oh oh, the sheep are waking: House panel votes to block ports deal

Discussion in 'Politics' started by TorontoTrader2, Mar 8, 2006.

  1. House panel votes to block ports deal :cool:

    Wed Mar 8, 2006 7:52 PM ET
    Printer Friendly | Email Article | Reprints | RSS (Page 1 of 2)

    Top News
    Senators craft budget with $90 bln for war

    Moussaoui had dream to hit W.House: witness

    Bodies found garroted in Baghdad


    By Richard Cowan
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. House of Representatives committee on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to block an Arab-owned company from managing American ports, defying President George W. Bush who has vigorously supported the deal.

    By a vote of 62-2, the House Appropriations Committee approved a measure to stop the state-owned United Arab Emirates company Dubai Ports World from managing six U.S. ports.

    A vote by the full House could come next week on the legislation, which was attached to a must-do bill providing more emergency funds for the war in Iraq and for rebuilding Southern states hit by hurricanes last year.

    Earlier on Wednesday, White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters in New Orleans, where Bush was again assessing Hurricane Katrina rebuilding efforts, "the president's position has not changed" on the fight over the Dubai company's role in managing U.S. ports.

    White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the administration was "actively soliciting the views of members of Congress, as well as state and local officials" as part of a 45-day review of the deal.

    Bush enjoys the support of at least one key Republican, Thad Cochran of Mississippi, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee and will shepherd the emergency spending bill through the Senate.

    "I support him (Bush) in upholding the contract with Dubai Ports World," Cochran said, adding he was convinced the company's "management techniques will improve the efficiency of the ports and will not jeopardize national security."

    The House committee's vote on Wednesday was a reaction reacting to what members said was broad opposition to the deal by constituents. House Majority Leader John Boehner on Tuesday called it a "very hot political potato."

    On the other side of the Capitol, Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, offered a measure as an amendment to a sweeping Senate lobby-reform bill to block the ports deal.

    It was unclear if Schumer's proposal would even come for a vote in the Republican-led Senate where Majority Leader Bill Frist has said he would oppose consideration of any such measure until the 45-day review is done.

    Since word of the deal broke last month, lawmakers have complained about security risks if ports management was turned over to firms from countries that in the past were sympathetic to terrorist activities. Continued ...

    © Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.
  2. azimuth


    Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
    Watch lights fade from every room.
    Bedsitter people look back and lament,
    Another day's useless energy spent.
    Impassioned lovers wrestle as one,
    Lonely man cries for love and has none.
    New mother picks up and suckles her son,
    Senior citizens wish they were young.
    Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
    Removes the colours from our sight.
    Red is grey and yellow white.
    But we decide which is right.
    And which is an illusion??

  3. Sam123

    Sam123 Guest

    This whole thing is another example of the best and brightest vs. the masses successfully indoctrinated by movements advocating that all bad things come from the top: namely, the best and the brightest.

    No mistake here: Democrats and Islamists are on the same side of this: the people who run things are evil: the Islamists want to put an end to the smartest Arabs doing business all over the world. Likewise, the Democrats want to put an end to the smartest Americans doing business with the smartest Arabs!

    The ports deal issue is amusing because it’s fun watching the Democrats put their predictable head up their ass, predictably.
  4. The committee vote was 62-2. There are 37 Republicans on that committee.

    No, the truly amusing thing to watch is the denial by hard-core partisan loyalists. Yes, we can all plainly see who has their head up their ass.
  5. Sam123

    Sam123 Guest

    That’s a bi-partisan committee formed by Democrats and Republicans who are against it. Not representative of elected party members. Nice try.

  6. The only thing that has motivated these politicians to actually do something not motivated by capitalism or cronyism... is that they're worried about the people voting them out of office in November.

    As one prominent congressional member said:

    If the President had a 65% favoritism in the recent polls, do you really think this would even be an issue?


    Democrats: Pathetic.

    Republicans: Snake Oil Eminence.

    Especially the old wind-bags... Vote 'em all OUT of office!
  7. achilles28



    Both democrats and Republicans are nothing but toothless whores who've sold America down the river.

    Whats even more disturbing is the dearth of comparable outrage at a MUCH larger security threat: the porous southern border.

    What is it? 3,000 illegals coming over a week??

    The Government says we need to give up our rights to save ourselves from 'the terrorists'. Yet apparently, they don't give a flying fuck about whose coming into the country.

    Totally backwards. America is going down.
  8. Don't Get started on the borders. Grrrhhh....

    The really sad part is that it's gonna take years to clean up the political and economical screwed up mess the Republicans have created for us.

    Some of the toothpaste will never be able to be put back in the tube.

    The Dems contributed from the dumbass corner for letting themselves be run over. Dumbasses.

    They All Suck

    Side note:
    Reminds me of the Bob Dylan song "Everything is Broken".

    Vote 'em OUT
  9. LOL. I rest my case.
  10. None of this is any different than when Rome's senators became so corrupt because of their office that they forgot who they represented and served (the people). And then what happened to Rome?
    #10     Mar 9, 2006