Clearly conservatives do not trust Dubya. It was painfully obvious when they skewered Miers. Those who didn't betray Dubya then will probably blast him now so they can prove their independence.
Dubya is the Rodney Dangerfield of Presidents. He don't get no respect. How twisted must one's mindset be to think Dubya wants to leave a legacy of unsafe American ports? His speeches and battles to take down Afghanistan and Iraq all just a cynical ploy to reward his arab oil buddies.
Or perhaps conservatives just think Dubya is stupid.
I don't know if I want to call myself a conservative if the definition is just "cynic"...I'm a optimistic Reagan Republican.
He is leaving a legacy of unsafe borders. He did as Governor of Texas and he is doing so as President.
Bush is a WSJ globalist at heart. And if the GOP fawningly goes along with this we could very well be out of power for a generation.
Oh, cease with this nonsense.
The difference between then and now is that conservatives had solid arguments against her confirmation while the administration was reliant on arguments that she was a woman and a friend as qualification for the job. In this instance, it is the opposite. Most folks arguing against the sale are not arguing fact and reason, only emotion. While arguments in favor seem to be winning converts as more facts emerge.
I opposed Miers and didn't do so to gain independence. I'm not sold on this port deal, but I'm leaning more to the administration's side currently. certainly I've done my fair share of denouncing the hysterics at least.
The one part of your post of any merit is that is is absurd to think the president is selling our security to terrorists intentionally. Folks advancing that lunacy have departed reality.