Mike Luckovich

By Phil

February 21, 2006 11:17 PM | Link to this

Another good one, Michael. And oh so accurate. Shows the little troglodyte pretty much as he really is, exercising his intellect to full capacity. Next clip should show him “Blessing Murcuh.”

By Bob

February 21, 2006 11:24 PM | Link to this

Good ml. It’s that time. Time again for you repub never-serveds and assorted cowards to park your SUV’s, take off your ball caps, slide into your oily little beds for rest. Tomorrow’s a whole new day for your hate-hurling. Let’s see how many American GI’s you and Bushista can slaughter this week. You can talk tough again tomorrow night. OK?? Nite-nite.

By finch

February 21, 2006 11:27 PM | Link to this

This one made me laugh out loud, although it is a tad misleading.

Even ardent foes of the UAE taking over US ports concede that the US (DOT, DHS, FBI, Customs, Marshall Service, etc.) will still be handling port security. NOT the Arabs.

By RW-(the original)

February 21, 2006 11:37 PM | Link to this

finch,

You hang around in some good company over here don’t you? I bet I’ve seen Bob’s rant attributed to a dozen people.

What do you think ml thinks a port is? Ventilation systems, unlocked doors, shift changes, vulnerable areas,….maybe he thinks someone will sneak a ship in.

By Flibberdigibbit

February 21, 2006 11:37 PM | Link to this

Isn’t anyone at-all concerned this cartoon, not to mention ardent American calls for backpeddling from the sketchy ports-deal, may be the next excuse for inciting violent riots in fanatic Islamist countries? Sheesh!

By DavidU

February 22, 2006 12:01 AM | Link to this

Since I’ve been on this blog, this one and the “Buddies Forever” have been the best ones. Very Funny

By rushncap

February 22, 2006 12:42 AM | Link to this

Well, finch, all those alphabet soup departments may indeed be handling security at the ports, but do you figure the people who own the ports will have every last blueprint, every last sketch of every square inch of those ports? And if they will, do you figure that information may be of some value to certain countrymen of those port owners? There is a distinct possibility that while not handling security Al Queda may wind up knowing as much about the ports as those who do.

By Neal Summers

February 22, 2006 01:50 AM | Link to this

When even Hannity and Savage are saying this is a stupid idea, you know Bush has really stepped in it. Of course, Rush was there today to shill for his President as he always does. Rove must have promised him more Oxycontin.

By WashingtonState

February 22, 2006 02:09 AM | Link to this

Hoist on his own petard. What color would you call this alert over the port sales?

By laughing at the idiots

February 22, 2006 03:14 AM | Link to this

When are all the traitors showing up. Where are all of the rightwing “hey lets sellout our port security to the Arabs” scum like Andy. We worship our President who worships Arab oil so we worship Arab oil. RW come on puke tell me how I’m unAmerican because I don’t worship Arabs like you. Now it is time for you to leave the country since you don’t love it anymore. Come on you sellouts. You’ve your country because you are lowlife scum who care nothing about the security of this country. You are weak pieces of crap. Vets my butt. You could not have served and now support this traitor President who is selling us out.

By LT

February 22, 2006 03:27 AM | Link to this

I’ll have to agree with you this one laughing. These guys in here are usually people I agree with but, turning over our ports to a country who was one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban but still to this day will not recognize Israel says it all.

By Mark

February 22, 2006 03:29 AM | Link to this

When does Bush turn over the security and management of Hartsfield-Jackson to Dubai?

By utter madness

February 22, 2006 04:42 AM | Link to this

September 2001:How could we have possibly know they would use planes as weapons?

September 2005:How could we possibly have known the levees would break?

September 2008:How could we have possibly known they would place an atomic bomb in a shipping container?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 04:48 AM | Link to this

I thought you pinkos didn’t think there was a threat from the terrorists, that the Conservatives were “playing on the fears” of Americans to gin up support for the war on terror? You’re too stupid, which is nothing new, too realize that your hysterics over this port deal is admitting that we have a real enemy, that there are a lot of them and that you libs are racists.

Welcome to the war on terror.

By Duh

February 22, 2006 04:48 AM | Link to this

Why is everyone so worried about this? It is not as if we are going to let them run ports in Texas. Texas ports will be safe so calm down and nobody but crazy liberals care anything about those other ports.

By John Sloan

February 22, 2006 04:53 AM | Link to this

I agree with Duh though he does need a new name. That one is stupid. It is very clear to all the regulars on this board that only one thing threatens the safety of the ports and that is disgusting homosexual sex. If one of those ports is destroyed it certainly won’t be because of our greatest allies the Arabs. It will be beacause the lord is punishing us. Pat Robertson understands this why can’t the rest of you.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:31 AM | Link to this

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.”

Cartoon boy can’t read like I can? Or is it a racist issue, discriminating against Arabs?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:55 AM | Link to this

I left out the most important point. These arabs are the only people who hate jews as much as I do.

By Sally

February 22, 2006 06:08 AM | Link to this

Quoting Don Imus from five minutes ago

“It doesn’t take a genius to see why Bush is doing this. Just follow the money.”

“These are the same keystone cops that missed it on 9/11. We all know these guys are dopes”

By Andy

February 22, 2006 06:14 AM | Link to this

I apologize to everyone who views the comments on this board for the 5:55 that was obviously posted by a liberal democrat, an uneducated one at that, who missed capitalizing the noun “Arab.” All of you liberals should be so proud of yourselves, because comments like this are what you really are.

By I wonder?

February 22, 2006 06:21 AM | Link to this

Suddenly the UAE are a moderate ally in the war on terror. Let’s see — this moderate ally 1) refuses to recognize Israel 2) Still recognizes the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan 3) Was uncooperative in investigating the financing of terror organizations 4) has been involved in the transport and trafficking of illegal nukes to terrorist regimes.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 06:35 AM | Link to this

Talk about totally deep sixing your own argument: 4) has been involved in the transport and trafficking of illegal nukes to terrorist regimes. Hey, I wonder, do they abuse thier camels too?

By Sally

February 22, 2006 06:47 AM | Link to this

Andy you are a complete idiot. The Pakastani Khan who sold the terrorist world the nuke secrets did it through the UAE. So you have no idea about anything you are talking about, you racist antisemitic piece of crap.

By candide

February 22, 2006 06:50 AM | Link to this

You’re doing a great job, Ahmed!

Bush now has a lot of Republicans vs. him. He is on the edge of total failure. My fondest dreams are coming true: impeachment, ouster, whatever. Get the bum out!

By Andy

February 22, 2006 06:56 AM | Link to this

Hey Sally, that’s pretty good, being able to read “the sale of nuclear secrets” into this: transport and trafficking of illegal nukes You got a super secret pinko decoder ring?

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 06:58 AM | Link to this

Andy; I think that the 5:55 spoofer was making a comment about you more than the Arabs. Political hatred/racist hatred; it’s still all HATRED. Sadly, this is not a commodity that is foreign to either political persuaion. Don’t worry Bud; most folks can tell a tu-rd from a Baby Ruth.

I don’t think opposition to the Dubai deal is racist in nature. As Andy has pointed out, we have real enemies in the Middle East. Unfortunately, they are not associated with any company or country; they are independent of both. I’m not really opposed to Dubai; security should not be trusted to American companies either. It’s not like there are no potential moles working for the “American” companies.

I think it is probably impossible to find ANY American company (port or otherwise) that does not have investment by Arabs. We have been paying these guys mega petro dollars for a lot of years and they have been investing that wealth. If we REALLY want to tell the Middle East to kiss our rear, we need to be independent of their product (oil). That means building breeder reactors on a grand scale so that we can make our own fuel without the onerous burden of nuclear waste production (breeders don’t produce any significant quantity of nuclear waste and produce their own fuel). As much as a I dilike GWB, he is the ONLY President who has recognized this immutable fact. FBR’s (fast breeder reactors) and SSTAR’s (easily transportable energy production units) are this countries door to future prosperity. We can either hide in a hole and continue to watch the rest of the world benefit from technology we originated, or seize the day for the welfare of all our children and their children’s children.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 07:00 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Are you trying to say that I hate Jews?

By candide

February 22, 2006 07:04 AM | Link to this

Dubya=Dubai

By Andy

February 22, 2006 07:16 AM | Link to this

None of these politicians, so far as we recall, made a peep when the government of the United Arab Emirates donated $200,000 to fund a professorship in Middle East studies at Columbia University that was filled by a virulently anti-Israel and anti-Bush professor named Rashid Khalidi

NY Sun Editorial, 2/22/06

You liberals need to look within to find the Jew haters.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 07:17 AM | Link to this

Andy: Of course not!!! I think the 5:55 spoofer was directing their venom at you personally more than at Arabs/Jews; a rather poor and cowardly means of expression. This kind of person goes for the back rather than get their tails kicked in a stand-up fight. We all know the sort!

By Andy

February 22, 2006 07:31 AM | Link to this

AntiR: Either way with the 5:55 “spoofer,” whether that loser was attacking me or the Jewish People, you are damaging your own credibility by apologizing for that type of immature behaviour.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 07:39 AM | Link to this

Andy: When I apologize I say “sorry” or “I apologize”. You will not find these words in my posts. I can’t apologize for people that I do not align myself with. I do find it reprehensible when people are so ashamed of their own words that they cannot own them, though! If that diminishes my credibility, so be it!

By Aaron

February 22, 2006 07:50 AM | Link to this

Its amazing how misled our congressmen, the media, and public our on this whole situation. This whole situation has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with port security. I work with ports on a daily basis, and this deal strictly deals with the management of the ports, which pretty much means how the the vessels are loaded and unloaded. The security situation is the exact same. Saying that our security will be weakened is like saying security will be weakened because we recieve oil from Saudia Arabia.

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 07:54 AM | Link to this

Bush is playing you Lib’s like a fiddle. He is setting you all up to expose the fools you are.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 07:54 AM | Link to this

AR, I’ve been looking into breeder reactors, as they look very appealing. I have found that they run very hot and cannot be cooled with typical coolants. They must be cooled with liquid sodium metals (sounds contradictory I know) and that sodium is combustible when it comes in contact with air or water.

“The French and Japanese breeder reactor designs both use liquid sodium metal as a coolant, a solution which looks good on paper but has proved troublesome in practice because sodium is a very reactive metal that ignites on contact with air or water. France and Japan have both had problems with the liquid sodium plumbing in their breeder reactors.”

