You're right, chief. That's exactly what the CNN exchange was about:
PILGRIM: This is the problem. It is so broad, the talks are so broad, 146 countries, each with one vote, trying to hit consensus, it is almost impossible.
DOBBS: Sounds almost like the United Nations.
Consensus for Pilgrim means ratification of the US program. And as we remember from the run up to Gulf War II, the UN is the equivalent of the League of Nations, so Dobbs here is quite damning in his criticism.
What always staggered me about this logic was the glee with which it was taken up by those who in no way benefit from it. I had always meant to write something about it. Whenever some arrangement is made to further democracy in the face of overwhelming power differentials, people sneer at the arrangement as soon as power's prerogative is stalled. Witness many working people calling labor unions, for instance, 'irrelevant.' Ditto for the UN - except when the UN is needed for legitimation/bail-out purposes.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com