Posted on 02/20/2006 3:14:17 PM PST by Stellar Dendrite
Senator Tom Coburn wants more information and so do I
As he should and it's not a "political" tin ear decision if the press would put out the facts(i.e DPWorld is not "controlling" the ports, they are not in charge of security, etc.etc)
FR's comics page shows up.
Seek restitution from whom? When companies seek to buy out others, it is always contingent on regulatory approval. The United States requires it, Europe requires it, everyone requires it. Look, if a person goes out and purchases a popular established bar and then isn't able to secure a liquor license in his own name, the new owner doesn't get to sue the licensing board for breech of contract.
I won't join you in tearing down Reagan.
And I certainly don't care one iota whether Clinton was as bad as Bush, nor Carter, nor Hillary, nor anybody else.
Wrong is wrong.
Whoop-dee-doo! It's a golf paradise!
But guess what?? They're STILL Muslims who want to own U.S. ports.
Then how did 1992 senate that was very slightly controlled by the Democrats pass Clinton's massive tax increase? Bush is weak when in comes to taking his message to the people as are the republican senators - either that or they are corrupt.
I won't join you in tearing down Reagan.
LOL! You don't get.
" now THAT is a surprise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Hey -- I love and agree with you ALL! (except all those who oppose me and my evil genius [twisting handlebar mustache].)
But foreign entities already own US ports as well as ports of very friendly allies. It seems to me sooner or later we have to effectively deal with this security issue.
This isn't a bash Reagan thread, nor should it be a bash Bush thread either, but I know that's impossible since many participants do little else besides bash Bush.
No, I don't "get" people who feel like they need to tear down a dead hero in the hope that it will make themselves look better.
It doesn't work.
When the deal is approved by a British court(P&O's home base) on March 2nd, DPWorld will be in control of P&O's worldwide assets, that the done deal.
The interesting part is if the contracts are nixed is what DPWorld does with those assets, since they legitmately acquired them. They could just close them down and put Americans out of work for giving the finger to a country that has US troops and is a popular and safe port of call for US Navy ships.
Peter King on Scarborough now.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1582492/posts?page=1
House GOP Leaders Line Up Against UAE Port Deal
Yes Reagan was a great president. Unquestionably there were things he did wrong. But when you look at the political landscape that he had to work with it's hard not to defend him.
I defended Regan(for the most part) then and I have defended (for the most part) Bush today for similar reasons.
BTW Reagan's amnesty was a citizenship amnesty. Bush's amnesty is not.
The same way they keep any classified information out of the hands of those who are not cleared to receive it.
If there was one Democrat left they would still be putting out that tired excuse.
"The Buck Stops Here" is now "We're Never Accountable".
IF everything you have posted here is true, JUST LOOK at the number of folks you have convinced.
Then try to imagine the difficulty POTUS will have convincing Americans.
You don't get it, Dane. You really don't.
UAE is an ARAB country. That does not sell well here and thank God and their worship of their Allah for that.
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.