POLITICAL ISSUES

[texaspackerbacker]

Daddy was big on Unions. I'm a Union member. :P

Unions had a large part in making this country great. But that was a hundred years ago. From 60 or 70 years ago down to the present, they have become infested with insidious liberal leaders and "organizers" (one of those scumbags is running for president).

If the question is "how can a party so elitist and hateful to good normal Americans and their beliefs get so many votes?", then unions are a large part of the answer.

[GrnBay007]

Actually our union was/is backing Hillary

[Freak Out]

Fact Sheet: Strengthening Diplomatic Ties with Saudi Arabia
United States And Saudi Arabia Improve Peace And Stability In The Region Through Nuclear Cooperation


RSS Feed White House News

Today, President Bush met with King Abdallah to commemorate the 75th anniversary of formal diplomatic relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia. Since 1933, these two nations have enjoyed formal relations. In 1945, during the waning months of World War II, King Abdallah's father – King Abd al-Aziz – met with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt aboard the U.S.S. Quincy in the Red Sea, and the two leaders chose to deepen the strategic relationship between the two countries. The President's visit today builds on this tradition of friendship and close cooperation.

* It is in the spirit of that meeting that the United States and Saudi Arabia have completed four critical agreements to strengthen the protection of energy resources, enhance peaceful nuclear cooperation, broaden the fight against global terrorism, and bolster nonproliferation. These agreements further cement the longstanding U.S.-Saudi friendship and close cooperation to help bring peace and stability to the region and its people.

The United States And Saudi Arabia Will Work Together To Further Our Relationship

The Saudis bear a special responsibility for protecting key energy facilities of global importance and the world benefits from their abundant energy supplies. Our global economy depends greatly on Saudi Arabian energy. The U.S. has a keen interest in helping the Saudis protect their energy infrastructure against terrorism, as demonstrated by the unsuccessful terrorist attack against the Kingdom's Abqaiq Plants in February 2006. To this end, the United States and Saudi Arabia have agreed to cooperate in safeguarding the Kingdom's energy resources by protecting key infrastructure, enhancing Saudi border security, and meeting Saudi Arabia's expanding energy needs in an environmentally responsible manner.

1. Saudi Arabia will join the 70 partner nations of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. As a partner in this multilateral initiative, Saudi Arabia will:

* Enhance its accountability and physical protection of nuclear systems
* Advance its capability to search for and confiscate unlawfully held nuclear material
* Improve its ability to detect nuclear material to prevent illicit trafficking
* Enhance its means to secure civilian nuclear facilities
* Deny safe havens and economic resources to terrorists
* Create legal frameworks to enforce criminal liability for terrorists
* Improve its response and mitigation capabilities in the event of a terrorist attack
* Promote information sharing to suppress acts of nuclear terrorism

2. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will also join more than 85 states participating in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). The PSI is a response to the growing challenge posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, their delivery vehicles, and related materials worldwide. PSI participants will now include Saudi Arabia and all states that border it.

3. The U.S. will help the Saudis develop both human and infrastructure resources in accordance with International Atomic Energy Agency guidance and standards.
* In order to ensure a smooth supply of energy to the world, Saudi Arabia must be able to effectively safeguard its borders and coasts, and ensure consistent supplies of water and power to its citizens.
* Under the Critical Infrastructure Protection agreement, the two nations have agreed to establish a Joint Commission on Infrastructure and Border Protection to facilitate training, the exchange of experts and specialized knowledge, and other support services as needed.
* The U.S. and Saudi Arabia will also conclude a security agreement that will allow for broadened cooperation between the Saudi Ministry of Interior and the U.S. Government.

4. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia will sign a Memorandum of Understanding in the area of peaceful civil nuclear energy cooperation. This agreement will pave the way for Saudi Arabia's access to safe, reliable fuel sources for energy reactors and demonstrate Saudi leadership as a positive non-proliferation model for the region.

* The United States will assist the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to develop civilian nuclear power for use in medicine, industry, and power generation.
* The Government of the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will establish a comprehensive framework for cooperation in the development of environmentally sustainable, safe, and secure civilian nuclear energy through a series of complementary agreements.

[texaspackerbacker]

Wonderful.

Is there a point to posting this?

[Freak Out]

Just spreading the news in your thread Texas...I thought you might be interested. From what I heard elsewhere Dubya got guarantees from the Saudis to increase production by 300,000 barrels a day.

[Freak Out]

Wonderful.

Is there a point to posting this?

Is there a point to most of the crap posted in this forum?

[texaspackerbacker]

I like the idea of the article. I was just wondering if you were either for or against it--since you brought it up.

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/us/politics/23veep.html

There's been a lot of hinting and speculation lately that the Clinton twins are interested in the vice-presidency. I believe this is true.

I think that the division in the Dem party runs very deep, and that Obama would be wise to choose Clinton.

For myself, I'm going to stick with McCain regardless of Obama's choice for a running mate. Although this will be a very painful vote. The Dems have such excellent VP candidates: Clinton, Webb, Biden ... I only wish one of them was at the top of the ticket. I just can't bring myself to support Obama as a Pres this year. He was only in Washington for a year before he started running for President.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/us...cs/23veep.html

He was only in Washington for a year before he started running for President.

And that makes him different from Bush, Clinton, Reagan?

If longevity was the criteria..guess you woulda voted for Helms.

[MJZiggy]

Strom...

[Harlan Huckleby]

From what I've seen of Obama he is second rate.

[Harlan Huckleby]

And that makes him different from Bush, Clinton, Reagan?

All three were governors of states.

Obama is ridiculously under-qualified.

I've heard Obama supporters mention Lincoln, who ran with similar background. Lincoln was lightening in a bottle. And in the Lincoln-Douglass debate three years prior to his presidential run, it was clear he was a mature, intellectual giant. I've seen Obama in action in the Senate, he is green.

[texaspackerbacker]

What makes him different from Reagan, Clinton, and Bush? What a question!

Obama is evil personified, America-hate personified.

I would never even come close to portraying Bill Clinton--with ALL his scandals and bad positions--as remotely as horrific as Obama. The country literally would be very lucky to survive 4 or 8 years of an Obama presidency.

If anybody would respond that I'm indulging in vague generalities here, the specifics are all there in the original post of this thread.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If longevity was the criteria..guess you woulda voted for Helms.

McCain is a rare republican who I would consider voting for.

Experience is just one factor that keeps me away from supporting Obama. Too many of his supporters have been extreme in their behavior and ideology.

[MJZiggy]

What has Obama done to earn such ire? and such an unfavorable comparison to Clinton?