I have researched several sources and am still researching it in my spare time.

I started by simply Googling the following words; breeder reactor feasibility.

The internet rocks!

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 07:59 AM | Link to this

Scooter, I like Ex Mayor Marion Barry’s gasification machine better

By Voice of Reason

February 22, 2006 08:05 AM | Link to this

Aaron - I’m not all that knowledgable about ports, so I have a question: What does port management entail, and how much oversight do they have?

I have no worries about the Coast Guard because despite DHS’s poor record, the Coast Guard is the only function that is reliable. But I don’t think they have the ability or manpower to know what is on every ship. I’m pretty sure their searches are pretty much random.

By finch

February 22, 2006 08:06 AM | Link to this

rushncap - You don’t need a business contract to learn more than people should be allowed to know about the layouts of ports in Newark, Baltimore, etc. It’s all out there. They’ll be no more, nor less vulnerable under UAE operation.

antiRadical - It is time to get off the proverbial pot and put nuclear power on a “Manhattan Project” track. Applause to you!

Sally - you make a major point. The UAE was happy to give Pakistani physicist Abdul Qadeer Khan financial and logistical help as he arranged the sale of nuke related technology to Iran and N. Korea. Not good.

Add to that UAE contribution to global instability it’s laundering of Al Qaeda cash and it’s role in helping what’s left of the Taliban export drugs from Afghanistan, and you’ve got a country that falls in the category of “with friends like these, who needs enemies?”

What’s Bush so scared about?? Postpone the UAE deal for 90 days and lets have a looksee. Bush is gonna use his veto for the first time ever, for this???

And speaking of “with friends like these… “, lets not forget that Pakistan has given renegade physician Kahn a pardon.

Thank you Pervez Musharraf, secret coddler of Al Qaeda. Now go to hell.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 08:26 AM | Link to this

So we’ve gone from an “overhyped” “fear mongering” war on terror to this:

Sally - you make a major point. The UAE was happy to give Pakistani physicist Abdul Qadeer Khan financial and logistical help as he arranged the sale of nuke related technology to Iran and N. Korea. Not good.

Add to that UAE contribution to global instability it’s laundering of Al Qaeda cash and it’s role in helping what’s left of the Taliban export drugs from Afghanistan, and you’ve got a country that falls in the category of “with friends like these, who needs enemies?�

I thought these Al Qaeda dudes were harmless?

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this

Bush will expose the fools.

By George

February 22, 2006 08:33 AM | Link to this

Well Andy, it is official now. You are a complete idiot.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this

And just one week ago, it was failed Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore who was in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, attacking the Bush administration’s profiling and immigration enforcement against illegal aliens from terror-friendly countries as “terrible abuses.”

Perhaps the UAE will be hiring Gore to condemn the “abusive” practices now being championed by his fire-breathing extremist Democrat colleagues?

Michelle!

By Brian Curtis

February 22, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this

George: Where have you been? Andy’s always been an idiot.

But don’t worry; he only attacks figments of his own imagination. You see, he imagines how his caricature of “liberals” (anyone who doesn’t worship Bush) MIGHT respond to something, plays it out in his head (there’s plenty of room), and then comes here to accuse real people of hypocrisy… for doing what the voices in his head say they’re doing.

It’s a complex psychosis, but it’s awfully fun to watch.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this

Oh, Brian, you don’t have to give me that much credit. Actually, all I’m doing is using the stupid, hysterical, panties in a wad statements that you pinkos shriek out all the time and I’m using them against you. It’s really quite simple, I imagine it won’t be just a few short minutes and I’ll have some more ammunition.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this

The Musharraf pardon of Kahn does not appear be much unlike what is done by U.S. Federal, State & local prosecutors on a daily basis. Forgo prosecution in exchange for information. Acceptable in our judicial system but not theirs?

By Kim

February 22, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

Why would Bush so adamantly support a deal that so OBVIOUSLY violates National Security? Because he knows he can’t win, that’s why… This issue is bound to, and is showing signs already, of uniting forces from every side of the political spectrum. Think about it, Bill Frist and Chuck Schumer are together in their opposition; it doesn’t get any more divided than that. Okay, so this is how it goes down:

Shrub comes out in favor of the deal. Repubs and Dems alike balk, going so far as to say that they will push through legislation barring the deal. Shrub threatens to veto said legislation. Everyone agrees that having an Arab/terrorist-related government in charge of our ports is a Bad Idea, and the legislation passes. Shrub vetoes it. Congress easily overrides the veto, leaving in place a policy that says only an American company can run our ports. Now, dear children, tell me, what company do you think gets that contract? Yep. HALLIBURTON.

By Voice of Reason

February 22, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this

It’s not that anyone denies a terrorist threat — we just doubt their capability to carry one out right now. But handing over management of the ports to the UAE, we are actually weakening efforts to secure our borders and/or ports; ultimately leaving us vulnerable.

Given their history, I think it’s probably not the best idea to take chances with a questionable character. Who knows how long it will take for them to “sellout” and use their access to put us in danger.

A bigger part of the problem is the administration’s reluctance to communicate with the people. Admittedly, we don’t know everything, but it should fall upon the government to address the concerns of its citizens. A little transparency will go a long way in fending off the negative criticism this administration receives.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 09:06 AM | Link to this

Oh if the same sensationalism and hysteria was present after Saddam’s thirteen years of deciept, or 4 years of UN absence from his country? Such clear thinkers.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this

Scooter: Much of published material regarding breeder reactors is dated. Wikipedia has a lot of good reference but it is old. Newer breeder technology has been developed using a tertiary blend of uranium isotopes that would make reprocesing into weapons grade purity an infeasible effort (better to mine raw uranium and start from scratch). This eliminates the threat of proliferation via diversion of power plant stocks.

India has pioneered the development of “Thorium cycle” breeder reactors. They have the advantage of using more plentiful resources (Thorium is more plentiful than Uranium) but the process produces a nearly pure intermediary that can be readily applied to nuclear weapons.

Coolant problems, like in conventional reactors, are a product of the size of the fissionable core. If we build smaller disseminated plants, there will not be enough material in any one plant to have critical mass. You will find better information if you search using “SSTAR” as a filter. These are small self-contained units that can be delivered anywhere in the world, will produce clean power for over a decade and then be returned for reproccesing.

At this point in time, breeders reators have about a 7 year “twin” capacity (they can produce enough new fissionable material to build another reactor in 7 years). All the time they are “twinning” and producing new fuel, they are producing power.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this

Department of Transportation (DOT) filed complaints against United Airlines and American Airlines (who, combined, had lost 8 pilots, 25 flight attendants and 213 passengers on 9/11 – not counting the 19 Arab hijackers). In November 2003, United Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. In March 2004, American Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. The DOT also charged Continental Airlines with discriminating against passengers who appeared to be Arab, Middle Eastern or Muslim. Continental Airlines settled their complaint with the DOT in April of 2004 for $.5 million.

The “discrimination” was checking them to make sure they didn’t blow the plane up. Now we are discriminating against a whole country?

By mike

February 22, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

The UAE company will not be handling security.

Luckovich knows this, but he’s not going to let facts get in the way of his daiy partisan attack.

Hey Mike, if you are so certain that your arguments are correct, why do you exagerate or flat out fabricate the facts around them? Why don’t yu just let that truth speak for itself for once, you compulsive liar.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Hey bed Wetter:

From the NY Daily News for your enjoyment:

“WASHINGTON - The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.

One is Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose agency heads the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan’s cruise ship terminal and Newark’s container port.

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush’s cabinet.

The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World’s European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.”

By candide

February 22, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

If Arabs are mad that we won’t let them control our ports there are other jobs we can give them. In California they cannot find physicians to supervise the execution of convicted murderers. I am sure the Arabs can help us out there.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

Managing the ports will allow DP World to COMPLETELY document port security, that knowledge can then be used to assist any terrorist attack.

This whole thing is simple. DeepThroat put it best during Watergate (another Republican scandal): FOLLOW THE MONEY !!!

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this

I’m no deep throat but I have always been more suspicious of the motives behind hysterical sensationalist predictions that are presented prior to the forming of a solid understanding. But, that’s just me. Then I have to remember how the left was born with the uncanny nack for understanding all things thouroughly and instantly. I’m getting it together, but I still prefer to walk along side the bandwagon.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

America is starting to wake up.

Everything Bush does should be looked into very closely due to corruption.

Even Frist is against this payoff.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

N-GA, thanks for dropping by and showing everybody who starts the childish, immature name calling. That would be you:

By N-GA February 18, 2006 09:24 PM- RW, Anyone can comment….but I prefer to listen to someone speaking from an informed point of view….not someone like the bed wetter who lacks compassion, morals, and intelligence.

By N-GA February 18, 2006 09:28 PM- RW, I’ll wager that if the bed wetter knocked up some drunken chick, you would support a women’s right to choose.

By N-GA February 18, 2006 09:33 PM- Hey Bed Wetter: From some people’s point of view, the government health care that ALMOST killed you failed the rest of us.

You know what, I was wrong to even respond to you. I completely forgot that I am the adult here, you are the little foul mouthed child, you won’t catch me making the same mistake twice.

Drive on, junior.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this

N-GA: Sorry to burst your bubble, but plans and blue prints as well as operational information are not “classified” information. All of this information is readily available at the port authority, planning commissions, and building codes offices in every American port city. If we follow the money, it inevitably leads to the pockets of American port workers who use it to support their families.

This is a completely unsupportable argument when literally hundreds of tons of illict drugs and contraband manages to find their way onto US soil while totally circumventing any ports whatsoever. That’s what makes it smuggling! Does anyone REALLY believe that terrorists do not have access to these underground channels and that they can ONLY bring weapons/contraband into our country through conventional port shippage? That’s just plain dumb!

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

Found this enemy’s perspective interesting.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this

And Hastert

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

anti-radical:

It is obvious you know little about business and nothing about security.

Port security procedures are CLASSIFIED, not public knowledge. When, where and what kind of Coast Guard vessels are operating is classified information. What containers are going to be opened is classified information.

Money going into the pockets of port owrkers will go into their pockets regardless of who manages the ports. It’s the PROFITS that will go over to DP World (except for the money likey going into some neo-con pockets).

