~ Featuring ~
Foreign Aid Often Hurts More Than Helps 
by Brian Mark Weber
Bolton – Kim Is Lying, Stalling For 
Time, Trying To Hogtie Trump 
{ } ~ John Bolton points out that North Korea is very close to achieving “their dream of the past twenty-five years or more... being able to deliver thermo-nuclear warheads on target in the United States. They’re very close and they don’t want anything that would interfere with them crossing that finish line.” Shannon Bream asks, “If they’re that close, why in the world would they agree to now halt the program, to give it up completely? It just doesn’t logically make any sense.” Bolton replies, “Because they’re lying,” and that “they want to buy time, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, whatever it is they need to get across the finish line.” Bolton predicts “it could either be a long and unproductive meeting or a short and unproductive meeting,” dependent upon the posturing of Kim Jong Un. Shannon Bream plays a clip of Marco Rubio predicting it is a ploy on the part of Kim in which will portray himself as being cooperative to the world and President Trump as uncooperative, persuading them to back off of sanctions...
Radio Legend Michael Savage Approached 
To Run Against Sen. Dianne Fein-stein 
by Joshua Caplan
{ } ~ Radio legend Michael Savage revealed to his audience Friday that ‘very important people,’ have approached him to run against Senator Dianne Fein-stein (D-CA)... “Some very important people have come to me and said ‘Savage, would you like to run as an independent for the U.S. Senate in the of California against the esteemed Dianne Fein-stein?’ Now you may say ‘you don’t have a ghost of a chance.’ With all those illegal aliens, with all that union money, with no press on your side, how could you David run against the Goliath of Fein-stein?” […] I’ve been holding down the fort for 24 years this March. 24 years in the radio business and I am younger than Dianne Fein-stein. That’s right. I’ve been asked by a number of very powerful, important people to run as an independent for the U.S. Senate in the state of California and I am contemplating whether I really want to leave what I’ve worked for all my life and roll in the mud because politics is the dirty business on the planet.” Savage did not reveal who is pushing him to run for the U.S. Senate or what type of backing he would receive...
Chairman Nunes Reveals Fusion GPS
Connection to liar-nObama White House
by sundance
{ } ~ Well this latest twist is sketchy as hell. In December last year we learned about Nellie Ohr working for Fusion GPS... and channeling liar-Clinton/Steele ‘dossier’ information to her husband Bruce Ohr who worked in the DOJ National Security Division. Today Fox News is revealing that Fusion-GPS #2 man-in-charge, Neil King Jr., was/is married to President liar-nObama’s White House Policy Adviser, Shailagh Murray; who was also Joe loose lips-Biden’s Deputy-Chief-of-Staff.  It’s becoming more and more transparently obvious that Fusion-GPS was one of the contractors with access to the FBI and NSA database; and when Admiral Rogers shut down that access April 18, 2016, Fusion-GPS needed a workaround to access the system through the Dept. of Justice National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), via Bruce Ohr... 
CNN Anchor: Trump Goes Down as a 
‘Great President’ if He Solved North Korea
Crisis, ‘There’s No Way Around That’ 
by David Rutz
{ } ~ CNN anchor Erin Burnett commented President Donald Trump would go down as a "great president" if he managed to solve the generational North Korean nuclear crisis... adding "there's no way around that." The White House stunned the world Thursday night with the announcement that Trump had accepted an invitation from Kim Jong Un, the young dictator of North Korea who has repeatedly threatened the United States with destruction. If the summit takes place—the South Koreans have said the meeting will take place by May—it would be the first face-to-face meeting between a U.S. president and a North Korean leader. It was the main topic on cable news Thursday night, and Burnett made the comment after moderating a panel on the significance and pitfalls of such a meeting...
Colombia Ambassador Pick’s Testimony Spurs
Questions About Role in Benghazi Aftermath 
by Susan Crabtree
{ } ~ Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) wants more answers from Joseph Macmanus, a career foreign service officer nominated for the post of U.S. ambassador to Colombia... about his role in helping former Secretary of State liar-Hillary Clinton respond to the 2012 Benghazi attack. "The senator remains concerned about the ability of the nominee to effectively represent the United States as ambassador to Colombia," a Rubio spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon late Thursday, a day after Macmanus testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "The confirmation process is still ongoing, and the nominee will have an opportunity to address further questions," Rubio's spokesman added. Rubio is one of several Republican senators who have taken issue with Macmanus's nomination over his close ties to liar-Hillary Clinton during her tenure at State, amid other concerns... 
Foreign Aid Often Hurts More Than Helps 
by Brian Mark Weber:  There’s an old saying that charity begins at home. While the spirit of the phrase is controversial in our hyper-political climate, the fact is that sending federal aid overseas is more of a feel-good solution than a long-term way of reducing poverty or increasing the ability of people to become more self-reliant and prosperous.

