[CMAC51]

Yeah, fine. Under the deal, they’re our ally until they’re not our ally. Some ally. Except by then, they would have owned the ports and would have had permanent physical presence. IOW, they would have been able to express their non-alliedness any which way they might have wanted to. I’m not convinced by a single data point.

Your comments show how ignorant you are of the deal. They would not have owned the ports. It involved operation of terminals and would in no way have compromised the ports. A little knowledge of the facts would help you out quite a bit.

Just the fact that Chuckie Shumer opposed it should have been good enought reason to support it. That guy is a putz who is wrong 99.9% of the time.

[ovrtaxt]

Just the fact that Chuckie Shumer opposed it should have been good enought reason to support it. That guy is a putz who is wrong 99.9% of the time.

Yes, he's the Putz King, no doubt. But he was simply using the opportunity to play partisan politics and kick Bush in the ribs. The fact that Bush put HIMSELF in that position is Bush's fault. He should have had the common sense to know that we would never let a bunch of Muslims take charge of our ports. That's just a stupid idea right out of the box.