By SarahConnah

February 22, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

What…is…all…the…fuss? The Bush Reich is known for rewarding butt-buddies for fine work that has aided his cartel’s drive for dictatorial rule. Tommy Franks, Richard Bremer and George “Slam Dunk” Tenet recieved the Medal of Freedom. Now he is simply rewarding the “Ay-rabs” for the fine work they did on 9/11. Where would Dubya be today with out the attacks on “the homeland”? Answer: Still drilling dry holes in Texas. (Sorry Laura) In the words of this criminal band of sycophants; “get over it!” Now where did I put Michael Jackson’s phone number? I need a babysitter!

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

Andy,

It makes me happy that you respond to my posts when I use your “Bed Wetter” sobriquet rather than your pseudonym, “Andy”.

Thank you for taking the time away from trying to get the yellow out of your bed sheets and underwear. You should get someone to wash it off your back, sometime.

Of course I didn’t expect you to respond directly to the White House connections to the port outsourcing arrangement.

By Redneck

February 22, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this

Rushncap, You are an idiot. All that info you talked about is already available. Just go to the public library.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this

gal - I’m not one who views something so blatantly unpopular without some unforeseen merit. Unlike many, I do not profess to know what is in the minds of those who are protecting this nation. Self preservation is a human characteristic that I will place a bet on everytime.

Back to work.

By hewhoasks

February 22, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

Will Bush have the NSA spy on the communications of the UAE port management company? It would take only one al Qaeda mole to sneak something hugely dangerous into the US.

By Dusty

February 22, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

I do not understand all the aspects of these port arrangements. Maybe someone who knows more about these things could help.

Why are foreigners, not American citizens running any aspects of our sea ports?

Do Americans “manage” seaports for other countries, such as the Arab Emirates?

Are Americans still owners and managers of oil companies in the Arabian peninsular?

Can you sell off parts of our country to another country without some limits? For example, if I wanted to sell my house to someone in Timbuktu, could I do it?

I would appreciate some knowledgeable answers here.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

I thought I made it clear that I was not going to respond to the children? Do I need to do this with flash cards or possibly ten minute updates?

While I am on the line allow me to say that it is odd to say the least that someone who is blowing a gasket over a mere business deal would be calling anyone a “bed wetter.” I guess it must be a playpen rule.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

N-GA: We aren’t talking about turning the Coast Gaurd or port security offices over to UAE. Dubai would be no more “in the know” regarding interdiction efforts than any other shipper.

If there is no investment to create the jobs, American port workers will definitely NOT find a paycheck in their hands on payday. Maybe your knowledge of business relies mostly on wishful thinking?

This still does not address the simple fact that American interdiction authorities have not been able to secure our borders enough to stop the incesssant flow of TONS of drugs and contraband into our country. Terrorists do not need the ports; there are quite obviously MANY, MANY other channels through which they can smuggle!!!!! You’re being riciculous and this undermines any legitimate criticism you make regarding the current administration.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

Debunking liberal lies:UAE cut ties with the Taliban

By Napo D

February 22, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

Andy, my lips hurt real bad.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

It’s convenient that “hewhoasks” should “ask” that question (NSA spying) of UAE. Answer - If Congress will let him. Keep your friends close, but your enemies where you can see and use them?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

This whole sordid little affair is so rich with irony. These same libs who won’t allow us to crack down on illegal immigration, i.e. building fences made of reinforced concrete, are all in a lather over the last place a terrorist would try to get their one precious little atom bomb through. If they ever try anything it will be 75 MPH across the Mexican border at 3:00 in the morning.

Keep up the nonsense, pinkos, this is great.

By Steve

February 22, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

Andy -

“75 MPH across the Mexican border…” Just like they did on their way to Boston? Remember, the best place to hide is in plain sight.

On the other hand, the jester in the White House does say that outsourcing is good for the economy.

By Midori

February 22, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

I must say that today’s cartoon and comments are on a higher level than previous ones.

It will be interesting to see how events are shaped once the dust settles.

Buy Danish — I think it’s the conservative lies that really, truly need debunking.

You see, that’s why everyone is on Bush’s case.

One lie too many, and this is what happens.

The guy could say it’s raining outside, and 80% wouldn’t believe him.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

Since, there are many bloggers on-line today who support the Rep “tax-phobia”, I was wondering if anyone might explain to me why taxes are so parasitic to the economy? Economics is admittedly not my field (just Macro/Micro in college and assorted ancillary classes/ readings over the years), but I do have the common sense to know that when taxes are collected, they are used to build bridges, streets, schools, etc. The tax money, in other words, is returned to the economy to create jobs for contractors, suppliers, and others. I have heard Milton Friedman (Noble Prize-Economics and Reagan advisor) speak many times and he has never really explained this contradiction to my satisfaction. Sure, we all hate taxes but seriously, can anyone explain to me why Friedman takes this vitriolic stand against taxes?

By Eric

February 22, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

Let’s see, it’s taken six years for most wingnuts to figure out what we’ve know about Bush all along. He’s braindead!

By Midori

February 22, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

The Central Intelligence Agency did not target Al Qaeda chief Osama bin laden once as he had the royal family of the United Arab Emirates with him in Afghanistan, the agency’s director, George Tenet, told the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States on Thursday.

By buff

February 22, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this

Dusty

This whole port controversy is out of control and misunderstood

But, Bush is making a huge political mistake; this makes the Dems look strong on defense, which they are not

Andy is right, it does make the Dems recognize that terror is a problem, but, from a PR perspective, it is a political disaster

As an economic conservative, what frustrates me is that this is his first real veto threat, not the bloated domestic spending we have seen

And, if he vetoes, it will be overridden, and that will be the end of his presidency, in any substantive form

By SaneBob

February 22, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

WARNING

Andy, RW, and someone claiming to be an ex-Marine are all really sad bitter old men. They can’t get dates as they are withered and their tools do not function properly.

Their only outlet is to spank off to Faux News until they’re raw “down there” and then, because their “snake” refused to “spit”, they spew the hatred they’re not even bright enough to create for themselves on this site.

It is best to ignore them all.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I don’t mind taxes going to infrastructure, roads and schools, but the taxes that perpetuate themselves are a serious drag on the economy. The IRS is a good example, compliance costs for their rules alone is estimated to be $600 billion, that is like a tax in itself. Let’s go to a fair or a flat tax and put the 600 back into the economy.

Another example is a friend of mine that recently stepped up a tax “bracket” and really started getting hammered by the Fed. This was an eye opener for him, he figured why should he work harder to better himself when the government is just going to take all back from him. It’s totally unmotivating.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

Anyone living in Atlanta knows about outsourcing. The city tried to outsource its water department. After a couple of years, the city took it back.

While there are a few good reasons to outsource, most of the time it is done to MOVE a problem rather than FIX it.

One must keep in mind that outsoucing companies work to make a PROFIT, whereas government agencies just need to break even (for the most part). If DP World is operating on a profit margin of 20% (pre-tax) against total contract revenues of $6 Billion, then their expected profit would be $6 Billion/1.2 = $1 Billion. Theoretically the government could operate the same facilities for $5 Billion, assuminf we can hire qualified people. No charge for the accounting 101 lesson.

By Dusty

February 22, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Thanks, Buff, for giving me some sane political opinions.

I wish I knew more basic information about ports and business deals. Right now I view ports as ships, Coast Guard and a few fish.

The president has more information than most and thinks this is a deal good for the country. But, as you said, a bad political move. That seems to overide the good of the country anytime.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this

Anti Radical, taxes are parasitic on the economy because individuals create wealth, not government programs.

The fact is, if you give a “poor” person a dollar they will invest that in a new car or plasma TV, or a cell phone, etc… If you give a wealthy person a dollar he will hire somebody for 98 cents and produce a good that can be sold on the free market for one plus dollars. Wealthy people, if not born into it, will use their wealth and influence to create jobs and profits and hence the economy expands.

Collusion is illegal and monopolies, if allowed, are heavily regulated by things like Public Service Commissions.

Andy, if we institute the flat tax it will “progressively” move to the same system we have now. You are too smart to be fooled by politicians promises, the fairtax is the best bet to give power back to the people.

By Brian Curtis

February 22, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

Buff: The Democrats have never denied that terrorism is a problem… that’s another far-right fantasy worthy of inclusion in Andy’s Hall of Straw Men.

What the Dems DO suggest is that we don’t have to surrender our freedoms and trash the Constitution in order to fight terrorism… and that we should actually pursue terrorists instead of screwing around and getting our people blown up in Iraq, which has nothing to do with terrorism.

Or didn’t, until we barged in.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this

Andy: I understand and totally agree with your comments but I still don’t undertsand the Friedman dictum. Maybe I’m misreading him, but he mostly seems to be opposed to any taxes whatsoever as a parasitic drain on society. Otherwise, he is an absolutely brilliant and capitivating speaker.

A lot of people justify the higher tax brackets applied to higher income earners by claiming that their wealth was built on the efforts and infrastructure building accomplishments of the many countless citizens who have come before them and that this unseen benefit they have used to get where they are should be paid for.

Personally, I support a flat tax as long as there are no “exceptions”. Afterall, very few of the fortune 500 companies pay any significant percentage of their earnings as tax. Most pay none at all after they take advantage of all the “looholes” and targeted “exemptions” built into our current tax code.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Also Andy, the flat tax still taxes income and that is a divisive issue, income. To tax consumption above the poverty level is the most unifying tax structure, it would help reduce America’s wasteful habits and that would somewhat impact the retail market. But, think about how much industry would flood our shores if they were told industry encounters no income tax, wow!

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

SaneBob -

You’re so sweet, I bet you make a living organizing peace marches. Wouldn’t hurt a fly, I bet, just like Norman Bates.

By Voice of Reason

February 22, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

White House: Bush Didn’t Know About Port Deal

This is part of the problem. Who’s in charge over there?

