Major Harris Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 IThe majority of Americans didn't want this to happen. not to be combative, but i'd like a link on that. and i think that the majority of americans educated themselves on the topic by no more than reading the "a-rabs to own american ports" headlines. i know my initial reaction was :yikes: until i actually read up on it. Whether you think its right or wrong doesn't mean squat. Because if a dirty bomb snuck through a port, and people were killed. I can't imagine you'd stand up and say "Ok, everybody was right...." so if a dirty bomb sneaks through now, who was right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Is there not ONE American company that can handle these operations? No.. because unions.....forced healthcare.... political correctness... and federal regulation makes it unprofitable for an American company. An American company has the federal govt. so far in it's pocket and at it's board table... they can't make a decision on their own without asking Uncle Sam first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 not to be combative, but i'd like a link on that. and i think that the majority of americans educated themselves on the topic by no more than reading the "a-rabs to own american ports" headlines. i know my initial reaction was :yikes: until i actually read up on it.so if a dirty bomb sneaks through now, who was right? http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/February%20Dailies/Dubai%20Ports.htm February 24, 2006--Just 17% of Americans believe Dubai Ports World should be allowed to purchase operating rights to several U.S. ports. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 64% disagree and believe the sale should not be allowed (see crosstabs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Hmmm, not sure of the comment, because I actually AGREE with Bush here. . . Haha, I just meant it had been a while since Id seen you post. Maybe Im just off though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 It wasn't an issue that followed political lines. do you represent ALL liberals? Probably no more so than sarge speaks for all conservatives. Keep talking out your ass chom http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/03/09/ports.timeline/index.html exactly..:applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Like I said, I would give the side that opposed the port deal more credibility if they were crying foul over Canada, Japan, and China buying and owning our ports, but there wasn't a peep I've already gone on record that only an American Company should own the operational rights to the ports...however.... Spot the difference..... Canada, did they funnel Money to a terrorist organization that killed 3000 americans? Nope Japan, No way China, No. UAE? You betcha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted April 28, 2006 Author Share Posted April 28, 2006 Both Of course I put labels on people, cuz I am labeled quite frequently A Muslim who happens to be conservative. WTF? I have been called things from token to point blank asked by a green party member in college how much the college Republicans paid me to participate in a debate on their behalf It is the inner bigot that people have in them which comes out in times like this, ultimately we try our best to be tolerant, but can't always be that way. It happens to me also Like I said, I would give the side that opposed the port deal more credibility if they were crying foul over Canada, Japan, and China buying and owning our ports, but there wasn't a peep Once Muhammed and Habib decided to put their hands on ports, all hell broke loose about national security. Right, I am sure it was always about that It wasn't about race with the liberals, it was about politics, and it was a way to take the "convienient" side of the argument, and to score political points against his base, you know that ShF. I don't think the party is racist at all, politicians? yes, racist? no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted April 28, 2006 Author Share Posted April 28, 2006 exactly..:applause: I didn't respond to the previous poster because of the obvious stupid remark, but I will respond to you. . . why is the right against this Johnny? Why are the republicans going against the Bush machine? I know why the democrats are, because they would go against Bush on any matter, but why the split in Republicans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted April 28, 2006 Author Share Posted April 28, 2006 No.. because unions.....forced healthcare.... political correctness... and federal regulation makes it unprofitable for an American company. An American company has the federal govt. so far in it's pocket and at it's board table... they can't make a decision on their own without asking Uncle Sam first. Why is it you always "blame the government"? Why are you part of the "blame America crowd"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 I didn't respond to the previous poster because of the obvious stupid remark, but I will respond to you. . . why is the right against this Johnny? Why are the republicans going against the Bush machine? I know why the democrats are, because they would go against Bush on any matter, but why the split in Republicans? political brownie points and the fear of backlash from those that didn't bother to read into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 funny how when we had unity, people were unified in being wrong. :applause: :laugh: :laugh: :applause: Not sure that I agree with your sentiment, but that was funny!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 I know why the democrats are, because they would go against Bush on any matter, but why the split in Republicans? House Appropriations Committee voted 62-2 to block the ports deal. How is that a split? Most the the HAC are Republicans. Perhaps the question you SHOULD be asking is why was Bush so in Favor of this deal? A deal he didn't EVEN KNOW ABOUT until after it was initially approved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazyhorse1 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Unfortunately, I am one of the liberals who has to occasionally take Bush's side on an issue. It always embarasses me and makes me feel terrible, but EL Desidero, who has an IQ of about 86 and the morals of a vampire pig does occasionally luck into a defensible position. This is one of them, as is his position on immigration and abortion (both sides have their points on abortion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 The funny thing was that the Dubia company already owned partgs of other ports in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted April 29, 2006 Share Posted April 29, 2006 Unfortunately, I am one of the liberals who has to occasionally take Bush's side on an issue. It always embarasses me and makes me feel terrible, but EL Desidero, who has an IQ of about 86 and the morals of a vampire pig does occasionally luck into a defensible position. This is one of them, as is his position on immigration and abortion(both sides have their points on abortion). And you would Know his IQ from what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.