From PrisonPlanet.com:
Republican Congressman Predicts Bush Impeachment
Says US close to dictatorshipPaul Joseph Watson/Prison
Planet.com | March 3 2006Republican Congressman Ron Paul has gone on record
with his prediction that the impeachment of George W. Bush is right around
the corner but warned that in the meantime the US was slipping perilously
close to a dictatorship.
Appearing on the Alex Jones Show and addressing the
port sell-out, Paul stated that, “it probably will contribute to the
Republican’s failure in the next election.”Asked if the Democrats would use gains in the mid-term
elections to set in motion impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush,
Paul responded,“I predict that would happen.”
“I think he (Bush) has numerous things that the
Democrats if they get a chance, not only will they be after him for that
but it will be payback for the Clinton impeachment.”Paul was inclined to believe that the port sales would
go ahead anyway but took a positive perspective in pointing out that it
again highlighted George W. Bush’s complete abandonment of conservative
principles.“At least this has awakened a lot of people and
I think this is going to serve as a benefit,” said Paul. “They’re
likely to pull this deal off but the American people are awakening now and
I think there’s going to be a payback period in the election.”The Congressman expressed his resignation at the passage
of the Patriot Act and how it again underscores Bush’s unchecked powers“They had a few token changes which mean nothing
and under the present system he (President Bush) just ignores what he doesn’t
like anyway.”Asked if the US was heading into a dictatorship, Paul
responded,“It’s getting close to it, it’s called usurpation
of power and it’s done in many ways with Congress just going along because
they’re sound asleep and this certainly is an attack on our Constitution
and on our freedoms.”
{ 25 comments }
Does this include the vice president?
Alright, but isn’t Prisonplanet one of those conspiracy theory websites? Might not do much for the credibility of the story.
Why does Ron Paul have a problem with the takeover of P&O? Has he turned into a protectionist?
The quotes from Ron Paul are from an interview with the owner of the website on his radio show so I don’t think you can question the credibility of this story.
As for the protectionism argument, I don’t think it holds. The numerous contacts between the Bush family and the UAE make the port deal look more like crony capitalism. However, I don’t know Ron Paul’s specific objections to the deal.
Steve,
Crony Capitalism. That’s a good one. Tell me another.
AUE’s Dubai Ports World is purchasing the British P&O Company and some how the Bush family is accused of crony capitalism.
I know people hate Bush, but come on get a grip on reality.
Tom,
The ports are owned not by private, profit-making firms, but by unaccountable quasi-governmental authorities. Any business dealings they have are shielded from accountability, market or otherwise. Not sure if the deal meets your standard of “crony capitalism”, but it certainly isn’t “regular” capitalism.
Vince,
So, explain again how the Bush family stands accused of crony capitalism?
Ron Paul wrote a piece for LRC raising his objections to this deal a few days ago.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul306.html
Just off the top of my head:
Did Bush suffer for his failed S&L in the ’80s? (I suppose there is yet another non-difference with the Clintons, in their case, Whitewater).
How’d his baseball team do?
Isn’t it the Carslyle group or something that is the Saudi sponsored revolving door for Washington corporocrats? How did that plane with Saudi nationals – some of whom the FBI wanted to interview – get aloft and not shot down (unlike a plane from alaska with a heart for transplant for someone who was dying).
Try any contractor in Iraq – especially the cost-plus and other no bid contracts. Usually the government is criticized for too much red-tape and monitoring and auditing, but the Bush version of deregulation seems a bit much.
The ports deal just seems strange when Bush talks about security (of course he wants amnesty for law-breaking aliens and won’t secure the southern border).
If this isn’t Crony Capitalism – which is at least pure but petty greed – most other explanations would require a greater evil to explain the behavior, or gross incompetence.
Both major parties are the same, so don’t think I like democrats any better. But is there anything conservative or libertarian about Bush? (I know LR didn’t like Ronald Reagan, but at least his rhetoric was conservative/libertarian).
More big-brotherism than Craig Livingstone’s FBI files. More profligate spending than HillaryCare (and permanent Medicare Rx drug!). More soverign-as-king executive orders than Clinton.
Tom,
Your naivete is not surprising, but I would suggest you look into it a little more. The Dubai Ports World takeover of Peninsular & Oriental is not occurring in a vacuum.
Here is just one angle to investigate: After Treasury Secretary John Snow left CSX Corporation as its chairman, CSX Lines was sold to the (Bush-Baker) Carlyle Group, which renamed it Horizon Lines. David Sanborn, a CSX executive under Snow, became director of European and Latin American operations for Dubai Ports World and arranged to sell the Dubai state-owned firm CSX port operations in South America and Asia. Sanborn was then appointed Asst. Secretary of Transportation for Maritime Administration (MARAD), the oversight agency for US shipping and ports. The Dubai Ports World deal was to take over US port operations was signed off by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), chaired by Sanborn’s old CSX boss Snow. Interestingly, the Dubai Investment Corporation recently invested $100 million in the Carlyle Group. In fact the Sheikh Rashid al Maktoum is a major Carlyle investor to the tune of billions.
Then look into Neil Bush and the money he has been able to rake in from the emirates. And so as not to only focus on the Bush family, Bill Clinton as accepted over half a million dollars from the UAE.
Then perhaps think about the importance of the Dubai International Air Show to the pockets of the military industrial complex.
tz,
I feel the hate flow through you. The darkside is strong with you.
Look, I don’t like Bush, but to accuse him of crony capitalism because of this port deal is stupid.
The way Bush supports the Dubai deal in the face of so much Republican opposition makes it look as though he is being paid off somehow. Bush has a cloud of cronyism following whatever he does.
