Meanwhile, under the mistletoe , Uncle Joe does the traditional
Biden Holiday Grab-Ass with a member of the media.....
Desmond Tutu denounced Reagans' policy on South Africa as: "Immoral, evil, and totally un-Christian...an abomination, an unmitigated disaster. You are either in favor of evil or you are in favor of good. You are either on the side of the oppressed or on the side of the oppressor. You can't be neutral."
Good point, Mr Archbishop. Because on the welfare of Castro's regime you, sir, are hardly neutral, enthusiastically lending your name to the Stalinist regime's most important propaganda campaign, urging the release of convicted KGB-trained spies and terrorists.
The media's recent orgy of vituperation and snark against president Reagan's policy on South Africa finally got a much-needed corrective from Reagan's communication's director of the time Pat Buchanan. To wit:
According to President Ronald Reagan in 1986: "Apartheid is an affront to human rights and human dignity. Normal and friendly relations cannot exist between the United States and South Africa until it becomes a dead policy."...but and a BIG BUT:
"Reagan, whose first duty was the defense of his nation in the Cold War with the Soviet empire, saw not only the moral issue but the strategic imperative.
In 1986, there were 40,000 Cuban troops in Angola, where South Africa was a fighting ally and backer of anti-Communist Jonas Savimbi.
In Zimbabwe, Robert "Comrade Bob" Mugabe, having butchered thousands of Ndebele of rival Joshua Nkomo, was communizing his country. Southwest Africa and Mozambique hung in the balance.
Reagan was determined to block Moscow's drive to the Cape of Good Hope. And in that struggle State President P. W. Botha was an ally.
In view of Political Correctness, however, Mandela's ANC apparently did more to promote worldwide freedom than the U.S. military!Read More
"A bipartisan Senate duo says they want to crack down on what they call the government’s “lavish” spending on oil paintings of congressmen, the costs of which can top $50,000 each.
Sens. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said in a Thursday press release they are introducing a bill that would only allow $20,000 of taxpayer funds to be spent on each portrait, and would only cover paintings of lawmakers in the line of succession to the presidency."
|Hillary Clinton Sits for Secretary Of State Portrait in 2010|
“At a time when vital services and programs are facing cuts, we need to be looking at every way we can stop excessive spending practices in Washington,” Shaheen said.
Coburn says their bill is a way to rein in excess spending in Washington, and ensure taxpayers are not paying for unnecessary projects.
“Hardworking taxpayers shouldn’t foot the bill for lavish official portraits, especially when government officials spend more on paintings of themselves than some Americans make in a year,” Coburn said.
ABC News reported earlier this year that the Obama administration spent nearly $400,000 on paintings of officials in just a two-year- period, and the Washington Post reported in 2008 each portrait can sometimes cost over $40,000. The bill would allow other funds to be spent on the portraits after the taxpayer funds were exhausted."
"MapLight analysis of campaign contributions from political action committees (PACs) and individuals from the top 20 intelligence services contractors working with the Department of Defense, ranked by total value of contracts received, to members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Data source: Federal Election Commission from January 1, 2005 - October 4, 2013. Department of Defense intelligence services contracts source: USASpending (contract totals as of September 26, 2013)
* In total, members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence have received $3.7 million from top intelligence services contractors since January 1, 2005.
* Members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence from Maryland -- home of NSA headquarters -- led the committees in money received from top intelligence contractors. Representative C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, D-Md., is the largest recipient, having received $363,600 since January 1, 2005. Senator Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., is the second largest recipient, having received $210,150.
* Republican members of House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence have received $1.86 million since January 1, 2005, while Democrat members have received $1.82 million over the same time period.
* Members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence have received $2.2 million since January 1, 2005 from top intelligence services contractors, while members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence have received $1.5 million.
* Lockheed Martin has given $798,910 to members the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence since January 1, 2005, more than any of the other top 20 intelligence service contractors. Northrop Grumman has given $753,101, the second highest amount, and Honeywell has given $714,913, the third highest amount."Chart of the TOP 20 INTELLIGENCE SERVICES CONTRACTORS CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONGRESSIONAL INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEES at the LINK
|The Unknown Interpreter|