By all accounts, this story is leading the pack in the blogosphere in terms of discussion (see Memeorandum for more). Quite frankly, yours truly is beyond rehashing it at this point because some of what I have to say isn’t really fit for print.
Two posts on the poll-driven GOP move to take a vote on the port deal that caught my attention today: AJ Strata’s post on GOP “mob think” and Flopping Aces’ post criticizing the shameless political opportunism coming from the GOP-led Congress.
The hype surrounding this deal and lack of real honest discussions about it coming out of Congress have made me reconsider whether or not I even still want to be a part of the Republican party. I can’t recall in modern history a more shameless pandering to a constituency based on emotional arguments than this one on our side of the aisle. Don’t be surprised if one day I blog about how I decided to change my party affiliation to “Independent.” Like many other Republicans, I’ve put up with a lot of things I’d rather not have (like runaway spending, for example) out of the current crop of Republicans in Congress but honestly I’m almost to the point where I’ve had enough.
Update I: Jonathan R. at GOP Bloggers is on the same wavelength.
Update II: House and Senate GOP leaders have informed the President that the UAE ports deal is doomed.
Update III: CNN breaking news at the top of their page: Dubai-owned company has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O ports in North America to a U.S. entity, according to Sen. John Warner.
I’ll post a direct link as soon as it becomes available.
Update 4: Here is the direct link:
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A United Arab Emirates-owned company has agreed to turn over all of its operations at U.S. ports to an American entity, Sen. John Warner said Thursday.
Reading a statement from DP World on the Senate floor, Warner, a Virginia Republican, said the reason is “to preserve” the strong relationship between the UAE and United States.
The announcement comes after congressional leaders reportedly told President Bush that the deal for DP World to assume some operations at six U.S. ports appeared dead on Capitol Hill.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, delivered the news to Bush during a meeting Thursday at the White House, two Republican sources said.
Here’s Fox’s reporting on the story:
WASHINGTON — After Republican congressional leaders warned President Bush that both the House and Senate both appear ready to block Dubai Ports World from taking over operations at several U.S. ports, the company announced Thursday that it would give up its management stake in the deal.
The announcement was a blow for Democrats, who were pushing for a Senate vote on an amendment that would halt the deal. If they succeeded in that vote, Democrats could then claim a big election year win in the area of national security — an area Republicans generally have a stronger track record on.
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., read a statement from DP World executives on the Senate floor Thursday, announcing the concession.
“Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship, DP World has decided to transfer fully the U.S. operation of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity,” DP World’s chief operating officer, Edward H. Bilkey, said in the statement.
With the latest DP World news, many members of Congress who thus far have been critical of the deal may be much more positive toward it.
Here’s the WaPo link.
Related Toldjah So posts:
| Email This Post | Print This |
For the past 4 years the warmonger bush administration has hammered home how bad the “terrorists” are. The “terrorists” have always been Arabs, they have Arab names and only Arabs would saw a persons head off. We dress our young people in uniforms, arm them to the teeth and send them to an Arab country to kill “terrorist” Arab insurgents and extremists. 20,000 of these brave young men and women have been killed and seriously wounded. Then we are told by the corrupt, greedy and crony ridden bush administration that, “Oh, never mind, these are “good” Arabs who want our ports”. You’ve got to be kidding. Here is an idea we’ll pass the ports deal as soon as all of our troops are home from Iraq. Peace
Comment by steve @ 3/9/2006 - 10:36 am
- Well if it happens ST - Welcome to “Independence” =
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 10:36 am
- You know Steve. You’re your own worst enemy. Just maybe if you’d stop mis-stating the facts, over-stating things, and just generally getting it wrong, someone might listen to you. Bloviating generally just gets you labeled as a partisan hack and forthwith ignored.
- Whatever faults Bush and his administration has, they would speak for themselves without all the rediculous rhetoric. “The Big Lie” really doesn’t cut it in these days of high speed communications, as the Liberals have discovered much to their dismay. As it happens the entire “Get Bush” campaign has been a miserable failure, and if anything sinks the Republicans in Congress it will be their own fickleness and lack of common sense.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 10:46 am
When ABC states that it’s about the “sale of the ports”, and they know that’s a lie, then we have no recourse. They lie knowingly, and the politicos follow along.
Damn them all!
Comment by benning @ 3/9/2006 - 11:08 am
I think that’s why I tend to avoid a party label, and use moderate to describe myself.
