Page 1 of 2
Ports Fiasco: Where do you stand?

Posted:
Mar 10, 2006 @ 7:58am
by Brig

Posted:
Mar 10, 2006 @ 8:25am
by Andy
Normally, I'd be against it because I'm distrustful of brown people. But, in lack of that option, I guess I'll be for it.

Posted:
Mar 10, 2006 @ 9:01pm
by Caesar

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 12:07am
by Bluetrane
this kinda bullshit would never fly in Canada

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 1:26am
by Brig
It's just stupid political idiocy. Excuse the three-fold redundancy.

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 5:02am
by sandmann
Un-fucking-believable that there is such stolid opposition to such a sensible deal.
God forbid we do anything that might be good for this country, lest the fucking ignorant xenophobic hillbillies that litter this country get their panties in a bundle cuz a bunch of towelheads are going to destroy our country by loading a bunch of boxes onto a platform.
This shitstorm in government shows nothing but our leaders' inability to do anything remotely resembling leading, and just how dumb the supposedly "enlightened" American people can be.
I only hope Dubai can forgive us.

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 5:33am
by Brig
You know, I wish it were just old fashioned ignorance, but this is something worse. These politicians are not acting out of belief of real danger; they're seeking a way to exploit weakness in the opposition and taking advantage of popular ignorance.
80% of port terminals are owned by foreign concerns. If you look at the east coast, you'll find that the ports are controlled by organized crime. When the ports went up for bid, NO US firms were bidding because our firms didn't want them.
It's hard not to shake one's head in embarassment.

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 6:27am
by Bluetrane
the ports are a point of entry into your country and thus should be controlled by your government. Not some foreign concern.
would you let a foreign country run your airports? or your borders? probably not.
one thing is for sure : a foreign concern would probably do a better job in all areas concerned.

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 8:01am
by sponge
If I understood it right, basically Dubai is more or less signing the checks. American workers would still be doing pretty much everything, except the money comes from somewhere else.
Which in that case, is really a fine idea and just shows how ignorant and prejudiced both sides can be.

Posted:
Mar 11, 2006 @ 10:07am
by Brig
Not only would Dubai have been writing the checks, but data shows (if I recall correctly) that jobs created by foreign investment in the US pay higher wages than do those produced by domestic firms.

Posted:
Mar 12, 2006 @ 5:49pm
by sandmann

Posted:
Mar 13, 2006 @ 4:47am
by Maf54

Posted:
Mar 15, 2006 @ 1:41am
by RICoder
Its all pretty sad if you ask me. Sad that the Democrats used it to make Bush look even worse than he already does. Sad that the Republicans are too weak to actually stand up and fight for it. Sad that it fell through considering the economic and diplomatic benifit of the deal to the U.S.
I've actually been trying to avoid political discourse because I find things to be so utterly polarized that neither side is capable of critical thought or intellectual honesty. One would think that in such times as these we could all put asside our petty differences and do what is right for the country.

Posted:
Mar 15, 2006 @ 2:39am
by Brig

Posted:
Mar 15, 2006 @ 6:48pm
by RICoder