To: i_dont_chat
He's trying to say that because Bill Clinton is so much FOR the UAE getting the deal, the Dems will sound false for trying to use the deal against Bush and Republicans. I don't agree with him because the media and the Clintons and the dems will just muddy the water so that the truth won't get through.
14 posted on
03/05/2006 12:27:45 PM PST by
txrangerette
("We are fighting al-Qaeda, NOT Aunt Sadie"...Dick Cheney commenting on the wiretaps!!e)
To: txrangerette
He's trying to say that because Bill Clinton is so much FOR the UAE getting the deal, the Dems will sound false for trying to use the deal against Bush and Republicans. I don't agree with him because the media and the Clintons and the dems will just muddy the water so that the truth won't get through.
Thank you for interpreting.
This is why I am NOT so bothered by the uproar caused by the geneal public's reaction against the "U.S. Ports deal."
It seems to me that this is not a partisan reaction, not the public taking sides for or against Bush, or Republican versus Democratic. It is my feeling that the public (and I include myself here) simply doesn't think it is good for the Country.
I don't think ANYONE or ANYTHING will be able to blame this on a partisan reaction. To carry it further, I don't think it will change anyone's political leanings.
There's a lot of fear, expressed here on FR, that this will cause a huge backlash against Bush, etc. etc. I don't think so. But I do think that the American people will dig in their heels on this one.
17 posted on
03/05/2006 12:39:46 PM PST by
i_dont_chat
(I defend the right to offend!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson