Whats with the Dubai ports deal bill? (Vanity)

[wingsof liberty]

Whats with the timing on this new bill? I thought Dubai Ports World agreed to an open, visible 45 day investigation on wether they should be in charge of some operations at U.S. ports. Thats what politicians agreed to, and now theyre preparing to introduce a bill that would kill the deal, with billions in aid for Iraq, the Gluf Coast, Afghanistan, etc. also attached to it. This way Bush cant veto it without becoming the bad guy. So why are these politicians unwilling to even wait for the investigation to conclude before they pull this? Its as if I went to a bank to apply for a home loan, I am asked to fill out an application and while I am still filling it out, the loan officer tells me I have been turned down. Hows that for logic?

[tennmountainman]

I guess the poll here on this great site is BS too.
It shows a division between those who oppose and those who support as well.
Granted not in the same numbers as the "general population".
But still a division, just like the Harriet Miers nomination did.

[HitmanLV]

I have been discussing the perception.

You are discussing the facts of the case.

When the perception and facts align, that's a good thing. when they don't align, in politics the perception is more controlling.

The perception has been that Dubya has been a loser on this issue, and he hasn't helped himself. If you disagree with that as an accurate depiction of the public perception, fine. Just say so and tell me what the dominant public perception is.

[Dane]

Clinton impeachment pumped up the Republican base. Bush's port deal has divided Republicans, just as Harriet Miers

Uh first of all it wasn't Bush's deal. It was an above board takeover of P&O by DPWorld.

And second using your logic since 70% of the American people were against clinton's impeachment, you are saying that the impeachment should not have happened.

Try to be philisophically consistent.

[HitmanLV]

70% of the american people didn't want him impeached. He was on the popular side of the issue.

[tennmountainman]

"Uh they were follwing a Congressional law, that mandated the discussion of the business transaction be held in secret."

And Congress is in the process of making new law as we debate.

[muawiyah]

The deal is very simple ~ some in the press, and some in politics, have been notified by their bosses in the Mob that they don't want serious Congressional investigation of the port security issue, nor do they want a bunch of Arab companies in there who are going to draw undue federal interest to everyone's activities.

Remember, the Mob runs the docks ~ always has. They keep a ready supply of paid-off politicians in their pockets to take care of problems like this.

[Frank_Discussion]

Uh, basically, yes. Running the government by "polls" is pretty much BS. Since polls can be rigged, constrained by deceptive wording, and shopped to specific audience populations, they often don't represent reality.

"The remainder of 30% supporters are located on this site."

That's a bucketload of crap on general principals.

[tennmountainman]

The 'Review" meetings that walked this deal through all the departments involved in secret, without congressional oversight, regarding National Security.

[Indy Pendance]

Well, it may be, but you'll lose the arguement using du type descriptions. I thought FR was above the petty. I guess trashing the president is vogue. And yes, you can argue about Bush not being conservative, I'll agree, but the stupid names don't do this site justice. It'll take years to restore our country after 60+ years of liberal rule. But, it won't happen last year. Elect me as dictator, I'll get it done in a heartbeat. I wish I could, but our system wasn't designed for quick fixes. You should know that, based upon your sign up date.

[Frank_Discussion]

I guess we have been talking past each other, then. My point is that if leading the country is a matter of heeding perception or heeding reality, I would choose the latter. Apparently, so does the president.

[Frank_Discussion]

The deal was confidential, yes, so perhaps secret is an accurate term for this. But the implication that this was a "hidden" transaction meant to slipped under the door is not credible. There is a codified set of board and committees for this sort of dealing, so it wasn't exactly hidden.

[tennmountainman]

I must confess, I have been known to dump a little BS out from time to time.

[Frank_Discussion]

LOL. On that note, I have to go. Y'all have a nice FR slugfest, okay?

:)

[HitmanLV]

Well, my comments are tame compared to DU. I hope you can grant me that.

This isn't about Bush being conservative enough or not. It's about him being a remarkably poor leader. He fell in a tailspin just as last summer rolled around and hasn't really recovered. He has some things to his credit (Roberts and Alito) but they were not without their cost (the Miers frightfest showed just how remarkably poor judgment he can have).

Bush's chronic (but not exclusive) ineptness since last summer have nothing to do with 60+ years of liberal rule. I don't know why that's important to you in this analysis.

I've come to expect 'what's Dubya's screwup going to be this week?' If a lifelong GOPer and independent-minded conservative like me thinks that, what does the average American think.

They are $hitcanning the president and he seems either oblivious to it or uninterested in helping himself. If it's the latter, then why should we be interested in helping him.

[tennmountainman]

And that process may be a good process, with the exception of deals that could involve National Security issues, which this one does and why this has blown up into a major political hot potato.

[tennmountainman]

Have a good evening.

[HitmanLV]

A president's power is directly related to the electorate's perception of him.

Does anyone on FR seriously doubt that his image really really stinks lately?

[Lejes Rimul]

Hmm and an official branch of the UK govt.(Church Of England) has called for a boycott of Israel.

Unless you're Israeli, WTF does Israel have to do anything? Move there and shut up about American policies then.

[Dane]

70% of the american people didn't want him impeached. He was on the popular side of the issue

So you agree with schumer that clinton's impeachment should not of happened(bottom line, after going through your weasle words).

[lepton]

The American people oppose this deal.

What deal? If people knew what the deal was, and had an opinion, then their opinion should clearly be listened to. Most people still think this is about the U.S. selling 6 or more ports to Dubai. Even Rasmussen's poll questions completely mislead as to what the issue is. By reading the threads, three weeks into the debate, most posting FReepers have no clue either.

Opposing hysterical absurdist ignorance isn't the same as supporting the deal either.