How Bush handled DP World issue

Khaleej Times ^ | March 12, 2006 | pbrown

[SwordofTruth]

By law the Congress was excluded from decisions of the type of the ports deal.

Congress makes the laws so they can change them any they want to.

[Mike Darancette]

When did he say that?

Those were the types of bills being proffered in Congress at the time and presented at the press conference. Though Bush did not enumerate his reasons for threatening the veto I can think of no President that would relinquish executive power by allowing such legislation.

[Mike Darancette]

Congress makes the laws so they can change them any they want to.

Sure can, but not after the fact. Running a national economy by Senate committee is not such a good idea though.

[Mike Darancette]

Congress makes the laws so they can change them any they want to.

Sure can, but not after the fact. Running a national economy by Senate committee is not such a good idea though.

[processing please hold]

Though Bush did not enumerate his reasons for threatening the veto I can think of no President that would relinquish executive power by allowing such legislation.

I thought so. You know it's not nice putting words in Bush' mouth to further your argument. Some people on here might call you an outright liar for having done so.

[Mike Darancette]

You know it's not nice putting words in Bush' mouth to further your argument.

Saying "Bush would veto" is not saying "Bush said he would veto", there is a distinction and words mean things. To mollify you I could have said "Any President would veto".

I may be guilty of editorializing in assuming that Bush would take the correct (in my mind) logical course.

[processing please hold]

I may be guilty of editorializing in assuming that Bush would take the correct (in my mind) logical course.

On a subject such as this, editorializing is a no-no. It changes the whole completion of the argument.

(in my mind)

Now you're thinking for him.

[Mike Darancette]

On a subject such as this, editorializing is a no-no. It changes the whole completion of the argument.

(in my mind)

Now you're thinking for him.

And making statements like that below is not thinking for others?

I believe most saw it as, 'hey, this deal is going through whether you like it or not'.

As for editorializing, gee I thought that was what FR was all about. I see the phrase "in my mind" as being equivalent to I believe.

[processing please hold]

As for editorializing, gee I thought that was what FR was all about. I see the phrase "in my mind" as being equivalent to I believe.

Bush would veto a bill that said either that the specific deal is null and void after the Executive Branch had duly authorized if, or a bill that said the Congress was the final voice in such transactions.

That was lie. You got called on it and now you boxers are in a twist.

You're right on the 'in my mind'. I apologize. I do it myself.

[processing please hold]

As for editorializing, gee I thought that was what FR was all about. I see the phrase "in my mind" as being equivalent to I believe.

Bush would veto a bill that said either that the specific deal is null and void after the Executive Branch had duly authorized if, or a bill that said the Congress was the final voice in such transactions.

That was not true. You got called on it and now you boxers are in a twist.

You're right on the 'in my mind'. I apologize. I do it myself.

[nmh]

"Your right, but you know that those who don't agree are going to say you could have skipped this post...I get that all the time and wanted to get this out before some other idiot does it in a rude way. I agree with you 100 percent on this issue of Bush Bashing articles."

Yeah, I know, blind zealots. They refuse to learn from mistakes.

Never mind that I posted Bush signs all over the place to get him re elected. Never mind that I dodged bottles being thrown at me. No kidding! One one occasion a group of adults saw me posting a Bush sign, mouthed off and I verbally responded and some empty and half full Snapple bottles were aimed at me. Never mind the abuse I still get with my Bush sticker on my car. No, any criticism about his own SELF INFLICTED wounds is considered "Bush bashing".

Someone needs to get his ear and put him straight. Surely he must see the impact he will be having on the next election. Or perhaps he just doesn't care? People will vote the rats in. There is NO reason why he can't atleast explain to the base that voted him in, immediately, why he is for or against something. I am becoming increasingly disillusioned by his inactions.

[nmh]

If I were a Demoncrat I'd blast him on this come election time - just as the media is doing now.