Has Rush Limbaugh Changed Your Mind About UAE Running Our Ports

[L107ANGEL]

Despite the high disapproval ratings of this deal, Rush Limbaugh is preaching to his fans daily about why it's a good deal for America. Apparently, he'll keeping preaching until his ditsy heads change their minds.

If Rush Limbaugh is for something, it's pretty much guaranteed that I'll be against it. Just imagine if Kerry had proposed this, what Fatso would be saying.

Gees!! You are just falling all over yourself trying to make friends with your debut

 

[Keli]

I like to think of myself as a reasonable human being. Therefore, I can be persuaded to change my opinion on any subject when someone brings out valid, reasonable arguments that I had not thought of or fully realized on any subject. And it doesn't matter if the individual presenting these arguments is on the left, right or smack dab in the middle.

Having said that, I don't usually listen to Rush or any other political commentator so I had no idea where any of them stood on this issue. And I'm still on the fence about it at this time because I'm not done researching it.

 

[LoraJ]

Exactly! An Arab company will be controlling the operations but not the security. BIG difference!

I find it ironic that so many people who argue against racial profiling are furious over this decision

It's not about racial profiling. I don't think the brits should be running our ports either. We should be running our ports. An American company.

 

[lw49033]

This has nothing to do with the domestic issue of profiling. Profiling Americans is a civil rights issue. There is no civil right for a particular foreign company to get a particular contract!

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

I often agree with Rush, but not on this issue. Our borders are constantly being further compromised, and this proposed port deal is a continuation of that IMO. UAE is a terrorist-supporting state, and therefore not to be trusted with control of any kind over US entry points (ie ports). It's a bad deal and an unnecessary risk.

Slightly OT -not directed at any particular poster: Not quiet sure how to say this in a non-offensive way, but here goes--- Just because you are an independent thinker, that does not mean you are a good thinker.

 

[jimmiej]

Just imagine if Kerry had proposed this, what Fatso would be saying.

You obviously haven't seen El Rushbo lately...

Do you always make fun of other people, or is it just conservatives?

 

[momof2inPA]

You obviously haven't seen El Rushbo lately...

How about baldy or drughead? More accurate? The guy calls Hillary a lesbian (among other things); I think he can take a few monikers, himself.

 

[momof2inPA]

I don't listen to Rush, since he is very dishonest, and always comes off as an intellectual cripple. Still I am opposed to the deal. I do not approve of the UAE holding a critical security role on our country due to the fact that two of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE, due to the fact that the UAE does not recognize Israel as a nation, due to the fact that the UAE is run by an unelected hereditary oligarchy, due to the fact that this is not an 'Arab owned company', but this is a company owned and controlled by the hereditary oligarchy of the UAE, many of whom, apparently, were Bin Laden's pals not too long ago, due to the fact that the UAE has an abysmal human rights record, the UAE has a very spotty history of cooperation in counter-terrorism, the UAE was one of three countries in the world to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, due to the fact that the UAE has been a key transfer point for illegal shipments of nuclear components to Iran, North Korea and Lybia, due to the fact that the terms of the agreement protect the company more than the US, due to the fact that according to the FBI, money was transferred to the 9/11 hijackers through the UAE banking system, due to the fact that after 9/11, the Treasury Department reported that the UAE was not cooperating in efforts to track down Osama Bin Laden’s bank accounts, due to the fact that Bush administration didn't bother with legally mandated 45 day investigation, and most importantly, because many real security experts are horrified.

All good points, and you would never hear Rush Limbaugh discussing these. He isn't interested in presenting an honest picture. He wants to change your point of view to his point of view.

 

[jimmiej]

How about baldy or drughead? More accurate? The guy calls Hillary a lesbian (among other things); I think he can take a few monikers, himself.

I asked you about your behavior, not Rush's. I noticed you ignored that. It's so easy to make fun of those we disagree with.

 

[ToriLammy]

So that is why the Coast Guard voiced concern about their ability to protect the ports if the deal went through? I would like to think that the the Coast Guard must know something more about the security of the ports than we all do.

Again, I will reserve judgement until the final report.

The Coast Guard has stated that parts of thier report were taken out of context - imagine that. A politician using only the parts of a report that support their views. Gotta get your news from more than one source to be able to put the whole picture together. One side reports the negative, one the positive - the truth is often somewhere in the middle.

The Coast Guard report, written in December, said, "There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment of the potential DPW and P&O Ports merger."

"The breadth of the intelligence gaps also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities," it added.

The Coast Guard said the document was an excerpt of a broader intelligence analysis performed early in the initial review and, taken out of context, does not reflect the full, classified analysis.

"Upon subsequent and further review, the Coast Guard and the entire CFIUS panel believed that this transaction, when taking into account strong security assurances by DP World, does not compromise U.S. security," Coast Guard spokesman Commander Jeff Carter said in a statement.

A senior Homeland Security official, Stewart Baker, said he had not seen the Coast Guard document but the department had asked for some security assurances from the company, which were put in place before the deal was approved.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said the Coast Guard document vindicated lawmakers who pressed for the additional 45-day investigation.

"If this isn't a smoking gun, it shows that there may be one undetected by the CFIUS committee," Schumer said. http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...IDST_0_SECURITY-PORTS-COASTGUARD-UPDATE-2.XML

 

[momof2inPA]

I asked you about your behavior, not Rush's. I noticed you ignored that. It's so easy to make fun of those we disagree with.

I'm sorry, I can't find a question directed at my behavior-- and I haven't made fun of you in the least despite our disagreeing. Rush attacks democrats everyday, their physical appearances, their speech, their mistakes, their decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the fat, shiny, biased, dumped, drug addict, dimple head is fair game, ladies and gentlemen.

 

[eclectics]

I'm sorry, I can't find a question directed at my behavior-- and I haven't made fun of you in the least despite our disagreeing. Rush attacks democrats everyday, their physical appearances, their speech, their mistakes, their decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the fat, shiny, biased, dumped, drug addict, dimple head is fair game, ladies and gentlemen.

I think jimmiej was confusing you with the newbie that said the "fatso" comment.

 

[Lanshark]

I might listen to what people all over the political spectrum have to say but to change my position because a celebrity has a different opinion would make me a feeble minded idiot.

 

[momof2inPA]

The Coast Guard has stated that parts of thier report were taken out of context - imagine that. A politician using only the parts of a report that support their views. Gotta get your news from more than one source to be able to put the whole picture together. One side reports the negative, one the positive - the truth is often somewhere in the middle.

The Coast Guard report is classified. Sen. Susan Collins, the chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee-a Republican was briefed in closed session last week as to why the Coast Guard changed their mind and she was more convinced than ever that the White House and Treasury Department were flawed in their investigation into the security risks of using the UAE owned "company."

All of the information, word for word in your post and the information I have just stated were contained in a Feb. 28th CNN article. This might not be a case of one "side" reporting the negative, but of one side reporting the whole story, and Rush Limbaugh reporting the part he wanted you to hear.

CNN article:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/27/ports.dubai/

 

[jimmiej]

I think jimmiej was confusing you with the newbie that said the "fatso" comment.

I did. My apologies. However, it's still hypocritical to call Rush names and then badmouth him for doing the same. If it's allright for you, why not for him?

 

[chobie]

I did. My apologies. However, it's still hypocritical to call Rush names and then badmouth him for doing the same. If it's allright for you, why not for him?

I bet you were just fine with it when Rush called 13 year old Chelsea Clinton the "White House dog' weren't you?

About as low as you can get, an adult calling a child names, don't you think?

And no it was not a mistake, or out of context when he said it.

 

[mickeyfan2]

I'm sorry, I can't find a question directed at my behavior-- and I haven't made fun of you in the least despite our disagreeing. Rush attacks democrats everyday, their physical appearances, their speech, their mistakes, their decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the fat, shiny, biased, dumped, drug addict, dimple head is fair game, ladies and gentlemen.

Why not change the title of this thread to "I hate Rush." That is what it is.

 

[mickeyfan2]

I bet you were just fine with it when Rush called 13 year old Chelsea Clinton the "White House dog' weren't you?

I have to believe you that he called her that. I did not hear it, but don't listen either. I believe that minor children and family members who stay out of public eyes should be off limits. So this type of comment is 100% wrong.

 

[jimmiej]

I bet you were just fine with it when Rush called 13 year old Chelsea Clinton the "White House dog' weren't you?

How old are you?

 

[jimmiej]

Why not change the title of this thread to "I hate Rush." That is what it is.