Luckovich cartoon changes address!

Mike Luckovich’s cartoon has moved to a new ajc.com address. Click here to view and bookmark.

The new format features a larger version of Mike’s cartoon for the day and allow readers to vote. There are also links to recent Luckovich cartoons and special galleries.

Bloggers who want to comment on issues in the news are invited to blog at any of our four other Opinion blogs:

Thinking Right

Jay Bookman

OpinionTalk

Woman to Woman

Home > Opinion > Mike Luckovich > Archives > 2006 > February > 21 > Entry

Port security

By Mike Luckovich | Tuesday, February 21, 2006, 11:09 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Do you like this cartoon?
  Yes
  No


Voter Limit: Once per Hour
View Poll Results

Permalink | Comments (260) | Categories: Editorial Cartoon

Comments

Commenting is now closed for this entry.

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 05:55 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 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 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’