I don’t feel connected to either party in enough ways to want that affiliation, so while I may vote in a more republican direction I wont call myself one.
Good comments Sister.
Comment by Karl @ 3/9/2006 - 11:32 am
I was thinking about it on the way to work this morning and I know ALL of you want to hear about it.
I thought to myself, Baklava, there are two issues that poll at 80%. One is the UAE port deal and one is illegal immigration. Why in the heck does all the politicians clammer to stop the UAE port deal but NOT deal with the other 80% issue illegal immigration.
My speculation? Because the parties aren’t feeling the heat from US that they may actually lose voters over this nonsense (whereas they do feel they will lose voters on the illegal immigration issue). A Republican from CA spoke on a news clip yesterday talking about our selling our port “security”. It makes me sick to see so many fundamentally illiterate, non-fact driven, pandering, can’t put two thoughts together, can’t make common sense, can’t do the right thing for our country, baby kissing, phony, negligent, non-due diligence, idiots running this country.
We’ve gotten bigger stupider nanny state government over the last 6 decades. The left screams as if we are cutting and we aren’t. The republicans almost nothing for conservative points of view as they continue to legislate and govern to the left of center.
Yeah. Now I feel better. Yet the pattern will continue. I’m going to go test some software and get my job done.
Comment by Baklava @ 3/9/2006 - 12:05 pm
Sister T In the last few elections I have voted Republican only to keep a Liberal Democrat from attaining office but I have lost faith in the Republican Party when they have abandoned there core beliefs of smaller Government and less taxes. Here is a little Political test you would be surprised at what party you might be closer to. Have fun with it.
Comment by Jim M @ 3/9/2006 - 12:11 pm
Yesterday’s Congressional embarrassment underlines the wisdom of the Founders in setting up our government as a republic rather than as a democracy. The hysteria of the no voters is claimed to be in reaction to constitutents’ calls and letters. When those opinions are wrong, and based upon falsehoods, elected representatives are supposed to show some statesmanship, not kowtow to the mob.
Comment by Standlow @ 3/9/2006 - 12:28 pm
‘GOP “mob think”’
Ah, schadenfreude.
Comment by andrew @ 3/9/2006 - 12:54 pm
Jim - I agree with you, to a point. While we see Rino’s all around us, the core principles of the conservative ideal still exist. If those are of value to you, the only shot you have is to vote for a conservative and hope for the best. I guarantee that you will not find it in the Dhimmicratic Party of 2006.
Do we become disillusioned when we vote for someone who we believe to be sharing our values yet they turn out to be something less than we expected? Of course we do. But I’ll take a flawed conservative over the best the liberals have to offer every day. And twice on Sunday. Peas and carrots
Comment by Dave in CO @ 3/9/2006 - 12:54 pm
This is to the point of the pathetic. I was listening to some sound bites from some of our esteemed senators, and they are basically accusing Dubai of being a terrorist state. I think these morons need to take a step back for a minute. If they kill this deal it is going to have much broader implications, and I am not actually for this deal. What I really hate tho, is this political opportunism run amok. It is time to start getting some adults into our government and leave the children to suck their thumbs. - Lorica
Comment by Lorica @ 3/9/2006 - 12:57 pm
I agree with you Dave and there is no way I could vote for a liberal Dimwitocrat. I have said the only Democrat I would vote for is Zell Miller but he is retired from politics. We need to send a message to the Republican Party and the message I will send is supporting a party that believes in our Constitution and that would be the Libertarian Party. I do not agree with everything in the Libertarian Parties platform but I didn’t agree with everything in the Republican platform either. The Republicans have added there little welfare programs to the War on Poverty to starting with Nixon’s “Head of Household” deduction which is nothing more than income redistribution. I am just tired of the Imperial Federal Government taking from the “Haves” and giving it to the “Have nots”. Why should my family do without some things so others can have things or money they didn’t earn? I have a link on an earlier comment to a political test check it out take the test its real short.
Comment by Jim M @ 3/9/2006 - 1:18 pm
I have been a conservative (right of center - not far right) Independent for over 25 years. I support President Bush on, not all, but many fronts, including the war and the ports deal. However, it’s getting harder and harder to tell the difference between Republicans and Democrats. I expect the leftists and most Democrats to be gullible and political enough to follow the lead of the liberal media, but now I see many Republicans sticking their finger in the air too. The reason I like Bush, is that he makes a decision and sticks to his convictions. The reason I dislike the Democrats is because they go with witchever way the “politcal wind” blows. Unfortunatley, many Repubs seem to be doing the exact same thing.
