Bush will veto any bill to stop port deal

AP ALERT

[Brian Mosely]

ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — President Bush says the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and he will veto any bill that would stop it.

[LK44-40]

one could argue, it was too dangerous of a time to be risking a superb nominee such as Alito (and yet, he had to nominate somebody). When you look at it in that light, Harriet Miers served a valuable purpose. I tend to think that was by design.

I agree that it worked out nicely. But by W's design? ROFLMAO

[harrowup]

...high Crimes and Misdemeanors

Snow Sanborn Chertoff...all stand to gain financially from this deal. They must go.

[Oliver Optic]

Bush had best be revealing why he is outsourcing port security

You could be right for all I know ... but per Tom Ridge, the management company is NOT responsible for port security ... that remains with the Coast Guard.

[beyond the sea]

I'm going to rant on this later, but I swear, FReepers need to give their President just a little credit sometimes.

Yes sir, P.D.

[Stellar Dendrite]

ping to #1236

(hipaatwo, would you mind including stellar dendrite;itzlzha;djmacwow in your future pings? thanks)

[Reagan Man]

What we're seeing here with his stubborn public statement about the Dubai Ports World deal, are some of the first signs of the Bush fatigue factor beginning to appear. It happens in every second term. Happened to Eisenhower, Reagan and Slick. Usually starts sometime in the last two years. Seems to starting a bit early with Bush43. Talk about being stuck on stupid!

[hipaatwo]

Ping to post 1236

[BlackbirdSST]

The Bush Administration is simply the Clinton Administration with slightly cleaner rugs.

Very snappy Laz! Blackbird.

[afnamvet]

Bush called reports at about 2.30 aboard Air Force One to issue a very strong defense of port deal... MORE... He said he would veto any legislation to hold up deal and warned the United States was sending 'mixed signals' by going after a company from the Middle East when nothing was said when a British company was in charge... Lawmakers, he said, must 'step up and explain why a middle eastern company is held to a different standard.' Bush was very forceful when he delivered the statement... 'I don't view it as a political fight,' Bush said.... MORE... MORE...

The British are our allies. P & O are not state owned. They don't decapitate defenseless hostages. We are at war,so we are told, against islamofacists and their sponsors. 9/11 holds the Middle Eastern countries to a different standard. You, Mr. President need to step up and explain.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Go right ahead -- please fix any typographical errors... :->

[Peach]

What an excellent post, Wolfstar. I agree with every word you wrote. Much as I want to support this deal, and do trust the president, my distrust of the people who have professed to kill us is too great.

It is incumbent on the president to make the points that some freepers are trying to make with their research and suppositions.

[mewzilla]

Sigh. Now 43 figures out what a veto is...

[Peach]

s/b professed the desire to kill us.

[NRA2BFree]

Stellar, thanks for the ping, and hipaatwo, thanks for the post! :o)

[Darkwolf377]

Already stooping to the lowest form of discourse in the book. Good job.

As opposed to you folks who've been calling us traitors all day. LOL!

[beyond the sea]

;-)

[petitfour]

Did a bunch of British Anglicans blow up some buildings in the US within the last 150 years?

[F16Fighter]

"You think WE put pressure on the White House? Who are we, Iran? Respectfully, our opinions on Miers amounted to less than a flea bite on Bush's behind.

Then that was the "flea bite," that kicked his @ss and brought him back to reality.

And guess what?

Bush is NEVER shoving the Dubai BS deal through. Free Republic's opinion will influence Dubya...AGAIN.

"Harriet Miers was never going to sit on the Supreme Court, and everyone in the White House knew it. She was a Stalking Horse. Nothing more, nothing less."

Now that's funny.

You seemed to sing a much different tune last October during your 'I was wrong; so please join me in supporting Harriet Miers' thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499585/posts

Excerpt:

"I decided to end my self-imposed exile from posting due to information that I received this past weekend from ‘a little birdie’ in Washington, which I subsequently had confirmed by another ‘insider’ if you can call him that....You know I won’t tell, so don’t bother asking me for names, links, or further information. I trust these individuals, and have received accurate information from them before

Information was shared with me on Saturday, which described in no uncertain terms that Harriet Miers stands as the only nominee on Bush’s list which has any chance of confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee....

Luttig, McConnell, JRB, Owen, Alito, or anyone else you want to name, would have been defeated, and probably defeated in committee, in order to save other Senators from having to vote them down on the floor. Of this, I am now convinced. Only two names were considered allowable for Senate confirmation; Miers and Gonzales....In Miers, Bush has clearly taken what he can get, and our best hope now is for another vacancy on the court before this administration’s term is up.

tunehttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499585/posts

[DOGEY]

I live in Texas and much of the state is involved commercially in middle eastern countries. There are cultural difference throughout the world. Americans, like it or not, must conform to the concerns of the countries if they want to do business there. Many of these cultural norms we find idiotic, and many are. But if you wish to be the major economic and military power in the world, compromise in this area is crucial. Being the big boy in the world earns dislike even when no arrogance is conveyed.