By Mrs. Godzilla

February 22, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

The UAE can run our ports when they run President Bush’s security detail.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

Progress!!! Now when you see this WARNING, you can skip over and discount that individual’s post as having nothing of value to offer.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

Scooter: The argument can, also, be made that if you give tax-breaks back to the citizenry, the amount is not so significant that they will invest it, anyway. Instead they buy TV’s and cell phones from China. If the government keeps the money, it at least uses the funds to purchase goods and services from mostly American suppliers and thereby truely does create jobs and improve the standard of living. Not sure that I buy either economic view as this is a very complex isssue that I have never come to a satisfactory understanding of.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

A lot of people justify the higher tax brackets applied to higher income earners by claiming that their wealth was built on the efforts and infrastructure building accomplishments of the many countless citizens who have come before them and that this unseen benefit they have used to get where they are should be paid for.

Anti-R -

You start to make sense and then you say stuff like this. Who are these “people”? Sounds like reparations for slavery to me.

And what if I can prove that my family includes the “countless citizens” who have been contributing for centuries? Do I get a bonus?

Wackoeconomics 101!

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

WARNING, Sane Bob ^^^ has nothing of value to offer.

By buff

February 22, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

N-GA

Outsourcing is great. The water example you gave was orchestrated by Atlanta’s crooked Mayor Bill Campbell, who is currently on trial in Federal Court on corruption charges

Let’s see how Sandy Springs does

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

Buy Danish: If you are truely part of this society, you must acknowledge the debt you owe to the men and women who have sacrificed their lives in combat to secure this country. No matter if it’s the lowly janitor who pushes a broom for 30 years to give his kids a chance to do better than he, or the bus driver who drives your kids to school, or the mechanic who works on that buses brakes, and keeps our kids safe from harm; WE ALL OWE EACH OTHER!!! If that doesn’t make sense, I’m sorry for you!

By Wilbanks Izzatard

February 22, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

Bush is playing you Lib’s like a fiddle. He is setting you all up to expose the fools you are.

oh, right.

Just like he “played us” by nominating Meirs. You probably still think that was some grand master plan, and not just another Administration screwup.

Face facts—this Administration has friends in very high places (including most of the media) and they’ll get its back on most anything. That’s why they stumble from one crisis to another but keep on getting up, living to screw up another day.

The only solution is for Congress to change hands in November. Anyone who cares about this nation’s future had better hope it happens, else we’ll be looking at another two years with no oversight, no checks and balances whatsoever.

Hopefully enough Americans will realize in a few months that giving the Republicans all three branches of power is pretty much like giving an alcoholic teenager a bottle of Jim Beam, a wad of Benjamins and keys to the Porsche. Nothing good is likely to come of it.

By Wilbanks Izzatard

February 22, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this

These same libs who won’t allow us to crack down on illegal immigration, i.e. building fences made of reinforced concrete

Wait—“libs” aren’t “allowing” you to do this?

That’s your excuse today?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Brian Curtis: What do you call this?-

WASHINGTON — Ignoring GOP criticism that she’s too angry for prime time, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Wednesday walloped Karl Rove and President George W. Bush for “playing the fear card” on terrorism and for failing to kill “the tallest man in Afghanistan,” Osama bin Laden.

It’s been maybe 2 days since you accused Conservatives of “hiding under the bed in fear of Arabs,” what are you libs doing today?

By candide

February 22, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this

The White Haus has just admitted Dubya knew nothing about the port issue before a few days ago. As usual his modus operandi is ignorant arrogance. Now he is in a hole; he will have to reconsider what he says he won’t reconsider.

By Wilbanks Izzatard

February 22, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

It’s been maybe 2 days since you accused Conservatives of “hiding under the bed in fear of Arabs,� what are you libs doing today?

If you’re going to use quotation marks, make sure it’s a real quotation, ‘k buddy?

By Dusty

February 22, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Those of you still interested in the Ports Authority debate, read the link provided by Voice of Reason at 11:14. Read the WHOLE piece.

Voice of Reason only mentioned “Who’s in charge over there?” I think he only read the headline.

This article supplies all the names of Governmental Department Heads, the head of the Armed Froces and the Head of Security, Congressmen—all who reviewed this business deal and approved it. It was then sent to Bush who reviewed it. Is this not the way all gigantic organizations process material?

John McCain was also quoted. He more or less said that there should be less “heat” and more study of the facts and situation.

Read the WHOLE piece and think twice. Can you make a decision without basing it on hate for all Arabic people or hate for President Bush?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

AntiR: I haven’t heard the Friedman idea, but I can’t see how a zero tax system would work, there are far too many pinkos in the United States for that. If we took away their government security blanket many of them would be getting off the couch for the first time, they would be forced to deal with sobriety, they would have to, gasp, find work. Even I’m not that much of a sadist.

Scooter: I agree that both the fair and flat taxes have to be implemented fairly, with some bugs worked out of both proposals. I know the percentages that Forbes uses to present his idea are more than what most in the middle class pay now, would it be an increase on them?

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this

Anti-R -

What on earth are you talking about? You are making NO sense. I honestly don’t understand you.

From what I can gather, you were mesmerized by Milton Friedman, apparently so much so that you didn’t hear a word he said. Alternatively, you seem to have stayed awake for the socialism 101 lectures, and can rehash it in great detail.

BTW, I freely give money to veterans groups, without any prodding from you or the federal government.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.” - Samuel Adams said it best. We desperately need to check our moral and ethical compasses.

By Wilbanks Izzatard

February 22, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Samuel Adams said it best.

…when he said “I need a damn beer!”

outa here for now. It’s been fun.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

The poor (not all) are stealing from one another and the government is too inept or greedy for votes to initiate any resolution to this pervasive problem.

Republicans are trying to wean us from entitlements. That is a step in the right direction.

By Ricky

February 22, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Once again Lucko does a cartoon based on half-truths in order to meet his personal political views. If you have done any research into this you would know that the UAE company wouldn’t be handling any of the security and would only have control of 30% of the operations of the ports. Do I think this is a good idea? No I don’t, but at least present all the facts when making an arguement.

Midori, did you know that this bid process started back in November? Why wait till now to make a fuss? Because nobody knew about his until recently. Your contention that Bush was the only one that didn’t know about it patently false. But thanks for showing your ignorance once again

By Voice of Reason

February 22, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this

Dusty - Don’t get in trouble by thinking you know anything. I did read the whole thing, and I am well aware of how decisions are made. Of course, he’s going to side with his hand-picked cabinet. And we all know the quality of his cronies. He hardly strikes as the type to personally analyze anything.

The problem here, like I stated earlier, is that he could avoid the criticism from both parties, and prevent legislation if he addressed the concerns of his citizens. His “I can do what I want” attitude has cast enough dispersion on him and his administration.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

Izzatard - That was a good one! I appreciate a sense of humor.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Like I said, I’m sorry for you! You think you owe nothing to your ancestors or the other members of the society that supports you; I think you do. I suppose this must be a fundamental difference in us that words will not bridge.

By buff

February 22, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Folks read this story

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3676263.html

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Like I said, I’m sorry for you. You think that you owe nothing to your ancestors or the others members of the society that supports you; I think you do. This must be a fundamental difference between us that words will not bridge.

By buff

February 22, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this

Folks, read this story

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3676263.html

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

A bidding war for the British-owned P&O has been going on since last autumn, and the P&O board accepted Dubai’s latest offer last month. The story only blew up last week, as a Florida firm that is a partner with P&O in Miami, Continental Stevedoring and Terminals Inc., filed a suit to block the purchase. Miami’s mayor also sent a letter of protest to Mr. Bush.

The above is from todays’ WSJ editorial page. Do you think that maybe the UNIONS have something to do with this? Maybe the UAE isn’t required to use union longshoremen?

This way this story suddenly exploded makes me wonder if Fla. Congressman Wexler doesn’t have a hand in this too. If you recall, he was the man who began the dimple and chad revolution.

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Typical Liberal’s…leap before you look.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this

Anti-R -

I still don’t understand what on earth you are talking about?

Can you explain your position instead of repeating the childish statement that you “feel sorry for me”?

My ancestors made huge contributions to this country, thank you very much, and I appreciate every contribution that they have made. What I don’t understand is how my tax dollars are a means of showing my ancestors respect.

This is positively nonsensical. You have an opportunity to explain yourself. Please do so.

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

Buff - Excellent article. As a society we must all support one another through our effort, not through government entitlements. Kudos to the new progressive leaders within the African American community. Stances such as this will help their people and all of us in the long run. In all fairness, there are other ethnicities, including whites who could benefit from this wake-up call.

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this

The most common liberal thought is……”Ah Ha! we got him”

The second most common thought is……”Damn…maybe next time”

Repeat…..

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

Buff -

Great link. A fine way for people to make a “contibution” to re-building New Orleans.

But if I understand Anti-Radical correctly, this is not how things in America are supposed to work. We are to give money to the government who redistributes it to people who do nothing, as payback for the contributions of their ancestors.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Here is the original post you flamed me about-

A lot of people justify the higher tax brackets applied to higher income earners by claiming that their wealth was built on the efforts and infrastructure building accomplishments of the many countless citizens who have come before them and that this unseen benefit they have used to get where they are should be paid for.

Your ancestors, mine, and everyone else’s built this country and afforded the wealthy the opportunity to thrive and prosper. Why is it that the wealthy should have no duty or obligation for the sacrificres that everyone’s ancestors (and their descendents) have made for them? If it wasn’t for those sacrifices the rich would never have had the means to be successful in the first place, right?

By getalife

February 22, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

By getalife February 21, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this Money over security.Tell me again how this is good for America? This shows the war on terror is a scam.

Without border and port control, we are sitting ducks just waiting to be hit again.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

By getalife February 21, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this Money over security.Tell me again how this is good for America? This shows the war on terror is a scam.

Without border or port control, we are sitting ducks just waiting to be hit again.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this

Anti-R -

• Why is it that the wealthy should have no duty or obligation for the sacrificres that everyone’s ancestors (and their descendents) have made for them?*

Do the rich pay taxes? Again, what are you talking about? It still sounds like a call for reparations to me.

By buff

February 22, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

That link I posted, Houston is going to be teh big loser in this situation

New Orleans will be a winner when all is said and done

So will the GOP, as the Dems have barely been hanging on Louisiana, but will probably lose it now

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Here is the original post you flamed me about:

A lot of people justify the higher tax brackets applied to higher income earners by claiming that their wealth was built on the efforts and infrastructure building accomplishments of the many countless citizens who have come before them and that this unseen benefit they have used to get where they are should be paid for.