Comment by lakestate @ 3/9/2006 - 1:36 pm
- BP world, in conjunction with the UAE, just announced it would select an American entity for port “leases” only. That changes the equation so completely that Schumer just stuttered his way through his apperence on the floor, not knowing exactly how to respond, but obviously wanting to keep the whole kerfluffle alive.
- America is running an 8.5 billion dollar trade deficit at the moment. Its unsustainable without some sort of foriegn investments. I’m still waiting for the Democrats to stop yammering about “protecting American security”, which seems to have become suddenly popular with the left after 6 years of trying to undermine all things important to security, and explain how additional isolation is going to benefit the American economy.
- This will probably take the air out of the hoped for issue for the Dems, but the Republican Senators that were so easy to panic are looking pretty stupid themselves right now.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 2:00 pm
- I find it highly ironic that at the very moment that the president is signing the final draft of the renewed Patriot act, the act that took months to force through legislation while the Democratic leadership in congress dragged their feet and demanded “tweaking” to ostensively “protect the rights of Americans”, but really was aimed at lessening our ability to conduct counter-intelligence on our enemies, Reid and Schumer are giving a press conference patting thenselves on the back for freezing the port deal “safe-guarding American security”.
- So on the one hand they try to hobble the presidents efforts in the WOT in a really obstructive way, and in the exact opposite way they clap in unison for protecting us from something that never existed, while promoting trade isolationism. That has to be a record in being on the wrong side of every issue in sight.
- The Dems have given new meaning to talking out of both sides of their mouths at once. Unfortunately the Republicans showed their spinless bent in the face of pure partisan political demagoguery, with no discernable response.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 3:02 pm
The best approach to saving the tax payers money would be to cut in half the largest Socialistic organization in the US. The United States military should be cut by 50%. The military is funded exclusvively with tax dollars which makes it a Socialist/Communist entity. Peace
Comment by steve @ 3/9/2006 - 3:09 pm
“America is running an 8.5 billion dollar trade deficit at the moment. Its unsustainable without some sort of foriegn investments.”
Forein investment is what is funding it!
Comment by andrew @ 3/9/2006 - 3:13 pm
Jim - Bak….. Did one of you leave the back door open again?
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 3:13 pm
Way to go steve, cut just about the ONLY thing the government does, defense, that it is required to do in the US Constitution. How about we cut, oh, say 80% of all social “entitlement” programs, since the Constitution says nothing about them.
If we were still spending 49% of our money on defense, we’d be a lot better off. A larger standing military means more people get a taste of military discipline and training, which makes them better citizens in general. Plus, we’d have a large enough military that, if we showed some spine, that it’d intmidate more countries into like, saving us from actually having to fight.
Comment by Severian @ 3/9/2006 - 3:18 pm
real clintonian of your steve.
It was that exact mentality that down sized the military in the first place.
Comment by sanity @ 3/9/2006 - 3:22 pm
And now the UAE blinked.
Don’t they realize this makes them look defensive, just like the repbulicans in congress?
Sad….
Comment by Karl @ 3/9/2006 - 3:29 pm
Actually, this is not that sad. The UAE can read polls, like every good politician. I’ve been predicting this sort of thing to anyone that will listen. I’ll even go so far as to say that a federal earmark may be subsidizing part of the purchase price of the leases.
Come October, we will have all forgotten about this little “issue.” And the GOP will still gain seats in both the House and Senate.
Comment by Brad S @ 3/9/2006 - 3:32 pm
I have to say i detest politicians who watch 24/7 polls of the public to decide their position. As a Representative Republic, i thought our system was that we elect competent people to offices and they study the issues & do their best for the country’s benefit.
This whole idea of polling the American public on such a complex topic as this port deal, as if they know a damn thing about it is absurd. I consider myself a fairly intelligent and informed person and will just go ahead and confess right now i know absolutely zero about what the correct stance would be in this port deal!
We’ve had competent people we’ve elected or appointed checking over this deal beforehand ,and them being the only ones with an intimate knowledge of this issue seemed to have no problem with it.
So our nations direction on complex strategic issues like this port deal is now in the hands of Joe Blow the plumber, who has his opinion moulded by watching 15 minutes of mainstream media a day?
We need people of character who will help preserve our nation, not preserve themselves.