            For decades, the United States has sent aid to countries around the world with the noble intention of helping those unable to access the basic necessities of life such as medicine, running water and shelter. But some Third World countries never break the cycle of poverty, and this often has more to do with their corrupt political leaders than a lack of work ethic, resources or a desire to improve. When these corrupt regimes are flush with American cash, it’s no wonder that so many poor nations fail to prosper.
            The best way for people to escape poverty is to implement a free-market economy, support individual freedom and business expansion and fight political corruption. The reason tyrannical and corrupt regimes don’t follow this advice is self-evident.
            The data show that free nations are more prosperous than those whose political systems aim for equality at all costs. The Heritage Foundation’s 2018 Index of Economic Freedom ranks 180 nations based on their level of economic freedom and the corresponding level of poverty. Some economic studies send mixed messages, but not this one. The numbers are irrefutable: As economic freedom increases, poverty decreases.
           As Patrick Tyrrell writes at The Daily Signal, “This finding should not be overlooked when organizations like the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank plan aid for developing countries. Such aid too often ignores economic freedom violations by despots, dictators, and autocrats.”
            There seems to be little thought given to where the aid goes when it leaves places like the IMF or World Bank, or how the money is spent if it actually makes it past an entrenched autocracy. But should we expect anything different from organizations that habitually overlook corruption in countries receiving aid?
            Tyrrell adds, “Strongmen who disregard property rights or the rule of law to remain in power have been rewarded with billions of dollars in foreign aid from rich countries for decades. Despots and dictators have often used this aid to solidify their grips on power, such as by withholding food aid from groups that do not support them.”
          So that’s why decades of American and international aid hasn’t even made a dent in the problem.
            Not surprisingly, the political Left is often the driving force behind these global relief programs, and government aid isn’t the only problem. More often than not, so-called progressive aid organizations are plagued by malfeasance while the people in need to continue to suffer. We only need to look at what the loar-Clinton Global Initiative did with contributions from wealthy, progressive donors. Remember the millions that were sent the liar-Clintons’ way in order to help the Haitian people recover from the 2010 earthquake? Haiti still hasn’t recovered, yet the liar-Clintons have rolled in cash.
            Another segment of our society pushing for more global assistance is progressive Christians, who use their faith as justification for pouring billions of dollars of government aid into poverty-stricken countries. Once a donation drops into the collection basket, the assumption is that a hungry mouth will be fed and medicines will be delivered.
            Unfortunately, this is rarely the case. As The Resurgent’s Peter Heck suggests, “Christians who see their brother in need personally should give generously from their own resources, bank accounts, and wealth to care for them. Christians who see their brothers in need in other parts of the world should support charitable organizations that work to rebuild their lives through missions and relief efforts.
          This sounds reasonable considering that Americans are the most generous people in the world. “Americans out-donate Britain and Canada two-to-one and nations like Italy and Germany 20-to-one,” The Almanac of American Philanthropy reported in 2016. “What’s more, more than half of every single income class except those earning less than $25,000, give to charity. The much maligned top 1% in the U.S. economy fork over one-third of all donations made.
            But Heck adds, “Christians who are interested in results more than political posturing, should encourage and urge their government to spread a doctrine of economic freedom to the impoverished world. That, far more than confiscation and redistribution of wealth, achieves the results we desire.”
            The problem with sending money overseas is that it doesn’t get to the needy, and it therefore has a minimal impact on people’s long-term living conditions. Princeton University economist Angus Deaton, who worked for decades at the World Bank, asserts that rich do-gooders may be exacerbating the problem of corruption in the Third World, given that there’s been so little to show for $135 billion in global aid.
            What Deaton and other economists discovered was that countries receiving aid actually found their economic situation growing worse because the relationship between the governments and their people changed. This makes sense. A country is less likely to be accountable to its people if the government can rely on a steady stream of international aid.
            The U.S. should lead the way toward reform. This includes ensuring that nations receiving aid are working toward implementing policies that expand the economic and political rights of their people, and working directly with aid organizations rather than funneling money through politicians and despots.
            We can also apply these standards to our own cities, by promoting entrepreneurship and supporting business-friendly policies that help the downtrodden build independence and wealth. Like Third World despots, Democrat mayors across the country have largely squandered hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars since the “Great Society.
            Only when we battle poverty at its root cause will we break the cycle of political corruption and poverty.  ~The Patriot Pos

