Ports Deal Faces Wide Opposition. Bush ratings sink (Another MSM biased poll, oversampling Dems)

LAT ^ | March 3, 2006 | Ronald Brownstein

[FairOpinion]

And, in a trend that could affect turnout in the November midterm elections, Bush confronts what might be called an intensity gap: The percentage of Americans who said they strongly disapproved of his performance on a wide range of issues greatly exceeded the share who strongly approved.

The Times/Bloomberg poll, supervised by Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus, surveyed 1,273 adults nationwide from Saturday through Wednesday. The survey has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Contributing to the fall in Bush's approval rating since January was a slight increase in the new poll in the number of respondents who identified themselves as Democrats.

"Party identification is a dynamic variable that changes with the popularity of the party in control," Pinkus said. "The proportion of people who identified with the Republican Party was higher when Bush had more positive approval ratings."

[Chgogal]

The only way the truth regarding the port deal would come out is if Bush had a fireside chat with the country during prime time and explained the deal (business transaction between two foreign countries), security (which would be in American hands) and what access Dubai would have to our security process (this I am not clear on).

If Bush did this there would be egg on the face of Hillary/Schumer especially if Bush thanked former President Clinton for his help as an agent to Dubai and thanked Dubai for the generous donations to Clinton's library and then invited the nation to see Clinton's library and what Clinton did with the Dubai money. :)

LOL....I have such dreams! ;)

[jmaroneps37]

It's about time for the liars at IPSOS to release a poll. The numbers will be 45 rat 22 Indie 33 GOP and W will have an approval number of 29. But who cares? The dumb rat can't understand that the only elections he wins are the fantasy ones like this.

[bennowens]

I just found out that Bush can't run again! Who gives a crap about his numbers?

[SwordofTruth]

How can people capable of using a computer be so utterly IGNORANT of the facts of this matter after 2 weeks?

This is America, all the propaganda in the world won't save the ports deal, forgetaboutit.

[brainstem223]

AS in the very historic visit to India, where he praises the US outsourcing its jobs to the natives there....

Where he gives the Indians nuclear reactors and gets mangoes in return?

Where he will come back and not give his fellow Americans those nuclear reactors that he gave to India?

Whooop-teedo,,,what kinda history is this?

[montag813]

Of the poll of 1,273 adults, 35 percent were Democrats, 26 percent independents and 25 percent Republicans

What happened to the other 11%?

[montag813]

We scan 100% of the containers coming into the US for radiation all ready.

I am very dubious of that stat. Do you have source or proof for it?

[mcvey]

I have never believed that MOST Dems are lying. Uniformed, foolish, jealous, locked in a mindset--yep. I work in an environment that is almost 100% liberal Dems, Greens or worse.

A few (like some of the filmmakers) do lie and they know it. But the great majority really, really, really believe what they are saying.

It is the damnedest thing: I have come to the conclusion that they simply tune out what does not agree with their preconceived misconceptions. Someone asked me, in my political science hat, to explain the Dubai deal. I spent thirty minutes (at least) going over it in detail, saying what MN just said. The person then said, "Ok, I got it now." Then the next day, I heard her saying that she wanted to know what Bush's financial investment in the Dubai company was.

So, I give up. For the libs, it is all utopian, from the gut, sentimental/angry craziness that, I am convinced, originated with people who never really understood the difference between capitalists and the feudal lords they were used to when they came here. (Hell, even Marx understood that difference.)

McVey

[FairOpinion]

"Of the poll of 1,273 adults, 35 percent were Democrats, 26 percent independents and 25 percent Republicans
What happened to the other 11%?"

====

Good point, I didn't bother to add it up. Those are the illegal aliens they polled, and I bet they were included in the overall approval rating, and you know what they must have said.

It seems though, that it's the other 14%, if I did it right, but it was a good catch on your part.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1589929/posts?page=43#43

[FairOpinion]

I heard someone on FoxNews making some very good points, that I haven't heard before or after. He said that the UAE has been our very good friend, and that is the only place we can take ships and put them on dry land for repairs, and if we need land support, they provide it to us, getting them upset with us, would seriously hamper our strategy in the Middle East. Also, they don't control security at our ports, we do.

All that made a lot of sense. I think we wouldn't be jeopardizing our security by having the deal go forward, we would be jeopardizing our ability to "fight the terrorists over there, instead of over here", by turning our good friend, the UAE into our enemy.

[FairOpinion]

"We scan 100% of the containers coming into the US for radiation all ready.
I am very dubious of that stat. Do you have source or proof for it?"

===

Well, I can add, that I personally heard Chertoff on FoxNews specifically correcting the misconception, that we only scan a small fraction, he specifically said we scan 100% or words to that effect.

[FairOpinion]

OK. Found you specific source:

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_0865.xml

A Layered Defense:

Screening and Inspection: CBP screens 100% of all cargo before it arrives in the U.S.- using intelligence and cutting edge technologies. CBP inspects all high-risk cargo.

CSI (Container Security Initiative): Enables CBP, in working with host government Customs Services, to examine high-risk maritime containerized cargo at foreign seaports, before they are loaded on board vessels destined for the United States. In addition to the current 42 foreign ports participating in CSI, many more ports are in the planning stages. By the end of 2006, the number is expected to grow to 50 ports, covering 90% of transpacific maritime containerized cargo shipped to the U.S.

24-Hour Rule: Under this requirement, manifest information must be provided 24 hours prior to the sea container being loaded onto the vessel in the foreign port. CBP may deny the loading of high-risk cargo while the vessel is still overseas.

C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism): CBP created a public-private and international partnership with nearly 5,800 businesses (over 10,000 have applied) including most of the largest U.S. importers -- the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT). C-TPAT, CBP and partner companies are working together to improve baseline security standards for supply chain and container security. (We review the security practices of not only the company shipping the goods, but also the companies that provided them with any services.)

Use of Cutting-Edge Technology: CBP is currently utilizing large-scale X-ray and gamma ray machines and radiation detection devices to screen cargo. Presently, CBP operates over 680 radiation portal monitors at our nation’s ports (including 181 radiation portal monitors at seaports), utilizes over 170 large scale non-intrusive inspection devices to examine cargo, and has issued 12,400 hand-held radiation detection devices. The President’s FY 2007 budget requests $157 million to secure next-generation detection equipment at our ports of entry. Also, over 600 canine detection teams, who are capable of identifying narcotics, bulk currency, human beings, explosives, agricultural pests, and chemical weapons are deployed at our ports of entry.

[MNJohnnie]

Thanks! I have it in my email which I cannot access from work.

[MNJohnnie]

Thanks Tonk, those who who can should do, not just talk about it.

Great Idea.

http://nws.cgaux.org/visitors/ps_visitor/index.html

[FairOpinion]

I decided that it was important enough and a lot of people aren't aware of it, even here, that I posted it as a separate thread. Thanks for pointing it out originally.

Fact Sheet: Securing U.S. Ports (DHS Press release: we are scanning 100% of shipping containers)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1590048/posts

[SwordofTruth]

If you think it is just Dems against this deal then you don't have a clue. I'm ultra conservative and I'm 100% precent against it!

[mcvey]

That is certainly your right. This is not called Free Republic for nothing!

I think we are saying to anyone who wants to change sides and join us--welcome in and, oh by the way, we are going to screw you even if the deal has been done by the book.

I would be furious about this if I were in the UAE! Or the Gulf. It is how to turn potential helpers (probably not friends) into people who may not openly oppose us, but probably won't help us nearly as much as they could.

McVey

McVey

[MNJohnnie]

Facts about Container Security. Check the link at this thread for all the particular facts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1590048/posts