I'm a Bush backer but on this deal, I think, like most on here do, that it's just stupid. I know what Bush is saying......I understand it. "It will look bad....or racist if we allow the British but not the UAE run the port." What I'd tell him is.....quite frankly I don't give a good crap how it looks to everyone. The most important thing here is port security and the general security of our country. And after 2 of their countrymen flew airplanes into the WTC on 9/11, I don't care about insulting their sensibilities....and neither should Bush. Arabs have to understand too how Americans feel. It isn't racist.......it's having the good sense to do what we can to not let 9/11 happen again. And it starts with not allowing access to areas of national strategic interest.
That's the same thing I talked about with my wife last night. I wonder if Bush was not for the handover to the UAE if the Dem's would have come out with the opposite view? Also from this, if anyone wants to know where I stand politically on any subject, just ask Jimmy Carter what he thinks of an issue. I'm the exact opposite of him. He backs Bush on this! You can never tell what that guy is thinking on any issue. He's for Hamas, against lower taxes and the war in Iraq.
No doubt in my mind that they would have been all over Bush for not allowing this company to run our ports. They would have played the race card and cried about discrimination. As bad as it's going for Bush and the republicans these days, the dems only answer is to oppose Bush on everything. They have no answers and we'll see if that strategy works at the polls this fall.
And his responsibility . . . and his fault if the worse happens. Unfortunately he also has a well-deserved record of making imprudent decisions that benefit big business over the best interests and wishes of the citizens he serves. Iraq, privatize Social Security, incompetent crony appointments, lax border security, and now this extremely questionable port decision. The blunder list just keeps getting longer. Man, I'm simply amazed that you think this guy is infallible.
I know what he was saying. But what both of you fail to realize is that I don't condemn everything the man does just because he does it. It's just that it's usually something that I think is stupid, thus my anti-Bushness. Got it? Elaborate, please. SF was the only one I was talking to. Pay attention next time and avoid these remedial lessons.
No, I understand exactly why people don't always agree with me. It often involves a fundamental confidence, or lack thereof, in whatever establishment we may be discussing. But what I don't understand people who never bother to question situations that clearly warrant it. Nope. There's no one else like me. Never held any job less than one year. And, with the exception of my current job (which I've had since before I graduated), that includes middle and high school. You must have me confused with someone else. Whereas people like me try and improve the way things are if we feel that they can be done more effeciently. When I was in a meeting with my bosses last week to discuss my annual raise, that was noted as my strongest point. People like you end up working for people like me. You may be right on this one. I'm a born leader.:thumb:
the fact you condemn everything he does makes things quite clear. you cited the bush fans as well. see? you referenced anyone you deemed a bush fan as well as sabanfan. therefore, I explained that those who disagree with bush on this decision w/in this thread arent necessarily bush fans except maybe sabanfan. maybe, like me, many agree with some or even most of the things he has done and judge each accordingly based on the information given. pay attention next time and it will keep me from having to repeat something so simple.
I specifically said as it relates to National Security. That is one area where I am not concerned about Bush doing what is best for Americans.
I don't see it. A company owned by the government of a foriegn country! And a oil-rich Islamic country at that, one who contributed two of the 9/11 bombers. They may not be in charge of security but they will damn well have their people in place where they can observe the security and be aware of any weaknesses in it. Shipping a nuclear weapon or a dirty bomb into the country aboard a shipping container is the worse threat facing us. The Rags will make a ton of money on American commerce. How much will end up being contributed to Osama's "islamic charities"? We are going to help Al Qaida pay for attacking us. Geez. Are there no American companies capable of this important work? Companies that will hire American executives, managers, and supervisors. Now, despite the outcry Bush has threatened to veto any Congressional legislation designed to stop this deal! Unbelievable. Is there some kind of secret deal with the UAE going on for Bush to risk this kind of adverse reaction and still push it? The next President and the Congress are going to be left with Iraq to deal with as well as Bush's unprecedented budget deficits to pay for. I think they will fight Bush on leaving behind this port management business, as well. The buck stops with Bush and I don't trust this guy, SabanFan. I don't understand his motives, I don't believe his explanations, I question his honesty and candor, and I just don't trust his judgement.
Fine. Nothing I say will change your impressions. I do trust him on this issue, but I'm not opposed to a comprehensive congressional review before consummating the deal.