Your ancestors, mine, and everyone else’s built this country and made it possible for the wealthy to survive and prosper. Why is it that the rich should have no duty or responsibility to those (and their descendents) who made their wealth possible? Socialism is where nobody owes anybody else (instead they owe the state)- sounds a little like what you want; no responsibility, no duty, no incentive. An equitable tax system does not equate to socialism except in the minds of radicals.

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this

AntiRadical,

You were making so much more sense back at 10:08. This new topic is baffling at best. Don’t you think our ancestors sacrificed and built this country to give everyone the chance to thrive and prosper? It would seem that the intent would be for us to apply the “pay it forward” principle and pass those same opportunities to future generations not overtax “the rich” to fund a welfare state.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

Anti-R -

Here’s an explanation of the “negative income tax” if that is what you are talking about

Show me where the “wealthy” make no contribution?

By RE

February 22, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

Finally, a public figure not directly employed by the executive branch has come out in support of the UAE transfer:

” The Bush administration got support Monday from former President Carter, a Democrat and frequent critic of the administration.

“My presumption is, and my belief is, that the president and his secretary of state and the Defense Department and others have adequately cleared the Dubai government organization to manage these ports,” Carter told CNN. “I don’t think there’s any particular threat to our security.”

At least you have Carter on your side

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish- Of course the rich pay taxes (I’m not exactly hurtin’ myself, you know). In fact they pay much more than the poor (who pay nothing). The point is that this is not socialist or even unfair. The higher tax brackets that the wealthy pay are their return for the opportunities that have been afforded them and their payment for the past support that their fellow citizens (living and dead) have provided them. Makes sense to me; sorry you can’t seem to get it!

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

Anti-R

Frankly I have never heard this particular explanation of the “progressive income tax”. Is this some kind of text-book theory, or is it your own invention?

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

RW -

Anti-R seems to have put a new spin on “the death tax”!

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

Sorry about the double-post; system is running REALLY slow today.

RW- It would be great if everyone had the same ability to support our government. Unfortunately, only the wealthy and middle-class have the disposable income to do so. Point is that we are all one and each has duty and obligation to the whole (or should). Expenditure of the taxes collected (welfare, p**-ing it away on frivolity, etc.) is a matter for another debate (one in which you will find me firmly on your side).

By RE

February 22, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

Andy, RW, BD, Buff….just for an update, you are all on the same side of this issue as Jimmy Carter. Good to see you stepping over party lines.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: We’re talking about the current graduated tax system in which the wealthy pay higher rates than the poor. I don’t like it either, but do not think that it is either socialist or unfair for the reasons that I have elaborated on.

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

AntiRadical has to be making this up as he goes along. I think we’re being had by some inventive satire. I really liked the part earlier when your ancestors were not only dead, but driving your kids to school and running a “Brakes ‘R Us” shop.

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

RE,

I don’t base my opinions based on who may be on the same side, I base them on whatever facts I am able to find. It’s been on my blog for two days that Jimmy Carter was on the side of approval of this deal and it has been posted on earlier threads here.

By buff

February 22, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this

RE

If you are referring to the Port controversy, I am too ignorant of the issue at this time to comment

I do believe that we will need the help of moderate Arab countries to win this war. Hell, I visited the UAE and it is more Westernized than Chicago

My comments concerned PR

And, I am not a party person

Finally, that Carter remark was below the belt, hurts like hell :)

By getalife

February 22, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

Andy, RW, BD, Buff….just for an update, you are all on the same side of this issue as Jimmy Carter

Ya’ll see the the attacking rabbit?

By candide

February 22, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

Well, forget about the cartoons of Mohammed. The civil war is now breaking out in Iraq between Sunnis and Shiites; they have themselves to slaughter and will forget about the Danish Pastry of yesteryear.

It is good to see how well we are doing in Iraq! With a civil war there now we will either have to choose sides or leave. We need to leave and let those Arabs kill one another without our help.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

Did Mr. Murtha say something about civil war in Iraq?

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

RW: Sorry if you too cannot understand that everyone’s ancestors have contributed to the building of America, not just your ancetors or Buy Danish’s ancestors but everyone’s. You owe my ancestors, I owe yours, and we both owe the ancestors of the bum on the street corner smoking crack. Whether you wish to acknowledge your duties and responsibiities or not, they DO exist!

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this

I think posts are being swept away by that exploding Thrasher ad.

AntiRadical,

It seems the Fairtax is the way to go. It really does tax the wealthier more $’s, but in an equitable manner and takes the class warfare out of politics for the most part.

I’m leaving now, hopefully when I return that damn ad will be gone.

By buff

February 22, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

AR

I do not owe anyone a damned thing

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this

Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their battles lie not in the immediate result, but in the ever expanding union of the workers. This union is helped on by the improved means of communication that are created by Modern Industry, and that place the workers of different localities in contact with one another. It was just this contact that was needed to centralize the numerous local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle between classes. But every class struggle is a political struggle.

AntiR, the compensation package that a person negotiates priior to agreeing to labor for an employer is the end of compensation in a free society. Nothing further should be expected from the employee, especially not from society. Unless, of course we want to enable the victim mentality and the poor. Before everyone comes unglued, some need help but this nanny state passed those people long ago, now we are just redistributing income.

AntiR, the progressive tax code is one of the requirements (not end all be all) of communism/socilaism. Poltical leaders of a party know this and are flaming the hatred and animosity of the Bourgeois/”less fortunate”. Socialism is not a philosophy to run from, but you should read the Manifesto, as I think you will find much you agree with.

Communism is a form of socilaism and fascism dabbles in some socilaist policies of dependence.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this

It is rather ironic, Queen Pinko Cynthia posted a column today giggling about the triviality of “snowsports,” and here we are getting bombarded by an advertisement for a snowsport.

I wonder if Mother Lib knows that Norwegians probably giggle about people bouncing a basketball?

And what’s up with the NASCAR museum hissy fit? All these people want to do is draw tourists and their money into Atlanta, the pinkos at the AJC have got their thongs wadded up over it. Am I missing something?

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

correction;

Nothing further should be expected from the employer (not employee), especially not from society. Unless, of course we want to enable the victim mentality and the poor.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

Buff: I’m quite sure you never felt you owed any duty or responsibility to anyone in your entire life. Congratulations.

Scooter: If the graduated income tax is the progenitor of communism it sure is working slow. After all, this has been our system in America for nearly 3/4 of a century.

By RE

February 22, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

Buff,

As a US citizen, your personal portion of debt is about $26600 that you owe for goods and services already rendered. (~$8billion/~300million people=26666 $/person)

It’s up to you if you want to pay your childs share as well or leave them to pay it, but this is just about what you owe

By Daniel

February 22, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this

AR: I love the 1:28PM post! America is great due to the selfless, courageous efforts on the part of all our ancestors.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this

Anti-Radical: You need to remember that you are debating tax issues with the “Compassionate” conservatives (choke, choke, gag).

Don’t know whether or not the NASCAR museum belongs here any more than it belongs in KC, Daytona, or Charlotte. What I do know is there was a NASCAR museum in Dawsonville built using a city-backed bond issue to the tune of $11 million. The landowner and developers made out. The museum Director pulled in a hefty salary. The museum went bust. Now it is being used for City Hall.

If business people believe a farkin museum will bring in enough people that it will make money, let businessmen build it. Damn, the public keeps underwriting professional sports teams and their venues. Do any of you remember how Atlanta paid for the new Hawks basketball facility? Rather than have the Hawks owners pay for it….rather than have the people attending the Hawks games (or music concerts) pay a ticket surcharge for it….the Atlanta City council decided to tax non-voters. Yes, that’s it!! Taxation without representation. How did they do that, you ask. Well, they simply added a 5% tax to all car rentals in the city of Atlanta (which includes the airport).

Another case of government sucking up to big business.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

Alliof that I typed and all you come back with is that. The lack of private property rights is another requirement of communism/socilaism, how are they doing with liberals? If you don’t want to read it just say it and I will classify you as a born “know it all”.

**AntiR, the progressive tax code is a divisive tax system that is being exploited by a political party to solodify their positions of power and limit the potential of upward mobility within the masses.

I will keep trying to plug the drip… drip… drip… that you don’t seem concerned with.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

Sorry if you too cannot understand that everyone’s ancestors have contributed to the building of America, not just your ancetors or Buy Danish’s ancestors but everyone’s. You owe my ancestors, I owe yours, and we both owe the ancestors of the bum on the street corner smoking crack. Whether you wish to acknowledge your duties and responsibiities or not, they DO exist!

I think the above from Anti-R is a new classic!!

Anti-R -

The “ancestors” of the crack-smoker could just be the recipients of the largesse of “The Great Society”. Three generations of 15 year old “single mothers” having babies, and you’ve got yourself an “ancestor”. What a scam!

How about if I just hire a medium and try to make contact with my ancestors for advice on how they would like my money to be spent? Maybe a Ouija Board would supply the answer.

RW -

You’re right - it’s got to be some satirical spoof that we right wing morons don’t understand - the humor is too nuanced perhaps. Nothing else explains why it is such a joke.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

Daniel: Thanks. It’s really hard to get a point over to the “silver-spoon” crowd sometimes. I guess “old money” rots the soul!

By buff

February 22, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

RE

If everyone else will pony up I will pay my share, no problem

My kids are grown, they can pay theor own

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

It is generally accepted that:

democracy and communism are political systems whereas socialism and capitalism are economic philosophies.

By Your Ancestors

February 22, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this

Find out here

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this

N-GA, you need to realize that you enable the poor with your “comapassion” of fish handouts and your party depends on those poor staying right where they are. If there is no “less” fortunate, there is no democrat party and you think they are working to rid themselves of a portion of their political base?

Wow N-GA, look we agree?

If business people believe a farkin museum will bring in enough people that it will make money, let businessmen build it. Damn, the public keeps underwriting professional sports teams and their venues.

But, I don’t think you have many other free market tendencies.

By AntiRadical

February 22, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: You appear to be unaware that wealth is fleeting. Most of the drug epidemic revolves around upper/middle class youth who waste the opportunity their parents position in society has afforded them. Just because their children choose to waste their lives does not mean that we do not owe the parent for their sacrifices and contributuons to society. The “sins of the father should not be visited on the son” (and vice-versa). It’s actually an “old” classic, you will find it in the New Testament.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

N-GA, sorry, the lag time on the blog is large.

