Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

George W. Bush is about to fritter away his party's last advantage.
Washington Times ^ | February 24, 2006 | Wes Pruden

Posted on 02/24/2006 4:57:39 AM PST by When_Penguins_Attack

George W. Bush is about to fritter away his party's last advantage. What Republicans have had going for them is that they aren't Democrats. Over the past few days we've seen the men at the top of the Grumpy Old Party drifting toward something that looks suspiciously like an Old Boys' Party. When he hears applause only from Jimmy Carter, who gave away the Panama Canal (now controlled by the Chinese), and Bill Clinton, his newly adopted little brother, George W. should be looking for the panic button. Once they're no longer regarded as the toughest party on national security the Republicans will be burnt toast.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bushbotattack; bushbots; ports; wespruden
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 381-391 next last
To: David Isaac

I am sorry, I just do not follow your twisted logic. You have to remember that I am just a "brainless Bushbot"!

LLS


201 posted on 02/24/2006 7:06:56 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

The coarse language detracts from the persuasiveness of your argument.


202 posted on 02/24/2006 7:07:14 AM PST by seanmerc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: LS

>>
Second, Bush didn't "hand Hillary" anything. In fact, she is absolutely backing off, and she realizes, as will most of you soon, that this is a win/win for Republicans as all it does is tell the public to "think national security." In fact, if I didn't know better, I'd swear Karl Rove actually planned this to once again put the WOT back on the front pages in a way people understand it and get it off the stupid debates over NSA "spying."
>>

Bingo. It's about the agenda. When national security is what dominates debate, the Democrats lose. Period.

Debate of the WOT for the rest of this year will add GOP seats and in about 2 months the Democrats will develop a brain in that direction.


203 posted on 02/24/2006 7:07:46 AM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc
"I'm trying to hold my elected officials accountable."

I'm glad you have this sudden spur of the moment desire to hold this process accountible. I'm sure Chucky Shurmer appreciates the assistance as well. The facts have been put out there.

204 posted on 02/24/2006 7:07:48 AM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

No PORTS are being sold. At least use facts when you engage.

LLS


205 posted on 02/24/2006 7:08:49 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: notigar
How about Saudi Arabia?

They've been operating a terminal in New York harbor for more than two decades, and nobody expressed any concern about that on the day after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the day after 9/11, or the day after this "outrageous" UAE deal was announced.

206 posted on 02/24/2006 7:08:49 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: mdwakeup
Instead of showing you the races, I'll give you my record: in 2004, I missed calling only ONE "close" senate race, the Salizar/Coors race in CO. I correctly called the MN seat, the MO seat, and the SD seat. In 2002, I missed only ONE close race, Thune's race in SD (by 500 votes). I was off on Bush's EC numbers by one state, PA.

In short, my record, so far, of political predictions for the senate has been much, much better than that of the "experts," especially Larry Sabato.

GOP will win MN, lose PA, win MD or NJ or FL, possibly also win NE, for a net of one.

207 posted on 02/24/2006 7:10:12 AM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: onyx

"Never heard of Joseph King. He is not a major player, so his opinion is worth whatever you wish to give it.
I'll stay with facts and give due merit to the opinions of trusted and notable others."

He headed a Customs counterterrorism unit in NY. But who cares, what does he know!
And, if people had listened to some of the "lesser" players who were tracking the hijackers, we may have prevented 9/11.


208 posted on 02/24/2006 7:10:29 AM PST by notigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: TXBSAFH
I would disagree with you, the port deal has been water cooler conversation at my work off and on all week. About 2/3 against and most critical of GW.

And I'll just bet you've been putting your Ma Strayhorn slant on it, too.

There's never been an issue on which so many logical, rational people have jumped offsides and refuse to take the five yard penalty.

The entire security and military apparatus of the United States government has cleared the DPW takeover and the idiot Congress and stuck-on-stupid people are acting like two year olds who think a boogeyman is in the closet.

I've never seen anything like it.

209 posted on 02/24/2006 7:11:10 AM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

That's fine. But since the "coarse language" is the only thing you can point out about it, I suspect my points are right on target and probably beyond dispute.


210 posted on 02/24/2006 7:11:20 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Exactly, and they ain't gonna be bringing in Arabs, but BRITS. These are skilled jobs we are talking about. Heck, the Arab oil companies have to employ WESTERNERS to run them.


211 posted on 02/24/2006 7:11:22 AM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: notigar

Not yet.


212 posted on 02/24/2006 7:11:41 AM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I don't like that either. But just cause one baddy got through the door doesn't mean you let in another, does it?
This is the wake-up call we need.


213 posted on 02/24/2006 7:12:44 AM PST by notigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc
I was like you at first....Skeptical.

That's a healthy mechanism which causes some of us to investigate the issues thoroughly before we form our opinions.

The more I learn, the more I realize that there are deeply classified reasons the President has for his decision. There is a strategic reason that we MUST maintain the UAE as our Allie. I can give a brief hint; IRAN.......

There are also many other sound reasons to trust the loyalty of the UAE but it would take a new thread to list them all.

