Posted on 06/28/2006 12:00:55 PM PDT by Trupolitik
I voted for President Bush twice, and actively campaigned for him. However, I am convinced he is looking out for Global Corporate interests over National Security interests. Open borders, the SPP, the Dubai Ports deal, Support of an Islamist Constitution in Afghanistan... now this.
Be Sure to Read all of the Article.
The Dubai Ports deal was the right thing to do.
And if you're such a Dubya fan, how come I don't recall ever seeing you around here?
Why is this in the breaking news section?
Yep you convinced us (extreme sarcasm). Go back to Dummy Land
Sounds like Bush's next move will be to just invite all the commies up to the WH then leave the building until they have gotten an adequate amount of information to completely overthrow the government...
"I voted for President Bush twice, and actively campaigned for him. However, I am convinced he is looking out for Global Corporate interests over National Security interests. Open borders, the SPP, the Dubai Ports deal, Support of an Islamist Constitution in Afghanistan... now this."
Bingo
Another serious negative in Bush's ledger. Based on Mr. Gaffney's article, Paulson is a very poor choice despite his probable high competence. Bush has been weak on China, weak on North Korea, weak on Iran, and arguably weak on Iraq, and that's not to mention immigration, racial preferences, Harriet Miers, and some other things. It is a shame that the first Republican president since the Depression to have a Republican Congress has proven to be such a weak leader. We may not get this opportunity again, ever. I think this explains much of the disappointment and anger toward Bush on FReep. It certainly explains much of mine.
Correction: Ike had a just-barely Republican Congress in '53-'54. But he was lame, too -- and he needed the leadership of Robert Taft, who died in mid-'53.
"The Dubai Ports deal was the right thing to do."
Only true if you believe that to freedom loving people -
people who love and respect their human rights, democratic values and truly FREE market principals -
that there is no moral distinction between the "capital" of a public-traded or 100% private-citizen owned American corporation
and the "capital" of a fuedal-shiekdom to whom its "company" (Dubai World Ports) and its "country" (UAE/Dubai) and that country's OWNER (the ruling royal family) is no more than a distinction as thin as the paper it is written on, much like the distinction between the biggest "companies" in China and its dictatorship.
Advancing the "capital" interests of the state interests of China and of outfits like the gang that owns Dubai has only one element of success; it helps their government-business models succeed.
And why, pray tell, should freedom loving people want to do that, unless they don't give a damn about advancing their own model of freedom?
"the politicians simply do as they are told."
Only by immoral acquiesence.
You act like he's a dictator...or even a certain President circa 1982. Bush does what he is told, and somebody told him to put Paulson in, or else.
Evidence is overwhelming that there are certain issues on which Bush isn't even close to being his own man - fiscal and trade policy is one of them.
Rewarding a key ally in the war on terror, in a deal that has been thoroughly vetted by the CFIUS, does far more to advance freedom that some bickering nabobs on the Internet.
His daugher works for the Christian Science Monitor as a bureau chief.
His circle of friends are not good.
Who's daughter? Paulson?
And that "cooperation" amounts to what,
in comparison with the financial support they continue to give to groups like Hamas, and the Wahabi schools of hate-the-west that they continue to fund along with the Saudi's - continuing to create the future foot soldiers of violent extremists -
and who is to say that their double dealing with us and the Taliban and the Pakistani corrupt intelligence service during the 1990s is not still in operation - keeping tabs on us through all that "assistance" they let us have at their ports, and through the info our "partnership" supplies them with.
The UAE, Qatar and the Saudis are 100% duplicitious, in to no deal that is not 100% about their own self-interest and self-advancement and their "friendship" with the west is as shallow as a dry creek bed; no matter how broad it seems at any point in time.
I would not trust any of them as far as I can spit.
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.