Plan B Forum

Ronald Reagan was angry. It was October 1986, and his veto against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act had just been overridden — and by a Republican-controlled Senate, at that…. Conservatives believed the U.S. had no business hectoring the South African government over apartheid. Senator Jesse Helms (R–N.C.), the Senate’s leading race-baiter, took the Senate floor to filibuster on behalf of the apartheid government of South Africa. Helms was an old pro at using the filibuster: he had launched a similar one three years earlier against establishing a national holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr. He was joined by like-minded conservatives including noted segregationist Strom Thurmond (R–S.C.) and future presidential hopeful Phil Gramm (R–Texas) in voting against the bill’s final passage. Over in the House, Representative Dick Cheney (R–Wyo.) joined the minority in opposing the Anti-Apartheid Act. In earlier battles over South Africa, Cheney had denounced Nelson Mandela as a terrorist and argued against his release…

Reagan took his case directly to the people on a live TV broadcast. He echoed Crocker in urging Americans to be patient with South Africa’s apartheid government. Reagan argued that sanctions would disproportionately hurt black South Africans without significantly undermining apartheid, and blamed black extremists for contributing to the violence. Change, if it were to come at all, would happen incrementally. He believed he had sold his case effectively, and considered the matter closed…

Under considerable pressure, Republican moderates rallied. Thirty-seven (37) out of 53 Republican senators joined their Democratic colleagues to pass the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act over Reagan’s veto. Conservatives fumed, but they were powerless to stop the law from passing. It was the first time in the 20th century that a presidential veto on a foreign policy issue had been overturned…
[RINOs!] That CSpan clip is a nasty flashback — an old actor churning out a pudding of every rightwing cliche and scare story, cloaked with the thinnest skin of Reasonable Realpolitik.... He mouthed all those lies so earnestly. Like the Teabagger Wizard of Oz — a snakeoil salesman to the end. He inspired adulation in a limited (in every sense) circle, but he’ll only be remembered by future generations for the damage he did. Unlike Mandela…

"Are we truly helping the black people of South Africa -- the lifelong victims of apartheid," said Reagan in his veto, "when we throw them out of work and leave them and their families jobless and hungry in those segregated townships? Or are we simply assuming a moral posture at the expense of the people in whose name we presume to act?"

Pulling as hard as he could do undo the one thing which eventually brought SA to its knees

MajGenl.Meade wrote:

Pulling as hard as he could do undo the one thing which eventually brought SA to its knees

Ah the white man's burden! Of course, the "one thing that eventually etc etc" couldn't possibly have been the black struggle in South Africa could it? Those bunnies couldn't even get their schoolchildren out of the way of police bullets for goodness' sake!

No, it was all down to noble unhued people like rube and me refusing to purchase South African er.... something or others .... Outspan oranges and jolly well forcing USA and UK companies to disinvest - or at least change their name from Barclays to ABSA.

And there was some guy named Mandela who did something or other but that was AFTER whitey brought the Nats to their knees.

That must be why the N8 into Bloemfontein just last year was lined with ANC 100 year Anniversary posters saying "Thank you Cuba", "Thank you Malawi", "Thank you Zambia", "Thank you Angola" and so on. Somehow they forgot the sign for "Thank you USA" or "Thank you UK" - must have been using that same interpreter as at the funeral.

Meade