Who thinks Bush and Rove planned this whole fiasco ?

With the port deal collapsing?

First, Bush comes out and says he will veto any legislation that tries to stop the sale. He doesn't talk strategy with the Repub simpletons in Congress, we know that. He doesn't give his secrets out to anyone, to wit, NSA secrets. Their skills are in spinning a debacle after it happens, to it being in their favor. So, how did he know the Repubs in Congrss would rebel against the plan? He could have anticipated some amt of Democratic resistance but that has never been a concern with the comatose media we have...So, I'm having a difficult time rationalizing how it could have been part of a plan? Perhaps someone can better explain it. I think they fucked up..bigtime!

It probably started as a plain old globalization business deal. When it became a news story, they used it to allow congress to get all huffy and show they stood up to the WH. What better way to shore up the image of those running in 2006? Never underestimate your opponent.

Maybe shrub wanted a certain American "entity" to be in charge of the ports in the first place and this was just a way to guarantee it?

Something's fishy...have to wait and see what happens in the next week or so.

them that much credit; I'm hoping Rove is otherwise occupied with trying to cover his ass, to the detriment of his 'boss'.
IMO: They didn't have a clue, as usual.

...everything to do with Halliburton winding up with the contract in the end.

You never know.

They could be right about that. http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/duh!.gif

I could see Bush attempting to get the deal for Halliburton now, as a revenge motive, but I don't that was part of any plan in the beginning. They are very good at making lemonade out of lemons...but there is a shortage of sugar with these lemons.

They didn't have any info of it actually happening, but one of the Democrats they interviewed today was asked "What happens now if it turns out that Halliburton bids and wins the contract?"

I hadn't even thought of Halliburton until CNN mentioned them.. :shrug:

But it seems there is more going on with the port story than appears.

It just seems to me that the whole thing ended up making it look like congressional repubs could disagree with Bush and distance themselves from him on an issue that in the grand scheme of things didn't mean that much- compared to the NSA wiretapping for instance which they completely caved on.

simple people couldn't figure why Bush wanted ports to be controlled by an Arab (remember all arabs are terrorists) country?:sarcasm:

Rove figured out if Haliburton got the job
in the first place there would be resistance.
Now that congress has rejected Dubai Ports Co.
the job, there will be minimal resistance as
Haliburton is awarded the contract.

and I am with Mike Malloy on this one. This was a plan and the neocons executed it perfectly. Just my humble opinion but If you think otherwise you ain't been watchin.

I think it can also be counter-productive to give them too much credit, because in the process, you minimize your own efforts and ideas.

We have been so frustrated since Chimpy McCokespoon took office, that we almost blindly stampede when we see an opening. You can blame Rove for a lot of things, but you cannot call him stupid. Don't you think that just maybe, Rove knew that this would cause an uproar.

This is the exact same strategy he used to get Alito. Put Miers out there, there was a huge outcry then Alito pretty much sails through. Same thing with the ports. They are going to Dubai. Both sides of the aisle go completely nuts. Now Haliburton takes them and it even looks like a good thing.

without messing his pants

1. Congress would kill the Dubai deal.

2. Bush would veto that.

3. Congress would overturn his veto.

The result: Bush, who is not running for anything, is made less popular. Congress, including Repubs, are heroes for stopping the deal.

Perfect timing and issue for this fall's elections.