that she wants to get to a system where they can control the temperature in your house and make sure you that can't run your air conditioner --

WILLIAMSON: Yeah.

BECK: -- as high as you want?

WILLIAMSON: Essentially, that you would fire up your A/C real high and the power company would just cut down your power supply to counteract what you were doing.

BECK: Yeah. OK. When I said that over a year ago, people said, “Oh, that's crazy.” They were talking about it in California. “That's crazy. That'll never happen.”

Here you have somebody in government -- a czar -- that wants that to happen and can't wait for the smart grid. But she's also -- was involved in a socialist organization.

WILLIAMSON: Sure. Yeah.

BECK: She she's been scrubbed off this website. But this socialist organization wants one-world government.

WILLIAMSON: Yeah, they're big on what they call, you know, global architecture, transnational architecture, which is just another way of saying sort of U.N.-style bureaucracies that would be international in nature and would de-emphasize American power and global leadership.