Darn you!
Posted on 06/24/2005 6:54:48 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
Just to clarify, I wasn't saying Pres. Bush would be treasonous. I was stating that not all Capitalists respect national interest, especially where profit is involved.
The fine line that is very difficult to tread at the federal level is in determining which economic/financial transactions constitute a national threat. No president or congress likes to address such issues as part of the constituency is bound to be unhappy. Just as in nearly all court cases, someone's going to lose.
I'm sure most people on the FR would agree that (theoretically) if the PRC were to control all oil reserves, refineries, and transportation worldwide, it would be very dangerous to national security.
I know.
I'm just trying to get the guy I asked the question to answer it.
So far, he hasn't.
Considering he thinks the President is committing treason by not doing 'something' about it, he smells like a troll to me.
I'm willing to bet he'd be the first to scream about the President 'abusing' his power if the Pres DID do 'something'.
"I am not suggesting it would be his fault."
Don't play that BS on me.
Do I need to QUOTE your post suggesting the President is commiting treason by not doing 'something' about the business deal?
Just ANSWER the question and stop dancing around it.
Considering you won't answer the question and you keep dancing around it, that tells me that you are a troll.
;-)
Darn you!
Ummm.... no there isn't. The name "FREE MARKET" suggests that their are NO LIMITS.
Didn't they teach you this in Socialism School?
HI TROLL!! Bye TROLL!!
Trolling Ping.
Link provided in OFST.
*embarrassed*
Bush may find himself in a position to influence which way this deal goes. If he can and chooses NOT to---you know where I stand. Apparently you believe Bush should not get involved.
"Bush may find himself in a position to influence which way this deal goes."
MAY find?
Big difference from you sayng it was treason if the deal goes through.
You still haven't explained HOW that would be treason on the Presidents part.
I found it on my own before you pinged OFST.
Did you catch the part about proprietary national defense technology? Please don't tell me we're holding Bush to a different standard then Clinton...Why are you so willing to sell out national security for a buck?
Why is Bush "America's biggest traitor"?
ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Explain how business leaving the country is treason on the President's part.
IF you cannot and will not answer that SIMPLE question, it will show that you are indeed a TROLL.
You're question is incoherent. This is a national security issue. This isn't about the Pez factory moving to Bangladesh.
Clinton personally okayed the SALE of technology to China.
Note the DIFFERENCE.
SALE versus business LEAVING.
The President has NOT personally okayed the SALE of technology.
He has not PERSONALLY changed what governmental branch controls technology sales to other countries like CLinton did, he has not PERSONALLY sold missile, fighter, and nuke warhead tech to China.
Care to try again?
You continue to dance around the issue.
Question is perfectly coherent.
I understood perfectly what PaulaB said.
Say, are you an 'economics graduate' by any chance?
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.