[cgk]

BUSH DIGS IN

By

Michelle Malkin

  ·   February 21, 2006 03:50 PM

***video at Expose the Left***

Via Breitbart/AP:

President Bush said Tuesday that the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it.

"After careful review by our government, I believe the transaction ought to go forward," Bush told reporters who had traveled with him on Air Force One to Washington. "I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company. I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"

More from Bloomberg News.

Bush says it would "send the wrong message" to the UAE if the deal is delayed. What about the message it sends to Americans who are simply asking for greater assurances that the transfer was reviewed thoroughly by officials without conflicts of interest?

Allah Pundit, less tactful, e-mails: "Has he lost his damned mind?"

Reader Brian L.:

He says he'll veto any congressional effort to stop the deal. Now, he decides to veto something. Not Campaign Finance Reform. Not immense pork barrel spending.

I'd call his bluff if I were a leader in Congress.

Forwarded from a friend who received a note from a congressional staffer:

Well we know what to add to bills that we want the President to veto now.

And Day by Day cartoonist Chris Muir weighs in on Bush's plea to accept the deal "on faith:"

***

[cgk]

Malkin ping!

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Michelle Malkin ping list...

[mfnorman]

i can't wait to see which picture of this hottie is going to be posted on this thread!

[cgk]

Does anyone else get the impression after reading Michelle Malkin over the past week on this deal, and watching President Bush and then Scott McClellan this morning that there are 2 different discussions going on?

[goldstategop]

I agree with Michelle Malkin. The deal doesn't sit well with me and I don't think a country with possible ties to Wahhabi Islam has any business being involved with our ports. They're plenty insecure right now that we don't need to add to the risk. Either the Administration reverses course or Congress will do it for them. They still don't get it at the White House. Someone needs to wake them up.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[Dane]

Gee michelle, I'll trust a President who has killed more islamic terrorists, than all other presidents combined, rather than a keyboard commando who thinks she kills islamofascists with keystrokes on a keyboard.

[MyDogAllah]

If FR has Ann Coulter rules, surely we need Michelle Malkin rules, right?

MICHELLE MALKIN RULES:

1. If you even mention the name Michelle Malkin in a post, you must post a pic.

2. Errrr, I don't have a rule number 2 yet.

BTW, about the port issue. I can't understand why President Dubya is siding with an arab-owned, state-funded company and not with the vast majority of Americans. Why waste political capital on... a nothing issue?

PS Did anyone notice that I broke my own rule? That's cuz I don't know how to post pics.

[tomahawk]

We gain WHAT by continuing to back the ports deal?

Say goodbye to the House and Senate.

I hope they override the veto.

[Hetty_Fauxvert]

Well, I disagree heartily with Ms. Malkin on her general take regarding the WSJ. In our household, we call it "the best newspaper in the world." But like any newspaper, they can occasionally make a boner, and I agree that this is one.

Re "Chertoff's explanation": I wouldn't trust that man to find his a** with both hands, so I can't put much stock in anything he says. I further agree that *any* deal with the UAE these days should be investigated and vetted extensively, not rubber-stamped. As Ms. Malkin documents, it just hasn't been. And it looks pretty bad that both Bush and Rummy were kept in the dark until this was a done deal, so that if Bush put the kibosh on it at this point, it would make his whole administration look bad.

I think we need to continue to put pressure on our Pres not to let this go through, at least not at this time, without extensive investigation. Better safe than sorry. This is the President's White House comment line number: (202) 456-1111. Or call the toll-free Capitol line at 1-877-762-8762 and ask for the White House.

[Dane]

BTW, when is michelle going to criticize the part saudi owned Fox news. The network she makes a chuckie schumer bee line to be in front of their cameras.

[MajorityOfOne]

I agree with Michelle on the WSJ editorial being shifty and disengenuous. This is the second time in a week the WSJ has blown it (see Tunku's depressing Friday take on why the Journal was wussing out on running the Mohammad cartoons).

[GSWarrior]

If _____ (insert name of favorite blogger/pundit) said it, it must be accurate.

[Antoninus]

Michelle Malkin is a better reporter than 99% of the losers who pretend to be journalists at the WAPO or the Old Gay Lady. Well done!

[trisham]

The issue is not whether day-to-day, on-the-ground conditions at the ports would change. They presumably wouldn't. The issues are whether we should grant the demonstrably unreliable UAE access to sensitive information and management plans about our key U.S ports, which are plenty insecure enough without adding new risks, and whether the decision process was thorough and free from conflicts of interest.

*************

Exactly right.

[Mr. K]

I am trying to find Michelle's column from the other day where she said she got info from a lawyer involved in this deal that said this has less to do with buying the ports and more to do with getting around Islamic law about charging interest rates on borrowed money.


This deal, in effect, uses a loophole to create the single largest Muslim 'stock exchange' in the world, practically overnight.


These hypocrites are so evil they find loopholes in their own religion...

[txhurl]

ulcer & migraine bump

with the issue, not MM

[MissouriConservative]

While I love Malkin and her writings, she is off the deep end on this one. She writes...

"Continuing:

Besides, the notion that the Bush Administration is farming out port "security" to hostile Arab nations is alarmist nonsense. Dubai Ports World would be managing the commercial activities of these U.S. ports, not securing them. There's a difference. Port security falls to Coast Guard and U.S. Customs officials. "Nothing changes with respect to security under the contract," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday. "The Coast Guard is in charge of security, not the corporation."

Missing. The. Point. The issue is not whether day-to-day, on-the-ground conditions at the ports would change. They presumably wouldn't. The issues are whether we should grant the demonstrably unreliable UAE access to sensitive information and management plans about our key U.S ports, which are plenty insecure enough without adding new risks, and whether the decision process was thorough and free from conflicts of interest."

The security won't change a bit as the operator of the port is not responsible for security, the United States is responsible. Secondly, if the UAE company has purchased the British company who runs the port, would they not already have that information whether we let them run the port or not?? They now own all the information that the British company has on our ports even if we disqualify them from running the port....Michelle needs to bring her normally stunning logic back into the process. She's had a few knee jerk reactions lately and that's not what a Conservative does.

[Clemenza]

The Goddess Michelle is clutching at straws here.

Then again, I only come to her threads for the pictures. ;-)

[philetus]

(CBS) WASHINGTON If there is one thing Congressional leaders and the White House can agree on, it is that neither knew the port deal with a United Arab Emirates company was even in the works, reports CBS News political analyst Gloria Borger.


http://cbs2.com/topstories/topstories_story_053102937.html

[Conservative Goddess]

Ping!