George W. Bush is about to fritter away his party's last advantage.

Washington Times ^ | February 24, 2006 | Wes Pruden

[LS]

My "little world" is pretty big, dude.

[Tolik]

Amen and Amen !!!! Wes Pruden does NOT speak for me or millions of Americans who do support the President.

We need LEADERSHIP!

Leadership is not to say that you will veto the opposition and the VERY NEXT day say that you did not know about the deal up to a few days ago. Leadership is not surprising your own party to the extent that so many good honest supporters start opposing you.

I support President as well as the most FReepers here. He is DOING many good things and is a strong Leader in WOT. But in this case he provided no leadership at all. Shutting up your supporters is not what Leaders do.

Regardless of the merits of this case, it was handled badly

[LS]

Actually, even if you are right on the communication (probably) it's a win/win for Bush and the GOP becuase once again it shows ONLY one party is even thinking about national security.

[CWOJackson]

It is an important issue, which is why Congress created the secret process it went through; to insulate it from administration or political pressure.

It's amazing to me that any member of Congress, who should already know how the process works, who should already know that no U.S. company provides these services, and who should already know that Arab concerns already provide suchs services in the United States, are suddenly concerned that the process they created worked, and that one of the tops commercial port specialists bid on the project.

[LS]

They're not, and they've already lost on this. Trust me. This is going to hurt them, big time.

[notigar]

Apparently, Tommy Franks has been annointed the Supreme Ruler. Didn't you get the memo?

[CWOJackson]

Pssssssst, they're managing commercial operations, not the ports or their security. A very long leap in reality there.

[TXBSAFH]

I will gratn you the UAE has help us in the WOT. But I am most uneasy about letting any company owned and controlled by a muslim government that level of control and access (on all levels, security, operations, etc.) to any major US port. The more I read about it, both pro and con, the more uneasy I get. I think this is just a unnecessary risk give the situation these days and the level of port security that we have now. A level I believe is woefully lacking. Maybe if it was substancially beefed up I would reconsider, but as of now I am against this to the nth degree.

Also, another point in this whole mess, the complete and utter lack of brains in the handling of this by the administration. The one area Republican could always count on to trump the rats, national security. Now they are seen by many I know to not care about that anymore. They gave teh rats aclub to beat them with. And alienated and angered many of their supporters. Thanks George.

[LS]

If so, I suggest Bush and the GOP still win. In the end, if the DISCUSSION is about the WOT and National Security, then ONLY the GOP wins. The Dems are outfoxed on this again, and it's exactly as I said about Kerry and his "war hero" stuff in the campaign.

[JamesP81]

We need real, Reagan-republicans. Bush has done well on war and foreign policy, but we need someone who is more like Reagan domestically speaking.

Well, really, we need someone more like the Founding Fathers domestically speaking, but even if they were still alive today I think the PC establishment would consider them to be 'heartless, right-wing, and (mostly) Christian fanatics'. The sad truth is they probably couldn't get elected, especially James Madison. But I'll take a Reagan if I can find him.

[afz400]

"What's truly pathetic is how the "true conservatives" are adopting DU rhetoric ("Bush is stupid," "Bush is a crook," "the Bush family does business with bin Laden," et cetera)"
You make it sound like Bush is the second coming of Christ or something.

[notigar]

"an employer noted for modernization and efficiency"

No one ever said monarchies aren't efficient. They get to do all sorts of fun things. Almost...anything they want!

[CWOJackson]

"But I am most uneasy about letting any company owned and controlled by a muslim government that level of control and access (on all levels, security, operations, etc.) to any major US port."

Then you can rest easy since they will only have control over commercial operations which are far removed from port operations.

[TXBSAFH]

I am aware of this, and still have severe doubts. I do not think it is wise to give them even that level of access to operations and methods at a port.

[azhenfud]

After Harriet Miers, all I heard was, "The Republicans are finished." Sorry, they are stronger than ever. Just a year ago we were hearing that the GOP would lose seats in both the House and Senate."

Yeah, but GWB is doing a bang-up job of trying to wreck the front end. Why in the world does he keep grinding wrenches?

[Mo1]

If the President wakes up in the morning, the Democrats think that it is a scandal.

True .. but that doesn't mean our side should hand them an opportunity

[notigar]

"Then you can rest easy since they will only have control over commercial operations which are far removed from port operations."

Until, one day when they aren't anymore.

[CWOJackson]

"I do not think it is wise to give them even that level of access to operations and methods at a port."

Which is why their access is limited to what is necessary for them to complie with the laws and regulations, and restricts them to "commerical" operations not port operations.

[CWOJackson]

That's not how it works.

[Lazamataz]

Full disclosure: I haven't taken sides in this yet, because I don't like to spout off in subject matters I know nothing about.

Fair enough.

Here are two undiscussed scenarios, BTW:

1. The UAE 'governmental company' that is planning to run the ports is a CIA front organization, intended to lock the ports down and also get information about terrorists by appearing to be sympathetic. Bush knows this, thusly his insistance that this happen.
   
   
2. Bush and Clinton have agreed to bounce the presidency between their families for thenext 20-40 years, and Bush is purposely screwing up so it's a walk for Hillary. Hillary would then screw up badly (on purpose) to let that younger handsome Bush nephew in, and then back to Chelsea, and so on.