It is also commonly accepted that Socialism and Communism are political philosophies that control the economy. So, doe se doe your partner!

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

While the current tax system is flawed to the extreme, the current recommendations have flaws as well.

It is futile to debate “which tax system is better” in the same breath as “entitlements”. I suspect only 1 or 2 of the extremists posting here feel that the government should eliminate entitlements entirely. I suspect further that none of the more socially conscious bloggers feel that ANYONE WHO WANTS IT should get welfare. The vast majority of Americans, I believe, support some forms of entitlement programs to assist people who GENUINELY need it. The real questions are “what defines that need” and “how do we administer such a program so that abuse is kept to a minimum”.

I suspect, also, that there is no one posting here that LIKES paying taxes. Most people, I believe, want to know that their tax dollars are being spent WISELY. What we do know is that THIS Congress IS NOT spending our tax dollars wisely.

Nuff Said…..

By RE

February 22, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

Buff, I figure if we spread it out over 10 years, at 0% interest it would be about $221/mo per person. That would not keep up with the interest owed, or the year to year shortfalls, but it would be a start. At 6% interest it would be closer to $295/mo.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

FYI I have been an Independent voter for 35 years. Neither party has represented the American voter for decades. The only difference between the parties is how they perform when they are in power.

For the record, this administration will go down in history as the most morally corrupt, least financially responsible administration in the last hundred years. They will also be remembered for illegally invading a sovereign nation, violating the Geneva Convention, and setting back democracy in the world for generations.

By buff

February 22, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

N-Ga

I have a cousin who used to be a bleeding heart lib. She got a masters degree in Social Work and wanted to help the poor. She put in her twenty years working for the state and is now a true conservative, based upon her experiences of trying to help “the poor.”

I am going to call her and try to get her to post on this blog. Some of the stories she can tell….

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this

N_GA, we know some other things as well. Like, government is not subject to the competitive forces of the free market and thereby will not function as efficiently as the private sector. Now as to the government wisely spending our tax dollars on entitlements, it will never happen because of the above liberty of government to levy taxes disproportionately and bypass competition. The difference comes in when the left always insist that government be the one to do it through higher taxes or outright redistribution of income, which both parties do now that the republicrat party has been born under the Bush family.

The more free people are removed from the restrictions of government, more will become wealthy and open efficient aid programs for the truly poor disadvantaged.

The left loves government and I think it could screw up a wet dream.

By VK

February 22, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Working from conservative to liberal (meaning the definition of liberal, not the connotation):

The economic systems are communism, socialism, capitalism.

The political systems are authoritarianism, democracy, and anarchism.

Either extreme is always bad.

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

N-GA, with your boilerplate comments about invading sovereign nations and applying Geneva Convention rights to viscious non-signatories, I will leave you.

By RE

February 22, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this

Looking for consensus on the ports/UAE deal. Instead of trading barbs on the pros and cons, can we agree that for these type of deals there needs to be congressional, or at least non-executive branch oversite for the sake of responsibility.

I think these powers were givin to the executive back in the 90s during NAFTA discussions and the need for fast track authority on trade. (Clinton did it!) I think it may be time to institute more oversite.

Anyone agree?

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this

AntiRadical - Let’s take a look, shall we.

http://www.desiringgod.org/library/fresh_words/2000/020100.html

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this

VK, how easy is economic upward mobility in social democracies?

By RE

February 22, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this

VK, you are going to confuse everyone, the connotation and actual definition are so far from each other, no one is going to understand and think you wrote those backwards

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this

Another look. A loonnnnng look.

By RE

February 22, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this

Scooter, we live in a social democracy. Actually, a representitive democracy which is a little more authoritarian than a true democracy, but with many socialist programs

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

Has this WARNING addition slowed this site down. Posts are taking forever.

Does it also mean that I won’t get to watch Buff and Midori & Big Daddy and OO have fun with each other? Damn WARNING. It’s good for one but not for the other.

By RE

February 22, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

Shoop,

About your article, now there is a correlation between GDP and ND, but looking for sources, lets go for something written after 1986 and by someone of a little better economic stature than a guy selling nutritional supplements. But he does want to build space colonies, sounds reasonable to me

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

Hey Scooter,

You called my comments “boilerplate”, but you cannot tell me they are anything but the TRUTH!

Can’t you handle the TRUTH?

By buff

February 22, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

Midori

Where are you? Wanna play? :)

By Scooter

February 22, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this

N-GA, I hear you Jack N. But I think I would rather go beat my head against a pole while you realize that your arguments are defending the corrupted and inept UN Oil for Food Program. Peace out G!

By Shoop

February 22, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

RE, I’m an old codger who believes in sound principle. The table at the bottom brings you to 2004. If codger is spelled wrong, sorry, but I still am one.

Work day is over for me. You all have a nice evening.

By finch

February 22, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

By RE - February 22, 2006 02:45 PM

“…can we agree that for these type of deals there needs to be congressional, or at least non-executive branch oversite for the sake of responsibility…”

Exactly right!

What bothers me most about the UAE deal is that it was announced as a fait accompli, with President Bush insisting he won’t change his mind for anything, and even threatening his first ever veto…

And THEN we find out that he didn’t even know about it until very recently.

”.. over the last several days,” as White House flak Scott McLellan puts it so smarmingly.

Oh, great! We’ve got a President who’s a little too hands off, delegating major authority to functionaries, and when asked about it, acts like an emperor.

For all I know, the UAE deal’s the best thing to happen to US seaports since the 1934 “Black Thursday” waterfront strike.

But nobody really knows because the autocratic Bush administration won’t let anyone question it.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this

finch,

The word clusterfuk comes to mind.

Why are you the only one on this blog to get it.

It is very obvious that Bush and his cronies are way over their heads in the mess they leave behind.

By The Grinch

February 22, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

Terrorist thugs are currently working at the ports. The ILWU union….

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this

Anti-Radical -

The dead ancestor theory of economics just does not pass the laugh test. I’m still waiting for the source of your unique theory of wealth redistribution. Right now it sounds like a Monty Python skit.

It sounds to me that you want the rest of US to pay monetary tribute to the decendants of YOUR ancestors - naming YOU as the primary beneficiary. Very funny.

BTW, were you the one who told us that your ancestors fought in the crusades, but not against the Muslims? I’m still trying to work that one out.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

It is amazing. Something like this port management fiasco comes up and all the Bush administration apologists (read: sycophants) run for the hills or attempt to frame a different argument.

I’m surprised that they aren’t shouting “Hillary this” or “Clinton that”. How about “Dean and Kerry blah, blah, blah….). Just makes you really understand how devoid they really are of anything of substance.

By Midori

February 22, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

Hi, Buff

smooch

kiss

kiss

By buff

February 22, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

OK

We have eight new millionaires in Lincoln, Neb. How long will it be before half of them are completely broke?

I give them four years

By Van

February 22, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this

I am wondering why this is such a suprise. THis was in and article in the New York Times last November. Where has everyone been. D P World bought British P&O (who managed the same ports) in an all cash deal.

This is strickly a management change.

From the Times article -

DP World, Dubai’s port company, is offering a 46 percent premium to P&O’s stock price on Oct. 27(2005), the day before news of a possible bid became public. After the all-cash acquisition closes, DP World will be the third-largest port operator in the world, behind Hutchison Whampoa of Hong Kong and Temasek Holdings of Singapore.

Maybe Whampoa or Temasek would have been a better choice.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

finch -

…the autocratic Bush administration won’t let anyone question it

Gosh, how did you slip through the radar? Maybe we really do have a national security problem!

By wench

February 22, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

Oh, come on! For once Bush is doing the right thing ethically speaking, and everyone jumps all over him? Do you really think that a Dubai company is going to be easier for a Moslem extremist to infiltrate? Why - because “they all look the same”? Because they’re not Christian? Get over your prejudice & take a cold look at reality. You want the ports to be safer in American hands but it’s not necessarily so. Extremists come in all colors and faiths. Have you already forgotten Oklahoma city? White Christian man, blew up a building and some kids… The only part of this situation I disagree with is outsourcing our security to a private second party. Personally I think the government ought to be providing homeland security, not a private company. That’s what the Coast Guard is for. Guarding…the coast…. get it? In other words, IMHO you’re right for all the wrong reasons.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Van,

Sometimes the details don’t emerge so quickly. As I posted earlier from the NY Daily News:

“WASHINGTON - The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.

One is Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose agency heads the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan’s cruise ship terminal and Newark’s container port.

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush’s cabinet.

The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World’s European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.�

As Deep Throat said: “Follow the Money!!

By Dusty

February 22, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

finch,

Do you ever read anything on this blog before you post? Now you are saying the Bush Administration won’t let anyone question it.

Do you know that this afternoon Senate Armed Service Com. Chair John Warner is meeting with the Armed Services Committee for a briefing from Defense Department officials on Dubai Ports Authority?

Do you know that Warner has already met with Rumsfeld, a deputy secretary Gordon, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Peter Pace?

Do you know that,although already confirmed by a 12 member government panel and approved by the Cabinet, the president has until March first to either say NO or Yes?

If you had read the link to Fox News from a 11:14 blog you would know a little more about what is going on. QUESTIONS ARE BEING ASKED AND ANSWERED.

I guess you will keep posting that same old line: Bush Administration won’t let anyone question it?

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

buff -

I think anti-radical has booked a flight to Nebraska to cash in on THEIR winnings for HIS ancestors.

Van - Hutchinson Wampoa (read Red Chinese) already IS in charge of the Panama Canal with 25+ year lease, set up during (shhhhhh, not too loud), The Clinton Administration.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this

Wench -

Personally I think the government ought to be providing homeland security, not a private company. That’s what the Coast Guard is for.

They already are.

By finch

February 22, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

“Do you ever read anything on this blog before you post? Now you are saying the Bush Administration won’t let anyone question it.”

I never, ever said that the Bush administraion won’t let anyone question it. What I did say is that President Bush has said this is a done deal, and he’ll veto any bill that blocks it. This means the blockhead will let anyone criticize it, but he still won’t listen. Heaven forbid we should confuse him with what could be facts.

Great. Senator Warner will actually be allowed to ask questions of Defense Department and other administration types. Whoopie! That and $2 gets you a ride on the NYC subway.