214 posted on 02/24/2006 7:14:27 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If I'm a "BUSHBOT" then that makes you an "ARABAPHOBE")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

I am not supporting Staryhorn, I would not support any of those bozos to be dog catcher. What I said is this, that the people I talk to do not support this deal. Deal with it.


215 posted on 02/24/2006 7:14:35 AM PST by TXBSAFH (Proud Dad of Twins, What Does Not Kill You Makes You Stronger!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
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.

So Bush knows nothing about this deal but he will veto congress if they try to stop it...Yup, Yup Yup, I can believe that...I'm pretty gullable...

And then he sends C. Rice over to Dubai to convince the a-rabs to hold on while he does some PR work...And I wonder what Condi traded off to get the a-rabs to go for this one...

Shutting up your supporters is not what Leaders do.

I see George as a lousy leader of America, however, he is doing a great job at being a global leader...

People seem to forget, or don't care that it was George's dad who gave us the New World Order...Clinton got the Democrats on board and little George has laid out the road map...

Our next prez will be a Democrat...A Democrat will be able to completely erase our borders...

216 posted on 02/24/2006 7:16:07 AM PST by Iscool (Start your own revolution by voting for the candidates the media (and gov't) tells you cannot win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: notigar

When? Post a link to the article you excerpted. Post a link to his credentials. Several people work or have worked, in similar positions. What makes his opinion valid? Because it fits your agenda?

You're quick to dismiss all facts that have been repeatedly posted on threads here. Why is that?


217 posted on 02/24/2006 7:16:08 AM PST by onyx (IF ONLY 10% of Muslims are radical, that's still 120 MILLION who want to kill us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Here, I found this on Lexis Nexis:

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company

The New York Times

November 5, 2001 Monday

Late Edition - Final

SECTION: Section A; Column 4; Foreign Desk; Pg. 1

LENGTH: 1437 words

HEADLINE: A NATION CHALLENGED: MONEY TRAIL; U.S. MAKES INROADS IN ISOLATING FUNDS OF TERROR GROUPS

BYLINE: By JEFF GERTH and JUDITH MILLER

DATELINE: WASHINGTON, Nov. 4

snip>

Last month the Emirates announced new rules requiring identification of those who transfer more than $550 out of the country. Previously, the threshold was $50,000. Mr. Suweidi said that change, which grew out of "international cooperation," made the Emirates regulations among the tightest in the world.

snip>

Six weeks [after 9-11] later a 10-member American team slipped quietly into Abu Dhabi for the meeting about money-laundering and the financial underpinnings of terror. Officials said the team had been led by the State Department and drawn from a diverse group of agencies including the National Security Council, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Treasury Department. The group was not invited to any other Middle Eastern country, officials said, though such invitations would clearly be welcome.

The meeting lasted more than 10 hours, longer than planned. One administration official attributed the meeting's collegiality and candid exchanges to Mr. Suweidi, who they said broke the ice by urging his fellow gulf regulators to explain their views of the financial monitoring problem along with their solutions.

The last time a team of investigators visited the country, the meetings were not as cordial. Stuart E. Eizenstat, the deputy secretary of the Treasury in the last years of the Clinton administration, said that officials in both Saudi Arabia and the Emirates were "not as responsive" as officials from other Middle Eastern countries.

Mr. Suweidi said relations had improved since those earlier meetings. Mr. Suweidi and American officials said that much of the discussion focused on cultural and political differences in their countries' financial systems. For instance, regulation of charities in the United States is far more rigorous than in the gulf. In the United States, charities must file detailed annual reports about their donors and programs with the Internal Revenue Service. At the symposium in Abu Dhabi, American officials described that process, citing examples of how Roman Catholic charities had been prosecuted for funneling money to the Irish Republican Army.

That discussion helped ease Arab concerns that the United States was singling out Muslim and Arab groups in its terrorism investigations, one participant said.

Officials agreed that both countries shared responsibility for failing to uncover the financial threads of the Sept. 11 attack. "If the financial institutions of the U.A.E. are to be blamed, U.S. financial institutions should be blamed too," Mr. Suweidi said. "The money that came from here popped up there." To stop terrorism, he added, "We should work together."

218 posted on 02/24/2006 7:17:55 AM PST by eyespysomething
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

It's not "sudden" or "spur of the moment". It has been a lifelong endeavor for me. If you knew me, you'd know that.

I'm not sure why you feel it necessary to resort to baseless insults (i.e., insinuating that I am giving aid and comfort to Chuck SCHUMER), when all I have asked for is a rational, reasonable discussion.

Obviously the facts haven't "been put out there" well enough if many reasonable people are still asking the questions.


219 posted on 02/24/2006 7:18:09 AM PST by seanmerc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: When_Penguins_Attack
What should be interesting and reportable is the decided shift in opinion about this port deal the more people learn about the details of it. More and more of the Conservative blog world is shifting to support the President.

As that happens, the rest of you will fall in behind.

This simply isn't a bad deal...except for those who foolishly want to ban all things not American.

220 posted on 02/24/2006 7:18:50 AM PST by Solson (magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 381-391 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson