"Bush's Mexican truck plan draws angry U.S. reaction." Who's working for Bush ..

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by ST12, Feb 23, 2007.

  1. #1
    WASHINGTON - The news that Mexican trucks will be allowed to haul freight deeper into the United States drew an angry reaction Friday from labor leaders, safety advocates and members of Congress. .....

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/ap_on_go_pr_wh/mexican_trucks



    The Bushman, as usual ....... doing things good for a handful.
    Forgetting again he is supposed to serve the USA, not some small groups of $$$ and power interested only people.
     
    ST12, Feb 23, 2007 IP
  2. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Who are the handful?

    In what way is he not serving the US?

    Who are the small groups of $$$ and power interested only people?

    I couldn't find these in the article.
     
    GTech, Feb 23, 2007 IP
  3. ST12

    ST12 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    30
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    90
    #3
    .............They said Mexico has substandard trucks and low-paid drivers that will threaten national security, cost thousands of jobs and endanger motorists on the northern side of the Mexican border......

    If the US public is at risk ....... don't you think that a few will benefit, and that many will lose their jobs in US?
     
    ST12, Feb 23, 2007 IP
  4. GTech

    GTech Rob Jones for President!

    Messages:
    15,836
    Likes Received:
    571
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    I did read that, and it does raise questions, as presented, but it also states:

    Which leads one to believe that a high percentage of Mexican trucks are already being taken off the road.

    The story also says:

    It shows another raising a question about how it can be done, but no followup other than the paragraph above which seems to answer her question.

    The author suggests it drew an "angry" response from members of Congress, but go on to cite:

    apparently as the angry responses. I'm not seeing the anger suggested. Keeping in mind, that those are the author's words, not yours.

    Seems like a fairly rounded report covering both sides, but the initial paragraph or two are misleading when actually compared with the story as it progresses.

    At the end, it says:

    Seems like a fair statement.

    I'm just not seeing the second part of your initial post which sparked the questions.
     
    GTech, Feb 23, 2007 IP
  5. aletheides

    aletheides Banned

    Messages:
    2,016
    Likes Received:
    61
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    Well duh - that's just logistics.

    How else is the Bush family going to import all that heroin made from the opium fields that they seized in Afghanistan after 9/11?

    "Last year saw what is probably the single biggest one-year increase in opium production in world history. Since the Bush administration toppled the Taliban regime, opium production in Afghanistan has increased from 185 tons in 2001 to 3,700 tons in 2002 — an increase of twentyfold. Afghanistan has historically produced more than two-thirds of the world opium supply and the resurgence of Afghan production is good news for heroin addicts everywhere." http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0304d.asp

    I heard 2004 was a real record breaker too.
     
    aletheides, Feb 28, 2007 IP