But wait!! You mean Bush has changed his mind?? He’s willing to entertain suggestions that this isn’t a good deal?? He’s retracted his veto vow and adopted a wait and see position??

Um, no.. he hasn’t.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

Follow the money, indeed, how about the longshoreman’s union donations to our Congressman:

It turns out that nearly every politician who has been at the forefront of the opposition to the Dubai deal is on the receiving end of some Longshoreman largesse. Senator Clinton’s (woman’s got her hands in everybody’s pocket) campaign took $4,500. Senator Dodd, $2,500. Congressman Fossella, $9,500. Senator Boxer, $6,000. Senator Lautenberg, $9,000. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat from New York who is another outspoken critic of the Dubai deal, has accepted $22,500 from the Longshoremen since March of 2000. Senator Menendez, a leader of the opposition to the Dubai deal, has taken in fully $39,500 in campaign contributions from the Longshoremen’s political action committee.- NY Sun Editorial, 2/22/06.

Oh, but the Republicans are the corrupt ones says the pinkos, yes, I get it.

Van: This port deal is something brand new for the libs and a few presidential hopefuls to beat Bush over the head with. It’s warm, fuzzy and fresh, plus it hasn’t been thoroughly debunked yet, like all of the other hysterical, moonbat schemes have been, but we are working on that.

By Your Ancestors

February 22, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

Come back in a few hours and what do you find. In case the blog is still operating in Siesta mode, I’ll put it all in one post.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this

From the AP:

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said disgraced U.S. lobbyist Jack Abramoff was paid $1.2 million to organize a meeting between him and President Bush in 2002…Mahathir said that at the time he had been persuaded by the Heritage Foundation in Washington to meet with Bush because the conservative think tank believed he could help “influence (Bush) in some way regarding U.S. policies.”

The meeting took place in May, 2002.

This administration is all about THE MONEY!!

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

and of course by Your Ancestors-deliverer of Cyber Ouija boards I mean RW-(the original)

By Steve

February 22, 2006 05:11 PM | Link to this

Andy -

Well, OF COURSE these people took money from the Longshoreman’s Union! Those are people they “represent”. And the longshoremen are the ones who are going to get hurt by this.

The only people making out well on this deal are DP World, the law firm of Alston & Bird, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. and the leaders of the Longshoreman’s Union. The actual dock workers will get the shaft on this one.

But, as I said earlier in the day, it’s not so bad, since outsourcing is good for our economy.

By mike

February 22, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

Oh I got it! All Arabs are terrorists!

Ha ha ha. Boy, isn’t Mike a bigot?

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

Hey Bed Wetter:

You don’t seem to be posting the $$$ that were donated to your anti-American neo-con pols. No surprise. Certainly small potatoes when compared to the ten of millions of dollars available to Bush and his cronies over this crooked deal.

How do you sleep at night with all these evil thoughts? Oh, I almost forgot…the golden shower!!

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

If you were still wondering why health care in the United States costs so much:

Man sues drug company, casinos after losing $14 million. In federal suit, Austin retiree claims Parkinson’s drug caused his compulsive gambling.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this

Steve: So you are saying that Congressman should take bribes to influence official government business?

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this

And now a quote from Donald Rumsfeld about the port fiasco:

“We all deal with the U.A.E. on a regular basis,” he added. “It’s a country that’s been involved in the global war on terror.”

I want to respond by saying: “The U.A.E. certainly has been involved in the war on terror. The question is, which side?”

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Only the dumbest of the dumb can defend this president now.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

We need to consider the European model of judicial practices. In a civil suit, the loser pays the legal bills of the winner. They have far fewer frivilous lawsuits and, I suspect, fewer attorneys taking cases on contingency.

We should also consider professional juries.

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

Hey ATC,

And many of the people to whom you refer regularly post here.

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this

ATC,

On the other hand maybe a bunch of rampaging sheep that don’t care about details are the dumb ones.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

It seems patently hypocritical that America wants democracy in the Middle East, champions capitalism and global integration, pushes for reform, transparency, and anti-corruption practices in business, and then turns around and tells those who are practicing what America preaches, Sorry, we think you folks are a bunch of terrorists, so we don’t want you on our shores and don’t trust you running our ports.

By Dusty

February 22, 2006 05:40 PM | Link to this

finch

How was I to know that you didn’t say what you wrote and didn’t remember what you said.

That is really strange since I copied it right from your postings.

Oh, well, Bush still has until March first. Congress has a week. I don’t know what either one will do or say.

Of course, you do.

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this

It’s really hard to understand. Is it just that they’ve been apologists for so long and dug their hole so deep that they just don’t have the cojones to admit that the guy is the biggest disaster ever to sit in the White House. How oblivious can one guy be. How politically stupid can one guy be. The Republicans that have to run in 06 should be mad as hell. All the dems have to do is sit back and wait for the next Bush screw up. They shouldn’t have to say one word. The prez is their greatest ally. What will his approval rating be after this fiasco?

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this

Just like I said. Only the dumb ones.

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:48 PM | Link to this

Just like I said. Only the dumb ones. If Bush raped their sister they would still be leading the cheers.

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:49 PM | Link to this

Just like I said. Only the dumb ones. Bush could rape their sisters and they would still be leading the cheers.

By buff

February 22, 2006 05:52 PM | Link to this

Hmm, four points

By buff

February 22, 2006 05:55 PM | Link to this

midori

I just read your 4:03 post

You little tease, can you hear my heavy breathing :)

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 05:55 PM | Link to this

Anyone want to vote on best version of ATC’s latest tripe? I’ll say the first one since after seven words she couldn’t hold the thought together anymore.

By ATC

February 22, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this

Just like the Saudis are our good friends, huh, buff?

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this

ATC: Why would a left-wing, atheist, nazicrat pinko, communist pervert like you use an example like raping their sister? You liberal scumbag, you sound as if you’re speaking from experience. Is that what nazicrat liberals like to do in their spare time?

By Andy

February 22, 2006 05:59 PM | Link to this

ATC: Five posts, zero intelligence. You will continue wondering why hysteria doesn’t rule the day in America, probably all the way untill November 2008 when you will start you hysterics and wondering anew.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this

Andy -

I want to commend you for turning another cheek while N-GA uses his bait-Andy tactics.

finch -

You said, “the autocratic Bush administration won’t let anyone question it”. Now you say, “I never, ever said that the Bush administraion won’t let anyone question it.”

Is someone blogging with your name in vain?

By ATC

February 22, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this

Kinda like our “good friends the Saudis”, huh buff?

By ATC

February 22, 2006 06:03 PM | Link to this

Wow! Coulda figured. You idiots can’t spin it, so you attack. Why don’t we turn an airline over to them too. They are such good friends.

By clark

February 22, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this

Zelly; a left-wing, atheist, nazicrat pinko, communist pervert

are you sure you got all the adjectives out on that one, Don’t hold back. Let your imagination flow.

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 06:06 PM | Link to this

I thought that these hypocritical nazicrats would stop at nothing short of selling their mothers to make a dollar and take a dig at Bush, but I was wrong. It looks like they would rape their sisters instead.

By MikeT

February 22, 2006 06:07 PM | Link to this

Andy are we camming tonight? I have some new pictures that you are really gonna like!

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

ATC -

You say, “If Bush raped their sister they would still be leading the cheers.”

I think you have administrations confused.

RW -

Why is this thing so darned slow today, do you know? Maybe Your Ancestors is trying to communicate, but is having trouble getting its message through with so many negative spirits hovering about?

By buff

February 22, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this

ATC

Actually, their jets already land here

I do not like the Saudis, but I have been to the UAE and it is extremely Western, Dubai is a beautiful city too. Our military personnedl love to get leave and go there

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

It’s fairly obvious that it isn’t to weed out content. Maybe ml is playing tricks on ATC to get her to keep re-posting. Your Ancestors was only supposed to deliver the Ouija board and go away, but I guess they got wind of this money grab by AntiR and wanted to stay for their cut.

I hope it doesn’t stay this way or this blog will be dead. DING DING DING that’s it ml wants to kill this blog, start a new one and get the new one to pay reparations to this one.

By Andy

February 22, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

Anybody want to guess who this is?

SO, THREE MUSLIMS WALK INTO A PORT

February 22, 2006

The idea that the Democrats have any meaningful interest in America’s national security is a joke, so I’m perfectly willing to believe there’s more to this port story.

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 06:23 PM | Link to this

Clark: No imagination required because liberals are what they are, that’s why so many left-wingers are so afraid to say that they are liberals in public. It’s their treasonous anti-American rhetoric that has made being a liberal a thing of shame. It’s their defecation on everything that’s American that has made the word “LIBERAL” a dirty, shameful, filthy word that only brings with it the connotations of a sodomous, whacked-out, dirty, backstabbing, long-haired hippie traitor that should be highly medicated and locked up in a maximum-security insane asylum so as not to be a threat to themselves or the future of our society and its culture, ideas and principles.

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 06:29 PM | Link to this

Now nazicrat, atheist deviants like ATC are advocating the rape of females to try and make a senseless political point. Will liberals stop at nothing in their attempts to destroy this country?

By Midori

February 22, 2006 06:31 PM | Link to this

Hey Buff!!

where’s my hug!!??!!!

:)

By Andy

February 22, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

European liberals already behave as a submissive people of the pact in their feeble multiculturalist mindset (long evident in their hate-crime codes and contempt for their native Christianity), which casts them as inferior unbelievers who must never question a non-Western religion like Islam. Multiculturalism is the modern equivalent of the expected stance of the “dhimmi,” those Christians and Jews who were never allowed to forget that Islam calls the shots.

Guess who the liberals have their sights set on next?

By clark

February 22, 2006 06:37 PM | Link to this

Zelly; It’s their defecation on everything that’s American that has made the word “LIBERAL� a dirty, shameful, filthy word that only brings with it the connotations of a sodomous, whacked-out, dirty, backstabbing, long-haired hippie traitor that should be highly medicated and locked up in a maximum-security insane asylum so as not to be a threat to themselves or the future of our society and its culture, ideas and principles.

See, I knew if you put your mind to it, you could describe it much better.

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 06:38 PM | Link to this

RW -

Well one things for sure - there are flight delays in cyberspace.

