Posted on 02/17/2006 3:43:01 PM PST by outofhere2
Michael Savage is talking to Chuck Schumer at this very minute.
Heck, I've known about this DPW acquisition of P&O Ports for weeks (there's been a lot of merger/acquisition activity in that sector in recent months) . . . it just never occurred to me that there would be any kind of problem like this.
"[This issue may bite the Bush butt as hard from the left and right as the Miers nomination did from the right.]"
You could be right. Afterall when the US ramped up all the regulations on US registered ships after WWII its not like they all switched their registration to Liberia or anything. And what with declining teamster power due to containerization, we need to do something to assure our ports remain as inefficient as the Dims regulated them to in their post WWII hey day.
"Being in favor of this as you apparently are, perhaps you'd like to argue why it's GOOD to have a UAE-based company taking over port operations?"
I have no passion one way or another on it. I just don't think it's the earth-ending event some of you hysterics are making it out to be. We have no reason to think DWI is a security threat. I know, I know, all Arabs are bad and that's what's driving this. But frankly I can't lose any sleep over a typical international business acquisition of one company by another. That's all this is. It's not about the UAE BUYING our ports as the far right and far left are lying about.
So I'm neither for nor against this. It has nothing about it to get empassioned about. If the story were as it is being made out that that a UAE company was buying our ports, then yes I'd be against it. But that's not what's going on. It's just an operations company. And the ports in question can opt to use another operations company if they choose. Why are you flipping out over this?
I don't know... it is staggering. Everyday I feel this administration is less competent and less conservative.
Guess y'all missed the very beginning of the show. "Thank GOD for Hillary Clinton!", he said. Twice. !!!!
Schmuckie - and by that I'm referring to Schumer - has sensed there's some political mileage to be gained by opposing this sale. He's a little late to the party though.
I don't no what else to say to you. You sound so automatic without caring about the facts and the dangers here. To you selling the ports doesn't matter because if Bush says it's alright, that is good enough. Well I don't follow this administration luck step. When Bush tried to push Meiers down people's throat I was resistant. This is a common sense issue. Would you sell our ports to North Korea if Bush said it was alright?
I'm one of Savage's biggest fans, but this is not good. He was way too nice to Schmuckie Sleaze. I'm disappointed in the way Savage seemed to subordinate himself to that scumbag, as if he was starstruck or something.
I've given a meaningful answer. All I've gotten in response is name calling and vitriol. Go back over what I've posted on this thread and tell me where I've not been substantive. If you're referring only to the other guy, my apologies.
"Still it should be pointed out that we aren't selling ports to Arabs"
Arabs are buying their way into operational oversight. That doesn't strike you as posing any particular risk?
The ports are not being sold. That's been mentioned over and over.
Uh, No. It is actually a pretty stupid point.
Since when have operational detail at any of our ports been SECRET? Why on earth would you WANT them to be secret. I would think you would want them to be obvious to everyone, just as a deterrent, would you NOT?
Anything about National Security that needs to remain secret resides with governmental agencies. If you think it is the responsibility of some person working security as some port to guard the nation, you are mistaken.
Any secret details pertaining to National Security at the ports will remain secret, even to the people working there. FReepers are not using their common sense on this, and giving the Democrats a phony issue for November. We can do better.
"Savage just said he's editing his new book to take the bad parts about Schumer..."
omg....he'll have half a book left, he HATES chuckie
hannity and tony snow did
but savage covered it the most
Exactly. As Schumer said, the minute this would start up, terrorists would try to infiltrate.
Security will not be tight enough over there to stop that.
It leaves us wide open.
Schumer said: "I will keep fighting on this until they undo it."
Oh come on, don't give in to Schumer's b.s. The ports are not being purchased. The operations company that run some of them, P&O, are. They do things like off-loading containers, etc. Security at the ports is STILL a US govt. operation and the ports are not being sold. And the employees will all be the current AMERICAN employees of P&O, the company being bought out by a UAE-based company.
Come on, don't fall prey to Schumer's lies and demagoguery. This is just a pathetic attempt to make Democrats look strong on security, all by misrepresenting a normal company buy out as being something it's not, even as Schumer is one of the loudest voices against wiretapping of Al Qaeda. This is pure election-year politiking. Don't be gullable to it.
NOBODY IS SELLING ANY PORTS HERE.
Variations of this story have been posted dozens of times over the last few days, in dozens of different media outlets of all types (including here on FreeRepublic). And yet it seems that none of these articles -- aside from the comment threads here on FR -- present the actual facts about the exact nature of the merger/acquisition in question have been presented.
This is why the so-called "conservative media" is rapidly following CBS and the New York Times into oblivion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.