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.

[inquest]

bttt

[AmericanDave]

Well I bet the Dem's are HOPING he veto's it! It is BAD politicaly, he's going to get NO public support on this!

Even though the ports are being operated by a Brit company that is being bought out by the UAE company. IIUC

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

Actually in the War on Terror scheme of things, the President may be right in rewarding the UAE with this Port Operations (not security) Deal for its being on our side in the Middle East.

However, HILLARY will add her oppostion to this UAE Port deal to her Membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee credential as examples of her being strong on National Security, when in fact she's always been just the opposite.

Our job as Freepers is to expose her every inch of the way. 'Cause if she's ever allowed back inside our Oval Office...

...us Freepers are the first to go into her very own version of:

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1308949/posts

.

[flashbunny]

"\ this is CLEARLY another rope-a-dope by the GENIUS karl rove, Bush is playing CHESS while the dems play CHECKERS /major sarcasm"

You are too much of a fool to understand this genius.

Only someone like GWB, Rove, Dane and MNJohnnie can possibly understand the strategery going on here!

[harrowup]

Better yet, a sparrow's belch in a typhoon......thanks; I'll send that to my nephew at AP.

[R. Scott]

With all the other junk he allowed, THIS he decides to veto? It’s really starting to sound fishy – like something we would expect from Slick Willie.

[Pukin Dog]

Are you sure your silly post doesn't make my case? Yeah, I wanted Miers supported. I knew she wasnt going to hang in, so what is the big deal? She had NO CHANCE. NONE. NADA. It was clear then, as now that she was put up there to ferret out the Democrat strategy. It was brilliant, because when Alito got up there, the Dems had nothing but mud to sling at him.

So just who's ass got kicked here?

[satan]

Clearly, he is drinking again. He needs to get back to AA or the countfry is doomed.

[rang1995]

i love Bush--back him all the way--but this is DUMB!!!!!

[DJ MacWoW]

It just gets better and better!

[Mo1]

Woo Hoo!!!

That is great news!!

[scottdeus12]

Hey buff, who did you vote for?

[Flux Capacitor]

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

Indeed. We might soon long for the days when Bush would sign a leaf if it blew onto the Oval Office desk. (This security sellout aside, those days probably aren't over anyway.)

-Dan

[arasina]

You obviously haven't read any of the wiretapping threads.

So I'm clueless. Care to elaborate and illuminate?

[harrowup]

I understand, but I'm surrounded by Democrats who are smelling blood.

[R. Scott]

He can't veto things that happen at the state level.

Is it at the State level? The Port of Hampton Roads was excluded from this deal because it is State owned.

[Flux Capacitor]

I thought so. :)

-Dan

[Stellar Dendrite]

"Only someone like GWB, Rove, Dane and MNJohnnie can possibly understand the strategery going on here!"


LOL...

[beyond the sea]

Clearly, he is drinking again. He needs to get back to AA or the countfry is doomed.

Crystal ball? Spell check?

[gpapa]

He is not outsourcing port security. As I understand it port security will still be a responsibility of US and State agencies, including the Coast Guard, as it is now. However, from a political and strategic point of view the decision is dubious at best, resulting in the shipping of more US dollars to the playboy Sheiks of Arabi who pour petrol-fueled funds into jahadi linked enterprises to protect their backsides.