UN into OK

I watched my television this morning, and I saw an interesting commercial about moving the UN to central Oklahoma. They said they want to have some "elbow room". Now, the commercial, as well as the website, looks cheap, so I don't give it a chance. But, I saw it on the mainstream television news station, so you'll never know.

There are two choices on what the meaning of "elbow room" might be.

Maybe it is because, of the 50 largest cities in America, Oklahoma City has the lowest population density. Or maybe that OKC or the surrounding towns is the center of the U.S.A. The latter one, I believe Kansas City is the closest to the center of the country than OKC.

But, never mind about "elbow room", I have a more strong reaction moving the UN to my home town. Moving the UN to OKC rather than to Washington DC, Chicago, or San Francisco, I have a mild reaction. Those other cities have what the UN wants. They are all liberal-leaning cities who despised the 2nd Amendment (guns). The same time as Independence Day (2 days past now), UN wanted to meet in New York and to finalize a treaty (I don't know if they succeeded or not) that would do away the right of self-protection for the people of America (however, Michael Badnarik said the UN is just a "paper tiger"). OKC, however, is a gun-friendly city (one of the few things I like about living in OKC), so the anti-gun UN would feel isolated living here.

I would rather move the UN to somewhere else, like London, or Paris, or Berlin, or Tokyo, or even Toronto or Mexico City; anywhere else except the U.S.A. I believe like Rep. Ron Paul believes. I believe in American sovereignty. Every year, Paul drafted a bill (and every year that bill gets defeated) that states: let's get the U.S. out of the UN, and let's get the UN out of the U.S. I will vote overwhelmingly for this bill!