Diary

U.S. Ambassador Rice Rips GOP U.N. Funding Proposal; Same Old, Same Old

PLAN IS “FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED, SETS US BACK, SELF-DEFEATING; WON’T WORK”

Barack Obama’s United Nations Ambassador, Susan Rice, has her blue panties in a bunch over the House GOP plan to force the corrupt, anti-American organization to reform, or face substantial U.S. funding cuts. (I’ll wait here while you reread that last sentence; let me know what part of the plan sounds irrational.)

“Legislation that would withhold funding for the United Nations is fundamentally flawed in concept and practice, sets us back, is self-defeating, and doesn’t work,” charged Rice, adding:

“The goal of reform is one that we are working to pursue every day of the week but we believe very strongly that the way to do that is from the vantage point of a member in good standing that meets its obligations and is viewed as a constructive player where our influence is much enhanced rather than as a laggard and a debtor who’s carping from the outside that things are not changed as we would like to see them changed.”

I have a few questions, Madam Ambassador: Which country wrote the largest check to the U.N. in 2010? (Hint: it’s initials are U.S.) What was the amount of the check? (a record $7.692 billion) What percentage increase did that check represent over the contribution in 2009? (21%) How many years in a row have U.S. contributions set new records? (3) How long has the U.S. been the largest financial supporter of the U.N.? (65 years – since the organization’s founding in 1945)

How many did you answer correctly, Madam Ambassador? 100%, right? You know as well as I do that the United States has been the main money machine for this hypocritical organization from the very beginning. How’s that worked out for America so far, hmm?

Additional “insight” from the ambassador: “Previous efforts to punish the U.N. by slashing U.S. donations reduced our standing, reduced our influence, and it made it much harder for us to use the institution to obtain positive results for the United States.” You’re just messin’ with us, right? Let’s give the lightning round a shot and see how well you do:

How’s our “standing” in the U.N right now, Ms. Ambassador?

How’s our “influence” working out as it relates to Israel, for example?

Which “positive results” for the United States are you talking about?

The United Nations not only became more and more anti-American through all of those years of record U.S. contributions, Madam Ambassador, but its obsessive compulsion with passing resolution after resolution condemning Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians – while turning a blind eye to Muslim countries and their abuse of women and children – has become pathetically laughable.

Doesn’t this whole thing have a “doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results” ring to it, Ambassador Rice?

Ironically, the Obama Regime’s logic as it relates to U.S. contributions to the U.N is exactly the same “logic” liberals have used for decades; the more money you throw at a problem, the better your chance of “fixing it.” Entitlement programs and a creeping nanny state mentality have brought this country to the brink of financial disaster. Coincidence? Not so much.

Shouldn’t Obama’s 2008 campaign slogan have been “Hope, Change and Wishful Thinking”?