Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: sdpatriot
is there a quote where Bush said he is for LOST?

I'll check that and get back to you.

At Condis confirmation hearing she said she supported L.O.S.T. Don't you think that odd that that subject would come up at that time?

It is her job to do the presidents biding is it not?

139 posted on 02/04/2005 1:23:18 AM PST by processing please hold (Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]

To: pbrown

hmmm... no, i didn;t know it was mentioned during Condi's grilling..


but (hehe)

but.. i still have hope.. i KNOW Bush was playing the dems when he said he would sign the fienstien Gun Ban law if they got it to his desk. either he KNEW he could say that knowing it wouldn't make it there, or.. he was just bluffing...

i'm holding onto hope here. he did get us out of that ICC..

145 posted on 02/04/2005 1:38:06 AM PST by sdpatriot ("If I know the answer I'll tell you the answer, and if I don't, I'll just respond, cleverly." Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

To: pbrown; sdpatriot
fyi: NY Times Full Transcript

Confirmation Hearing of Condoleeza Rice
Published: January 18, 2005


LUGAR: And this is a great way to do so.

I would add in agreement, this is also important, the AMEC agreement. We have enlisted the support of Norway and friends who want to work in that area, particularly on the submarine issues and the pollution of nuclear material that may have been dumped or could be dumped without activity on our part. Let me turn to another issue. In your answers to questions for the record -- and I cite that because I've asked this question for the record and you have responded -- I particularly appreciate your response on the Law of the Sea Convention.

You urged the committee to favorably report it out and said that you will work with the Senate leadership to bring the convention and implementing agreement to the floor vote in the 109th Congress.

And you also said the following: Joining the convention will advance the interests of the United States military. The United States, as the country with the largest coastline and the largest exclusive economic zone, will gain economic and resource benefits from the convention. The convention will not inhibit the United States nor its partners from successfully pursuing the Proliferation Security Initiative. And the United Nations has no decision-making role under the convention in regulating uses of the oceans by any state party to the convention.

(Page 18 of 79)

LUGAR: That's clearing up an issue sometimes raised by opponents of the convention. Finally, you said, The convention does not provide for or authorize taxation of individuals or corporations. I cannot think of a stronger administration statement in support of the Law of the Sea Convention. Should I assume that the president would like to see this convention passed as soon as possible?

RICE: Would certainly like to see it pass as soon as possible. And, Senator, I think you know the history of this better than I, as well as senators like Senator Warner and others who worked very hard to make sure that some of the early concerns about the convention were addressed and that the convention as it now stands serves our national security interests, serves our economic interests. And we very much want to see it go into force.

184 posted on 02/04/2005 6:57:48 AM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson