[MNJohnnie]

Couple of questions I wonder if the Weapons of Mass Demagoguery will answer?

If the Port Deal is such a major important crises, WHY did the Congresscritter Know Nothings in the Congress put their Anti-Capitalism "Port" legislation INSIDE an Appropriation bill? If this is so important why are the Congress Critters so gutless as to NOT put it up as stand alone legislation?

Do any of the Port fools even realize that the Federal Govt has NOTHING to do with who buys P&O? Blocking this deal merely means someone ELSE will have to buy P&O 9 Terminals. Did you even bother to stop and thing about that? The Democrat Senate Leaderhsip has now put forward legislation to create a Department of Port Security. Wonder if the Know Nothing talking heads like Hannity, Savage, Malkin and the clowns at NRO etc feel guilty now for pushing the Democrats Propaganda line on the Ports? Well done fools.

Way to actively help your political enemies Election Year PR. Nice job "Real Conservatives". After spending the last couple of years squalling daily about Federal Spending, way to demagogue yourselves into political position where you will now be responsible for expanding the reach, cost and scope of the Federal Govt! Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Actions have consequences you idiots.

[rodguy911]

Just one more time congress people are second guessing a President who has an excellent track record of defending the country, and the WOT, stuck on stupid congress critters.

[Shermy]

It's a Democrat conspiracy. I smell Shillary behind this. It was their trick to make it seem that Republicans and Conservative media first questioned the deal. This is nothing but another attempt to make it seem like Bush is soft on borders and security and outsourcing. Capitalism! Capitalism! And I'm not over-reacting becuase Bush's veto overreaction signals he might be weak on this, weak on security, and what else does the public trust him on? All that stuff about gleefully sending jobs to India, was not, I repeat NOT pandering to the cheap labor lobbies and a signal of Bush's Texas-style elistism but a brilliant strategic plan to get India to say they might open their markets if we sell them nuke plants first! It was brilliant! Anti-DPW people are racists, just like the border zealots. RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIIISSSSTTTTSSSS!!!

< head explodes >

[Shermy]

It's a Democrat conspiracy. I smell Shillary behind this. It was their trick to make it seem that Republicans and Conservative media first questioned the deal. This is nothing but another attempt to make it seem like Bush is soft on borders and security and outsourcing. Capitalism! Capitalism! And I'm not over-reacting becuase Bush's veto overreaction signals he might be weak on this, weak on security, and what else does the public trust him on? All that stuff about gleefully sending jobs to India, was not, I repeat NOT pandering to the cheap labor lobbies and a signal of Bush's Texas-style elistism but a brilliant strategic plan to get India to say they might open their markets if we sell them nuke plants first! It was brilliant! Anti-DPW people are racists, just like the border zealots. RAAAAAAAACCCCCIIIIIIISSSSTTTTSSSS!!!

< head explodes >

[Iscool]

After spending the last couple of years squalling daily about Federal Spending, way to demagogue yourselves into political position where you will now be responsible for expanding the reach, cost and scope of the Federal Govt! Stupid, stupid, stupid.

If a gov't is going to be in charge of ANY operation in the U.S., I'd much rather it be our gov't. as opposed to especially, a mozlem gov't...

Actions have consequences you idiots.

And inaction sometimes has even worse consequences...You must be losing a lot of dough on this deal...

[MizSterious]

I was against this deal before I learned the facts--and considered the ramifications on foreign policy if it is blocked. Perhaps I still don't understand everything there is about this deal, but right now, I think this bill is a grave, terrible error, and from where I sit, it appears these legislators did this primarily to "get Bush" (on the 'Rat side) and to grandstand for the next election (on the Republican side).

[conservative blonde]

Excellent statement. Listening to the GOP jackasses in the House speaking on this legislation just shows they know nothing about what they are speaking. The jerk from CA was talking about not having any foreign government own the ports. Where is this fellow's mind. Most the posts on both the Left Coast and East Coast are foreign run. These guys are just a bunch of idiots.

TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS, TERM LIMITS is the answer.

[chit*chat]

Leaderhsip has now put forward legislation to create a Department of Port Security

Good! More jobs for Americans!!!!

[sam_paine]

WHY did the Congresscritter Know Nothings in the Congress put their Anti-Capitalism "Port" legislation INSIDE an Appropriation bill?

Simply to force Bush to choose between funding the troops, and sinking the port deal.

No different a tactic than a crook uses when he holds a hostage at a mini-mart.

[TomasUSMC]

Actions have consequences

---

AND when the GOP's Actions are wrong for America, then they get slapped down. It doesn't matter if the Democrats support it or not.

What matters is America not politics.

Time for President Bush to do another Harriet - do a 180 and turn a dumb move into a smart one.

[BushMeister]

There is a serious security aspect that arises from the running of our ports. That's why even you, if you were director of DHS, wouldn't let Al Qaeda, The Chinese military, a North Korean company or an Iranian company buy a firm that had the rights to manage our ports. These UAE people will put their own people in, albeit gradually at first. Many of these UAE-appointed workers will have Osama deep in their hearts, as the entire UAE society has Al Qaeda fans at all levels of stratification. They will be able to see how the Coast Guard operates tp protect our ports. They will see port vulnerability assessments. They will learn how, when and why we search cargo ships and containers. They will be at ground zero, have the run of the place, and be able to bring in anything they want. Only a simpleton would create such an unnecessary security risk, or count on federal employees to protect us against the consequences of a breach. Furthermore, it is absurd to ask why Britain should be able to manage our ports, but the UAE should not be able to. See the list of prohibited parties, above, and add others if you wish. The UAE is on that list, for me and about 200 million other Americans.

The UAE people do not belong in our ports. You can't unring a bell, and the kinds of things that can occur from a breach in port security are so horrendous that they are worth political infighting to prevent.

[SwordofTruth]

Are you going to spam every thread with the same old stuff?

[curiosity]

WHY did the Congresscritter Know Nothings in the Congress put their Anti-Capitalism "Port" legislation...

Excuse me, but why is it "anti-capitalist" to stop a government takeover of a commercial venture?

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Actions have consequences you idiots.'

Bush will veto this and force them to override his veto.