Views: 15


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center



Reporter Kicked Out Of Michelle Obama
Conference For Violating ‘Black Girl Code’

The Black Entertainment Television channel recently hosted a conference in south Florida for black women known as “Leading Women Defined,” which featured a casual conversation between former first lady Michelle Obama and former senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett.

But according to the New York Post’s Page Six, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist who was in attendance was booted from the remainder of the conference after she wrote an article about some of the comments Obama had made during the discussion.

Robin Givhan, a fashion critic and staff writer for The Washington Post, documented the highlights of the friendly chat between Obama and Jarrett.

Some of the highlights of the conversation included the former first lady’s thoughts on President Donald Trump’s inauguration as the Obamas prepared to leave the White House, the role she played during the 2008 election, her difficulty settling in as “the spouse” to the president, how she described her White House garden as a “subversive act” to garner trust with the public and her upcoming memoir. Of course Givhan also wrote about what Obama was wearing … after all, she is a fashion critic.

But following the publication of the article, according to Page Six, BET demanded Givhan leave the conference early amid claims that she had violated a “sacred space” by publishing the content of the conversation.

They also canceled a panel discussion that Givhan initially had been asked to moderate.

However, Page Six noted that BET’s claim that Obama’s discussion was “private” and not intended to be shared with anyone else outside the small gathering in attendance didn’t hold up to scrutiny given the fact that BET itself posted clips from the discussion on its site.

Furthermore, Jarrett also posted those clips on social media and told everyone to “tune in” to the network so they could hear what Obama had to say.

Shortly thereafter, the dispute descended into a sharp back-and-forth on social media between Givhan and others who were irked at what she had done, as can be seen on Givhan’s Twitter feed.

Several of her critics asserted that the conversation had been “off-the-record” — an assertion Givhan flatly denied — and one user claimed the reporter had “violated a sacred trust” between black women.

Another said what she had done was a “complete violation of journalistic ethics and Black girl code, all at once,” while still another asserted through a hashtag that Givhan was “#notoneofus,” as if she were being banished from the exclusive realm of accepted professional black women.

For their part, a BET representative told Page Six that Givhan had been “invited as a guest (not working press) to moderate a fashion panel,” and noted that her travel and lodging expenses had been paid for by the network.

“She was made aware that it was an intimate conversation in a sacred space of sisterhood and fellowship,” the rep added.

Neither Givhan nor representatives for Obama responded to requests for comment on the report from Page Six.

If the WaPo reporter really was instructed ahead of time that the conversation between Obama and Jarrett was “off the record” and a private affair, but published anyway, then BET was justified in booting her from the remainder of the conference — though the mean-spirited commentary she received on social media still crossed the line.

But if Givhan received no prior warning on the matter — and given the fact that BET itself published the conversation later — then this is just a major display of hypocrisy and unnecessary infighting.

What do you think?


© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service