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 ...
EternalVigilance,
I told you not to waste your time.
You're making less and less sense.
Why not, that's exactly what you want Congress to do...till economic death.
Of course, the facts don't make sense to the Bush is all evil crowd.
It would appear that you are correct.
With the ports, all this debate does is to reaffirm in peoples' minds that Bush, NOT the Dems, has been fighting this war for four years (largely without their support). So even if he's wrong on the port issue (I don't think he is), the OVERALL message is that, "Bush has been fighting the terrorists." Moreover, by pushing the security/terrorism issue to the fore, it dooms the Dems, as they cannot ever win on this issue.
Your spin is turning into the twisting of words and casting of insults.
No time for those kind of games. Later.
LOL! Twisting words? You must mean the way you folks continue to try and advance the idea that the UAE would somehow be in charge of some U.S. ports. No, I leave that to you folks.
You have consistently missed the big picture. It goes beyond this particular deal.
In this position DP World will simply provide the same services in these ports that they currently provide our military forces in the war on terror.
DP World will have absolutely no operational control of any U.S. port or it's security, they will manage commercial concerns within some U.S. ports under the same rules and regulations as all the rest of the foreign owned providers.
There is nothing unusual in this deal. The process worked...and some individuals with a political agenda are manufacturing a non-crisis from it.
Actually it's pretty simple.
I guess you're able to understand "simple" better than I am. The DP World deal is not the big picture.
Sorry, you may be very knowledgeable about port/cargo/whatever operations, but I am not content to take your word as an authoritative source. I want to hear a thorough explanation from my leader.
If only you would direct your fire on the looney left, instead of a fellow conservative (who voted for Bush twice and gave significant contributions to both of the President's campaigns) and veteran of more than 20 years on active duty in the US armed forces.
You're right, come to think of it--it IS pretty simple.
"The level of idiotic, ignorant hysteria on this topic is absolutely astonishing."
Actually, what I find astonishing is your close minded attitude, compounded by your arrogance.
News flash....your opinion is no more valuable or insighful than many of the others here. To make statements such as this only inflame other posters and remove any chance of harmonius discussion.
No offense intended, of course . . .
No, DP World isn't the big picture since they will have no control over our ports or their security whatsoever. This is nothing more the union driven complaining and crass opportunism by Chuck Schumer and those who quickly jumped on this bandwagon.
In the context of this discussion, my opinion is certainly more "valuable" and "insightful" than any opinion that isn't based on facts. I know this sounds close-minded and arrogant, but hey -- sometimes the truth hurts.
This story has been a major topic of discussion for almost two weeks now, and for the first ten days most of the comments from government officials and people in the media were based on information that was patently false. If you think these opinions have any merit, then you can go bang your head against the wall trying to reason with people like that.
An interesting article in today's Baltimore SUN that is actual reporting of information:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-bz.longshoremen24feb24,0,5562593.story?coll=bal-home-headlines
Ports uproar finds no home at local dock
Longshoremen say safety, security issues far outweigh current political furor
By Meredith Cohn
Sun reporter
Originally published February 24, 2006
A steady line of cars pulled through the gate just before 1 p.m. yesterday. Longshoremen, many already wearing their orange safety vests, flashed their badges to guards and made their way over to the berth at Seagirt Marine Terminal where the MSC Zurich had docked.
Many of them have made this same trek for years, even decades. But one thing was different yesterday. The work they were used to doing in relative anonymity was suddenly news.
The company they work for, the British-owned cargo handling company Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co., or P&O, is being bought by another stevedoring firm owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates.
A lot of U.S. lawmakers, governors and mayors say that's a security problem. But on the waterfront, there was a collective shrug.
There certainly are issues on the Baltimore waterfront, longshoremen say: safety issues from ill-kept equipment and security issues from holes in the system set up after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Sometimes, guards don't always take a good look at ID cards at the gate, or foreign crews are allowed unchecked off the ships or even out of the port, some said. Or U.S. Customs and Coast Guard officials tasked with flagging suspicious cargo go home before the ship is done being unloaded, some said.
The biggest problem, said the longshoremen, as well as a host of security experts, is the potential for a terrorist or drug smuggler or criminal of another stripe to stick something in a cargo container overseas.
But who signs their paychecks, the dockworkers said, doesn't have much to do with any of that.
"We can't do anything about it. If it's going to happen, it's going to happen," Joe Letts, a longshoreman for 33 years, said of potential security threats. "I don't see how changing the cargo handling company here adds any real risk factors."
None of the cargo handling companies that hire the longshoremen at the state's public terminals is U.S.-owned. Most longshoremen know that the two biggest are British and Japanese. These companies have contracts to operate the terminals for the Maryland Port Administration and supply the supervisors for the longshoremen.
At the port of Baltimore, P&O rents and manages the Seagirt Marine Terminal, where most container cargo is offloaded. Until April, it will also oversee movement of some of the of cars and construction and farm equipment - called roll on-roll off, or ro-ro, cargo - at Dundalk Marine Terminal. When cruises start up again this season, the company will oversee baggage handling in South Locust Point.
---snip---
The Sun does not allow long excerpts
But how many of those polled know what the real deal on the ports is? How many can make an informed decision? What was the question? Such polls are meaningless.
Threatening veto is equal to shutting up dissent. Especially that he never vetoed anything else.
I responded to your post where you talked about LEADERSHIP. This is exactly what I am talking about too. Answer this point, please: how should a reasonable person supporting President respond to him saying he did not know about the deal until a very few days ago, when the day before he said he will veto any opposition to this deal? Leaders are to lead, not just command. It was bad leadership regardless of the merits of the deal itself.
You are saying that people rushed to squeal and ignored the truth that was squelched. I disagree. Obviously this is a hot button issue, as this and many other threads here and everywhere show. And this is not a clear cut obvious to anybody deal. People are justified to have a first negative reaction to it. There is a good number of respected conservatives who have opposite opinions on the matter. Any difficult issue needs to be well explained to public and yes, supporters as well. That is leadership.
As it stands now, any outcome of this commotion is bad. If the deal is canceled, an important real-politic ally is snubbed when we might need to use them. If it is approved, it is approved after lots of stink, allowing Dems to grandstand, and with some possible holes in the security remaining anyway. A lot of this fallout could have been avoided with a careful planning and proper communication.
"I haven't yet seen ONE RACE where any of this is having an impact. "
This about more than any RACE. This is about blindly following G.W.
His decision making has been less than credible in the past and his Miers nomination damaged his image beyond repair. Only a fool or a Lemming (IMO)would blindly follow any leader.
Pressure from his conservative base to force him into nominating a justice with the credentials he had promised us weakened him in many conservative's eyes. The neglect he has shown towards our borders, going as far as calling our Minute Men "VIGILANTES" shows an arrogance and lack of understanding on his part(IMO). His statements concerning this Port deal have left many of us with an uneasy feeling, once again. He may be correct(the jury is still out), but the way he goes about his decision making in these instances leaves a lot to be desired. He has a tendency to take the word of those below him as gospel and run with it. Sadly there are too many untrustworthy and just flat out stupid people in his cabinet to rely on the information they spoon feed him.
I would think that we here at FR all supported President Bush on his re-election and held high hopes that in this term he would address the issues of our borders, SC nominations, over spending, etc....
To put up a smoke screen to indicate he is keeping our party strong is unrealistic. Only when we face the truth can we improve on the mistakes of the past.
My prayers are with him, but not my blind trust.
"Miers took three weeks, this one three days, prehaps the next battle 3 minutes. I just don't see the strength."
Nor do I.
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.