Paul’s reservations about the deal are that it is a state owned company and that it seems to be a deal that is being pushed through by the national executive against the wishes of the state governors and Congress.
The deal really doesn’t bother me at this time other than it being a state owned company. But the USA has state owned companies too that we are forced to deal with.
What I find interesting is that supposed libertarians who oppose government intervention now would like the Congress to micromanage international foreign investment. We saw this with the Chinese attempting to purchase Unocal. We saw this when Congress threaten China with 27.5% tariff on Chinese goods if it didn’t unpeg their currency. And now we have the protectionists in Congress attempting not only to prevent the Dubia owning US capital but to extend that to any foreign ownership of US ports or “key infrastructure”.
What kind of libertarians do we have today that hate or dislike Bush so much they are willing to sacrifice their principles at the alter of politics? Libertarians accuse Republicans of this all the time, but now I see that libertarians are no different than Republicans. Here we see libertarians putting politics before principle.
It is a libertarian principle to allow politically connected business people to benefit from the ignorance of the American people?
S,
What business is it of the American people about the sale of British owned assets to a UAE company?
Is it true that libertarian respect for property rights doesn’t extend non-Americans?
Sorry: Is it true that libertarian respect for property rights doesn’t extend to non-Americans?
It is the business of the American people when they own the area of operation in question.
So you advocate respecting the property rights of a government who doesn’t recognize property rights and that they be allowed to conduct business with another government that doesn’t recognize property rights so they can all enjoy the profits of their ill-gotten gains?
S,
If I, as an American person, “own” the area of operation, then I would be able to sell my share. The fact that I cannot sell my share tells me that the American people do not own the area of operation in question.
A lot of governments and people (including libertarians) don’t respect property rights. A lot of Socialists in this country don’t respect property rights. Does that mean they should not have the right to own property? Should the Socialists property be taken from them?
How about those who don’t respect the property rights of the British citizen to sell their property as they see fit. Should those people have their property rights voided too?
This is a dangerous road to be going down.
You asked what business it was of the American people I pointed out they are the ones on the other side of the port contract. I guess when they say “we the people” you don’t think that includes you.
We are already down that dangerous road when we allow governments to encroach on our rights. You are the one advocating letting the government trample them completely. You have to differentiate between stolen/coerced government property and that which was acquired through mutually beneficial exchange or voluntary production.
S makes a pretty good stab at outlining the crony capitalism angle. I simply pointed out that in any event this is NOT normal capitalism, but deals between one government-owned corporation (DP World) and eight others (The Port Authorities of NY and NJ, The DFelaware River Port Authority, The Port Of Baltimore, etc.) There is nothing capitalistic about this deal, and there never was.
I as a libertarian would have absolutely NO problem with DP World becoming the operator of those ports, IF they and the ports were privately owned. They are not, the ports are not run as capitalistic businesses, they are run for the benefit of the political machines that pervade them and they are completely unaccountable to anyone. THAT’S why I am opposed to the deal. Privatize the ports, and I might even be able to accept the fact that DP World is UAE-state-owned.
This is very odd. I can not understand these arguments concerning property rights. I am just a country boy with maybe average intelligence, but did not our esteem president state that we are in a state of war?? Then, the issue of property rights should be secondary are at least temporarily suspended to the security of this nation. If merely for the purpose of appearing to be diligent, should we not hold appropriate hearings so the public at large can be made aware of the situation. Should we not at the very least appear to scrutinize the actions of those people who are profitting from our ports to assure the American people that someone is paying attention BEFORE an unimaginable event occurs. It is the American people who wishes to know these things my friends. What is wrong with asking/answering a few questions before this deal takes place, instead of after, something terrible occurs. This sort of review could eliminate this type of contraversy. It may have even prevented 911. This is a country of the people, for the people and by the people. We do not have to be lectured to about property rights. We hold these rights as precious, but in times of war (again this is a war right?) we have to place due diligence on security and defense. SIDE NOTE: It seems odd to me that the president and his adminstration would emphasize the urgency and potentially dire consquences of the “terrorists” yet seems surprised when the people want accounability and reassurance. That is what this is about my friends, we are mostly concerned with review of the purchase and sell of ports. I do not think that is too much to ask for afterall we are at war, right? We are at war, right? Then act like it or I may start to believe we HAVE BEEN TRICKED. You aren’t on vacation again, are you Geroge?
So… a company based in the UAE (Dubai Ports World) is taking over a British Company (P&O) and this is Bush’s fault? Get a grip on reality.
Hi Earl,
The port deal itself is only fishy because of government control. If the parties involved were private businesses, the people responsible for security at the ports would be accountable if anything happened. Since the ports are owned by unaccountable quasi-governmental authorities, the inevitable attack will be blamed on everybody BUT the port owners.
Why should the issue of basic property rights become secondary in a time of war? As Rothbard illustrates in Power and Market, any intrusion on property rights is equivalent to an intrusion on basic human rights. The state has no right to infringe on these rights whenever it decides to go to war (Iraq is a war by the American state, not the American people).
The threat of a terror attack is nothing more than a threat against some or all of my personal property, and it is I who should have the sole responsibility for protecting that property. If the knee-jerk reaction by the people is to hand over all rights to the executive branch in times of war then it is clear how far we still have to go in the struggle for liberty and freedom. This is especially true in the context of a war on terror, which by definition is a war against a subjective concept and therefore one which has no ending (Exhibit A: the war on “poverty”).
Sorry, a little off topic. My initial reaction was to favor this deal but I had neglected to consider all the cronyism behind it. As always I have Mises.org to educate me!
I can hear Karl Rove’s brain gears turning already: “If the democrats get control of Congress, their first item of business will be to impeach Bush!” Do you think an ad like that will get the republican base fired up?
Comments on this entry are closed.