Skip to comments.
Bush distances himself from ports deal
Herald Sun ^
| 23 February 2006
Posted on 02/22/2006 4:19:34 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141 next last
To: Howlin
Your tag line is very funny.
To: MrsEmmaPeel
I wish I could take credit for it; I stole it from some Freeper wittier than I am!
42
posted on
02/22/2006 4:45:23 PM PST
by
Howlin
("Quick, he's bleeding! Is there a <strike>doctor</strike> reporter in the house?")
To: panaxanax; conservative blonde
Calling yourself a conservative does not necessarily make you one. I'm guessing that c.b. is with you on that one!
To: Aussie Dasher
Now, this is getting a tad confusing...It is for me, too.
To: Aussie Dasher
The President needs his plough cleaned from stem to stern,just to get his attention focused on the serriousness of a situation he can only make worse by the minute. Not only should he distance himself from this problem but he should shut his mouth and not have an opinion whatsoever. Let the Congress critters do their jobs and quit making waves on this issue. One way you can tell how serious a situation is when you find yourself agreeing in principal with the likes of Schummer and Hillary Clintoon. Conservatives should speak with a unified voice in the majority not be linked with all this rabble and confusion. Its not hard to figure this out its the same old problem liberal versus conservative. Make our representatives do the expressed will of the people who elected them for a change, we can all appreciate that. The President will just have to whistle up courage in a dark corner somewhere; or just pout and suck his thumb!!
45
posted on
02/22/2006 4:46:25 PM PST
by
winker
To: DoughtyOne
"When this decision came to light, I think Bush was blindsided.
"
I hope it doesn't rise to the level of Katrina's handling by Brown?
46
posted on
02/22/2006 4:47:16 PM PST
by
swheats
To: florida one
I don't trust a former Reno aide to "spot" anything....
But at the end of the day, left out of the loop or not, poorly informed or not, Bush is still willing to go to the mat to defend this deal, to the point of calling people in his own party racists (in addition to being anti-Miers "sexists", eh George?) and threatening to use something called the "Veto Pen", which, for the last five years, has been stored away in the same government warehouse that contains the Ark of the Covenant.
That's what's really astounding.
-Dan
47
posted on
02/22/2006 4:47:37 PM PST
by
Flux Capacitor
(Trust me. I know what I'm doing.)
To: conservative blonde
Arab friends
Oxymoron?
48
posted on
02/22/2006 4:48:57 PM PST
by
ch.man
To: conservative blonde; Aussie Dasher
"Our ports have been operated by foreign governments all along.."
The ports are not managed by any foreign company. The ports are both owned and managed by the state/cities they reside in. And the security is not provided by the companies that run terminal operations. And the US Coast Guard and American firms run the cargo checking functions.
What in this case Dubai Port World would take over, is the terminal facilities at these ports that the British P&O company had owned and operated.
NOTICE: NO US PORT IS BEING BOUGHT BY A FOREIGN ENTITY. Why is this so hard to understand?
PLEASE. IF I AM WRONG WILL SOMEONE KINDLY CORRECT ME.
49
posted on
02/22/2006 4:50:00 PM PST
by
Marine_Uncle
(Honor must be earned)
To: Aussie Dasher; All
50
posted on
02/22/2006 4:50:30 PM PST
by
CyberAnt
(Democrats/Old Media: "controversy, crap and confusion" -- Amen!)
To: conservative blonde
[From a previous post]
"...staffers should've told the White House two weeks ago that this was potentially newsworthy...""You are listening to the MSM and believing their stories. This has been around for a few months and no one gave it a second take. Now all of a sudden when the DemocRATS think they can pile on Bush, Republicans get wobbly."
How can staffers always know something is potentially newsworthy when the MSM are known for creating news out of the non-newsworthy if and WHEN it serves their purposes? You'd be spending an incredible amount of precious time preparing for an onslaught that might not happen. And, by preparing for it, you might actually make it newsworthy.
To: Darkwolf377
----Sorry, but they're not going to change because we pray for it to happen. We must act. The way we act is not to wait for some Christian Republican to rise to power there; we deal with what's there, and make them see that life will be better for them if they play nice.----Sorry, we can't do that. We're all just a bunch of racists.
-Dan
52
posted on
02/22/2006 4:51:36 PM PST
by
Flux Capacitor
(Trust me. I know what I'm doing.)
To: panaxanax
53
posted on
02/22/2006 4:53:00 PM PST
by
rwfromkansas
(http://xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
To: Flux Capacitor
---Sorry, but they're not going to change because we pray for it to happen. We must act. The way we act is not to wait for some Christian Republican to rise to power there; we deal with what's there, and make them see that life will be better for them if they play nice.---- Sorry, we can't do that. We're all just a bunch of racists. -DanM'kay...so you're saying a Christian Republican leader--like ours--IS going to rise to power in the Middle East?
That's the best news I've heard all day.
(Your point is...?)
54
posted on
02/22/2006 4:53:11 PM PST
by
Darkwolf377
(Dubai-u's fault--The Port Non-Issue is Hillary's Sistah Soulja moment)
To: Aussie Dasher
What's 'tad confusing' is the headline does not support the article.
A standard trick done by the press where they lie in a headline with the intent to misdirect and confuse.
55
posted on
02/22/2006 4:53:38 PM PST
by
demlosers
(Kerry: "Impeach Bush, filibuster Alito, withdraw from Iraq, send U235 to Iran, elect me President!")
To: Reagan Man
This is looking more and more like a international sweetheart deal for the UAE. Bush is kept out of the official loop, while his immediate subordinates pull the deal together. Then in a PR frenzy, Bush speaks out in a tough defiant tone, giving his blessing to the $7-billion deal.Wow, that's an interesting take. I haven't heard that one before. I'm out of my depth on this subject, so I can't comment.
To: Aussie Dasher
Brit covered this tonight. The President knew about the merger deal, but he learned that it had been approved officially a few days ago (through press reports). He was kept informed of all the investigations findings etc, but he learned that its approval had been officially announced through press releases. That is a far cry from "not knowing about it".
This is an attempt by the media to accomplish putting doubt in some Conservative minds. It's working well this time.
LLS
57
posted on
02/22/2006 4:53:51 PM PST
by
LibLieSlayer
(Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
To: Howlin
I wish I could take credit for it; I stole it from some Freeper wittier than I am! Well, you have good taste. I thought it was funny, too.
To: CyberAnt
Then
WHY is Bush hell-bent on vetoing any congressional attempt to put the brakes on this?
-Dan
59
posted on
02/22/2006 4:55:05 PM PST
by
Flux Capacitor
(Trust me. I know what I'm doing.)
To: winker
And maybe you and others should get informed. This is about port operation not port security. Anyone who thinks that GW for an instant would advocate something that puts the security of this country in jeopardy is either misinformed, an idiot, or a DUmmie. I've put on my flame retardant suit so flame away, call me a bushbot or whatever
60
posted on
02/22/2006 4:55:28 PM PST
by
Merlinator
(Come to Wisconsin, where even the dead have a vote...or 2 or 3)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson