Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Bush: Arab Co. Port Deal Should Proceed

Breitbart reported President Bush said Tuesday that the deal allowing an Arab company to take over six major U.S. seaports should go forward
That is a mistake. He should call for a 45 day review. If after that time it still looks like it should go through that is one thing, but he should not decline to even look at it.
and that he would veto any congressional effort to stop it.
I am happy he knows he has a veto pen, but he should use it on some of these huge spending bills with earmarks.
"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.
No one from Great Britain were on the planes on 9/11
I am trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the world, `We'll treat you fairly.'"


Russ S. said...

Unfortunately, when it comes to middle-eastern governments, that fairness is never returned in kind. I know its not P.C. to stereotype, but in the interest of safety (not to mention survival), lets put political correctness and fairness on the back burner for a while.

Don Singleton said...

I agree. If the UAE is doing a good job helping us, let us find some other way to say thank you rather than this one.

Mike said...

All of this has got me wondering ...

Is this a sneaky little setup by the Bush administration designed to "rope-a-dope" Democrats in to publicly admitting that, in general, Islamic nations --particularly those situated around the Saudi peninsula -- are a threat to US national security?

Because once that happens, Democrats will have a very difficult time opposing things like the NSA eavesdropping program or other administration programs that target Islamic nationals and Arab nations.

Up until now, Islamic advocacy organizations like CAIR have protested Bush administration counterterrorism programs simply by throwing out blanket terms like "bigotry," "racism," and "Islamophobia". And in general, the Democrats have sided with these groups because nothing makes Democrats happier than calling Republicans racists, bigots, and (fill-in-the-blank)phobes.

But by opposing the port deal, the Democrats are putting themselves on the side of "racism," "bigotry," and "Islamophobia." Again, this will make it difficult for them to attack the Bush administration on these terms.

All in all, the politics of the Bush Administration's position on this issue seem to be very interesting.

Don Singleton said...

That is an interesting suggestion. I doubt if it is the case, but it is interesting.

Russ S. said...

Interesting indeed. One also has to take note of the fact that he has conducted similar "set-ups" in the past, i.e. the SOTU speech 2 years ago about renewing the patriot act. I also heard on Fox News this morning that Gen. Tommy Franks has endorsed the UAE as our greatest ally on the arabian peninsula, and the port at Dubai is the best run he has ever seen. I'm still on the fence on this issue, but that statement from a U.S. Military official is a strong one in my book.

Anonymous said...

don singleton said:
"No one from Great Britain were on the planes on 9/11"

neither was anyone from afghanistan, iraq, iran ... except for a few saudis ... glean from that what you may