[rktman]

Dear nita lowey of NY. You can't figure it out? Not surprised. A lot of us call this WINNING! We should not severely cut our contributions, we should eliminate them all together. No doubt that would cause Princess Grey Beaver to take some extra tokes on her peace pipe.

[KevinB]

Winning!

[mrsmel]

“Advance UN reform”...no thanks, you dimwitted dem.

[lee martell]

Good. It’s time to shake up the barrel.

[HarleyLady27]

‘GET THE U.S. OUT OF THE U.N. AND GET THE U.N. OUT OF AMERICA.’

WINNING!!!

[Kahuna]

Would love to see President Trump “cut” our entire contribution to zero charge the UN 500 Billion dollars a year for the lease in NY. We get nothing out of the UN that we can’t do better on our own.

[V K Lee]

DJT = MAGA!

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

I bet that you have many ideas for what to do with the property. :-)

[Envisioning]

....but at the same time the UN has fat around the edges.”

Fat around the edges? No, it is 'infused' with fat.....

US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!

[Psalm 73]

“My job was to go the UN and find value,”

Niki Haley: task-oriented.
What an exceptional pick for UN Amb.

[PGalt]

UNaccountable bureaucrats are socialists.

S ocialist
W ankers
A nd
M arxist
P oliticians

DRAIN

MAGA!

[jeffc]

Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) calling them “far-reaching and catastrophic.”

“Frankly I cannot understand how this administration intends to influence the UN agenda, help those most in need, and advance UN reform if it disengages and severely cuts our contributions,” Lowey said.

“far-reaching and catastrophic.”? That really explains alot (eyeroll...)

Cutting their funding will influence the UN moneygrubbers like nothing else, that's what gets their attention!!

[tumblindice]

And things have changed in 60 years. Change is a good thing, or so they tell us all the time.
http://www.un.org/en/ethics/pdf/convention.pdf
If we aren’t going to boot these hostile parasites, yank their privileges and immunities, perqs and emoluments of these UN leeches.
They aren’t diplomats and they aren’t our friends.

[Rummyfan]

... but at the same time the UN has fat around the edges.”

Fat around the edges? The entire organization is the biggest nest of corruption in the world. We'd be well off just leaving altogether. Maybe back in a bipolar world - US and the USSR - the UN served a purpose. But now it exists to attack us and Israel,and let the administrators become filthy rich.

[Rummyfan]

“Frankly I cannot understand how this administration intends to influence the UN agenda, help those most in need, and advance UN reform...

IDGAF about the UN agenda, we can help those in need directly, and it cannot be reformed.

[EXCH54FE]

“My job was to go the UN and find value,”

Can’t find value in shit!!!!

Get us out of the UN and the UN out of the USA.

[InterceptPoint]

” ... but at the same time the UN has fat around the edges.”

Haley baby, you have a great knack for picking just the right words and putting them in just the right order. As a result I have awarded with 5 more FR-Brownie Points putting you close to the maximum achievable.

[NonValueAdded]

From Wikipedia entry for Charles Lichenstein [emphasis added]:

Comments regarding the UN following the KAL shootdown

[US Deputy Ambassador to the UN Charles] Lichenstein is best remembered for comments he made following the Soviet shootdown of Korean Air Lines Flight 007, after which the states of New York and New Jersey denied Soviet Aircraft permission to land, in violation of the United Nations Charter that requires the host nation to allow all member countries access to the UN.

The United States [Federal Government], which opposed the [New York and New Jersey] legislation, offered the Soviet Union landing rights at a military base so its foreign minister, Andrei A. Gromyko, could fly in for the General Assembly meeting. But the Soviets refused. When the United Nations committee met to review the situation, the Soviet delegate, Igor I. Yakovlev, said the ban on landing "raises the question of whether the United Nations should be in the United States." A furious Mr. Lichenstein replied that if member states felt "they are not being treated with the hostly consideration that is their due," they should consider "removing themselves and this organization from the soil of the United States. We will put no impediment in your way," he continued, "The members of the U.S. mission to the United Nations will be down at the dockside waving you a fond farewell as you sail off into the sunset."

Due to opposition to these remarks by the State Department, Lichenstein offered his resignation. It was not accepted. President Reagan instead responded with this statement that endorsed Lichenstein's controversial remarks:

Maybe all those delegates should have six months in Moscow and then six months in New York, and it would give them an opportunity to see two ways of life. I think the gentleman [Charles Lichenstein] who spoke the other day had the hearty approval of most people in America in his suggestion that we weren’t asking anyone to leave, but if they chose to leave, good-bye.

[DoodleDawg]

Haley also warned that some organizations had become complacent with their budgets, something that was not translating to value for money.

The Federal Government is the last group to criticize another organization for not giving value for money.

[Billthedrill]

My position on the UN has always been clear - prone, with a bipod - but in an effort to be fair I'd like to see a list of all the UN's good works and a price tag attached. Is the UN fighting ISIS? No? Offering security to Haiti? No, that was actually cholera. Ending slavery in the Middle East? Fighting female genital mutilation? Combating terror sermons in mosques? Constructing solar-powered ditch pumps in Sudan?

Or is it a sinecure for an international ruling class and a stage for preening that accomplishes not even a good imitation of genuine debate? And if so, why do we pay for that? I'll be awaiting Ms. Lowey's answer with bated breath.

[rrrod]

Blue helmet target practice salute!