By buff

February 22, 2006 06:40 PM | Link to this

midori

Check my 5:55 post, you little scamp :)

By clark

February 22, 2006 06:41 PM | Link to this

There will be a delay of up to 5 minutes before your comment appears

By Midori

February 22, 2006 06:47 PM | Link to this

Buff:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Who is the tease here? :)

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 06:49 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Yeah, it looks like the Clinton Misadministration were the ones who set the tone for objectification of women…Gennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, Paula Jones, etc…etc….

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 06:50 PM | Link to this

clark,

It’s never been that way on this blog before in spite of that notation, smarta-ss.

By getalife

February 22, 2006 06:51 PM | Link to this

Zell from hell

By RW-(the original)

February 22, 2006 06:52 PM | Link to this

Dubai Ports World, like the foreign companies that already run the majority of key U.S. ports — including 80% of the terminals in Los Angeles — does not own the points of entry. It is a contractor that coordinates logistics. And most important, it’s not in charge of security. Port operators work with U.S. security officials (port police, the Coast Guard, the Department of Homeland Security) in charge of preventing terrorism.

By clark

February 22, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

RW; Had to wait up to 5 min for that one to be posted, Ha ha ha ha.

By SJS

February 22, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

N-GA,

By N-GA

February 22, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

We need to consider the European model of judicial practices. In a civil suit, the loser pays the legal bills of the winner. They have far fewer frivilous lawsuits and, I suspect, fewer attorneys taking cases on contingency.

Surely you’re kidding, when the government comes to take your property (recent eminent domain ruling), assigning their interpretation of “fair market value”, thanks to the once liberal Supreme Court, you will be at a clear disadvantage with them being backed by the big money some developer has placed in their pocket. You are naive my friend.

By clark

February 22, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

RW; Even your queen, Ann Coulter is against this. You know it’s bad when she’s not backing anything and everything republican.

By Midori

February 22, 2006 07:04 PM | Link to this

please watch this video snippet from Lou Dobbs today

By Andy

February 22, 2006 07:08 PM | Link to this

clark: So much for the lockstep Bush apologist BS, looks like we are free to disagree in the Republican party. You pinkos should try it, it’s healthy to debate.

By clark

February 22, 2006 07:11 PM | Link to this

Andy; It’s quite a refreshing change, If I do say so.

By buff

February 22, 2006 07:17 PM | Link to this

Midori

pant, pant

I watched the video you linked. Yes, Bush will be beaten over the head with that, but, he does nto care

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 07:22 PM | Link to this

Well, it looks as if Luckovich and the AJC flower children have gotten tired of getting their heads hopelessly beat in on a board that they thought would be dominated by angry, frustrated atheist East Coast and inside-the-Perimeter Bush-bashers gunnin’ for a secular, deviant, multicultural, pacifist America. We all know that Luckovich, Bookman, Tucker and the rest of the over-the-hill Al-Jazeera Constitution hippies are trying to sabotage the board because they can’t win fairly in what they thought would their own personal den of left-wing flame-throwing inequity. I’m gonna take off for a little bit, but I’ll be back to send these Godless liberal left-wing nazicrats running for cover when they decide that they want to go back to playing fair and taking an All-American a** whuppin’ on the chin like real liberals should and like not be sabotageurs like the Eurotrash cowards that they are and want us all to be.

You were sore losers in the 2000 election,

You were sore losers in the 2002 mid-term elections (Georgia Governor and National Congressional elections),

You were sore losers in the 2004 Presidential election (Bush 51%, Kerry 48%)

and you atheist Nazicrats are losers now, right here on your own wannabe left-wing flame-thrower board (is it really a coincidence that the board is running so slow after the liberals have been sent running for cover? Hell, the little left-weenies probably called the newspaper on the phone to wine that they couldn’t spew as many anti-America and anti-Bush lies as they thought they would under the Luckovich board that thought was designed solely for their treasonous propaganda)

By Andy

February 22, 2006 07:25 PM | Link to this

New cartoon, same slow computer, what did these libs do, outsource their server farm to the Saudis?

By clark

February 22, 2006 07:32 PM | Link to this

Zelly; angry, frustrated atheist East Coast and inside-the-Perimeter Bush-bashers gunnin’ for a secular, deviant, multicultural, pacifist America.

You definitely need a strong drink. Now you, who is all knowing, is coming up with your own conspiracy theories.

By clark

February 22, 2006 07:35 PM | Link to this

Andy, Zelly; Can we liberals at least keep the conspiracy theories? You Rep, can’t come up with anything new, so you take everything that we come up with, get your own ideas.

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 07:42 PM | Link to this

And by the way…you can all view how these vile, nazicrat, atheist deviants plan to hijack our future by brainwashing our children to be Eurotrash whores at American colleges and universities by viewing the Top-10 of the 101 Most Dangerous American College Professors at:

[http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=12331]

By Buy Danish

February 22, 2006 08:05 PM | Link to this

clark -

Actually, take out the word “frustrated” from the post and you basically have liberals nailed.

Nevermind. “Frustrated” works too.

Andy - Great Human Events post. I was wondering when someone was going to bring up the chilling hypocrisy of putting holocaust-denyers in jail:

More light has been thrown on the shifting ground of Europe this week. The same Europeans who accommodate Holocaust-denying radical Muslims cheered Monday’s news that British historian, David Irving, will go to jail for making appalling statements about the Holocaust. Were Irving a Muslim, the case would never have been brought. That he is going to jail for three years for making comments identical to those that appear in the radical Islamic press illustrates that Europeans enjoy less free speech on their own soil than radical Muslims do. And note, by the way, that Irving’s change of mind wasn’t sufficient for the Austrian court. They still believe he is a thought criminal. “The court did not consider the defendant to have genuinely changed his mind,” the presiding judge said.

Here’s a secret message that I intercepted:

“Al Qaeda sends thanks to all the faithful marxist soldiers who have embraced our cause. We give special praise for your excellent work in promoting multi-culturalism and thought control while destroying Western civilization and culture as we know it. Allah Akbar.”

By Mad As Zell

February 22, 2006 08:09 PM | Link to this

Andy: Pinkos debate? That’s a laugh because there is nothing for them to debate. Liberals all know that they’re a bunch of think-alike, left-wing, nazi-eurotrash lovin’, communist-wannabe, deviant atheists who have no tangible, coherrent position on anything of substance to the American people. The only thing for pinkos to debate is what will be their next failed babbling attempt to try to brainwash the American people (Al “stiff-as-a-bored” Gore in 2000, Howard ” psycho-red-faced can’t trust him around nuclear weapons” Dean and John “Swiss cheese-eating, french-speaking and wine-drinking, ketchup-heirless-mooching” Kerry in 2004, Hillary “angry ex-feminist posing-as- a-Republican with the womanizing rapist husband” Clinton in 2008?).

By Les

February 23, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

After reading some of the above comments, there would seem to be quite a bit of hatred and anger out there.

I would like to offer the words of someone who, supposedly, has the credentials to offer up some of the concerns of the Dubai Deal.

The Washington Post reported today…

“Joseph King, who headed the customs agency’s anti-terrorism efforts under the Treasury Department and the new Department of Homeland Security, said national security fears are well grounded.

He said a company the size of Dubai Ports World would be able to get hundreds of visas to relocate managers and other employees to the United States. Using appeals to Muslim solidarity or threats of violence, al-Qaeda operatives could force low-level managers to provide some of those visas to al-Qaeda sympathizers, said King, who for years tracked similar efforts by organized crime to infiltrate ports in New York and New Jersey. Those sympathizers could obtain legitimate driver’s licenses, work permits and mortgages that could then be used by terrorist operatives.

Dubai Ports World could also offer a simple conduit for wire transfers to terrorist operatives in the Middle East. Large wire transfers from individuals would quickly attract federal scrutiny, but such transfers, buried in the dozens of wire transfers a day from Dubai Ports World’s operations in the United States to the Middle East would go undetected, King said.”

In the end, if the head of the Homeland Security Agency, Customs Anti-terrorist program is concerned…I believe any reasonable American should ALSO be concerned. Period!

Les

By curt Esident

February 26, 2006 11:01 PM | Link to this

Press Release - Libertarian Hollywood Producer’s Film:

Atlanta, GA — On Sunday, March 5 at 1 PM, accomplished Hollywood producer Aaron Russo will test screen his new feature film, “America…From Freedom To Fascism” at the LEFONT PLAZA THEATER in ATLANTA.

Russo’s films, which include “Trading Places” (starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd) and “The Rose” (starring Bette Midler), have received six academy award nominations. Russo has personally won both an Emmy and a Tony award and his films have also won numerous Golden Globe awards.

This new film is a highly anticipated political documentary about the fight for Freedom inside America. Mr. Russo stated that he is, “More proud of this movie than any other work (he) has ever done.”

Russo, as writer, director and producer, is entering “America.” in the upcoming May 2006 Cannes Film Festival.

The advance screening event is FREE and open to the public.

The sponsor of the event, the We The People Foundation For Constitutional Education, is a nationally known non-partisan, not-for-profit 501(c)3 educational foundation committed to educating Americans about their fundamental rights, the Constitution and the essential principles of liberty.

The Foundation’s event will run from 1 PM - 5 PM and will also feature a short video about the landmark Right to Petition lawsuit, where almost 2000 Americans have filed a federal action, asking the judiciary to declare — for the first time in history — the meaning of the last ten words of the First Amendment, i.e., the Right to Petition the government for Redress of Grievances.

The battle for Freedom and our Constitution has just begun. Please join us for this important event.

The theaters are located at:

The Lefont Plaza Theater 1049 Ponce De Leon Ave. NE Atlanta, GA 30306 (404) 873-1939

By how can my husband increase his sperm count

March 10, 2006 08:04 AM | Link to this

count increase male natural remedy sperm increase sperm - ejactulation http://www.9-11usg.org/sperm/increasespermvolumethicker.html increase sperm - ejactulation masturbation increase sperm production http://www.9-11usg.org/sperm/whatvitaminsincreasespermproduction.html and …. count increase male natural remedy sperm increase sperm volume thicker http://www.9-11usg.org/sperm/increasespermmobility.html increase sperm amount increase sperm mobility http://www.9-11usg.org/sperm/doesfertilityaidincreasespermcount.html increase sperm volume increase sperm volume http://www.9-11usg.org/sperm/masturbationincreasesperm_production.html .Thanks.