Comment by miles @ 3/9/2006 - 3:43 pm
DPW must be profiling us. Heh.
Comment by jac @ 3/9/2006 - 3:44 pm
- They didn’t really need to blink very hard, since the 6 ports they would have invested in, it was an investment of money and never had the slightest thing to do with operations or security in any way, were a tiny tiny part of the overall deal. they’ll just take their investment bucks somewhere else. Doesn’t really matter to them at all.
- We lose a simple investment in our port businesses…
- The Democraps get to pretend they give a damn about security…
- and the Republicans send a message that they’ll cave at the slightest sign of trouble….
- On the other hand if the Democrats think that after alienating the voting public for 6 years, trying to cripple the Pres in every way in the WOT, and wanting to cut and run, they’re going to suddenly look tough on security from this one dustup, they’re fantizising.
- The Dems like to crow about the Presidenst low approval ratings. What they always fail to mention is, that public confidence in a party with no plan for anything is much lower yet.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 3:49 pm
Bang says, “- On the other hand if the Democrats think that after alienating the voting public for 6 years, trying to cripple the Pres in every way in the WOT, and wanting to cut and run, they’re going to suddenly look tough on security from this one dustup, they’re fantizising.
I don’t know Bang, so many people seem to have short attention spans now days.
Comment by sanity @ 3/9/2006 - 4:00 pm
- Believe me sanity, the left has left no stone unturned in making their self-assuming elitist arrogant attitudes toward “gun rack fly over Red staters” known. Maybe the fact they think that SF, Boston, NJ, and NY can carry a national election has something to do with their showing in the last two votes. You think?
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 4:57 pm
Next Issue….
Why don’t the politicians tackle the other 80% polled issue (illegal immigration).
Let’s see some idiotic pandering on that subject for once.
Comment by Baklava @ 3/9/2006 - 5:20 pm
- Well Bak… the Teflon Lady launched a full frontal attack on the whole issue of border security by damning the idea of our soveriegnty and right to protect our boders as “Police statist tactics” by an out of control Adminsitration.
- Can you say “Hispanic vote”, and use it in a sentence. Libertarians love this stuff. Of course most of them do not have illegals sleeping in their back yards and such.
- The fly in her ointment is that 59% of the legals already here are very much in favor of a strong border defense and curtailment of immigration across the board. But what the hell. She goes for what she can get these days.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 5:36 pm
Nods.
The ports were definately something that needed to have the light shined on….but after this, I have a feeling nothing is really going to be done about port security or anything looked at to improve it.
Our Southern Border is our weakest point by far, and we should be trying to figure out ways of protecting it better.
Last I heard the AZ governor ordered troops to the border to help protect it.
Link
Now illegals coming across is not something new, and in the 4+ years we have been more concerned about National Security this is just now happening.
One thing I do wish to point out is that Governor Napolitano is up for re-election next January. The people of Arizona in a referendum have said quite clearly they don’t want any state money going to illegals. Could this be why she is suddenly making this a hot issue for her state?
Granted I am glad she is doing this, as long as she doesn’t stop as soon as she is re-elected (if she is re-elected).
Comment by sanity @ 3/9/2006 - 5:39 pm
- Actually sanity, she isn’t really doing anything as of yet, and as a result so far it qualifies as just “show boating”. According to the Commander of the guard there, her bill changes absolutely nothing, until she actually issues some commands, and even then it might be just to act as “observers”, in which case they might as well save the tax payers the money and stay home. I’ll reserve judgement.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 7:19 pm
As soon as we get rid of the electoral college the population centers in the United States will have the power that they should have. That would be both coasts if your looking at a map. This country must move forward and that move requires that Peace be the norm, not war, as is the case now. Peace
Comment by steve @ 3/9/2006 - 7:49 pm
Not only did you leave the back door open, you must’ve put out a sign for free cookies and it thought it read free hookahs.
Comment by forest hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 8:14 pm
Bang- Up at the top in your 2:00 pm post was the closest I’ve heard anyone come to explaining the financial logic of this issue. Can you add additional info for us common folk?
I still have yet to understand why so many don’t/can’t get past the fear issue about security. It has nothing to do with who owns or operates the terminals. At the risk of sounding redundant- 100% American owned/operated terminals 9/11 proved that point hands down, did it not!
What is it that’s so evasive regarding understanding the security issues.
Everyone, I dare say even steve wants better security and we’ve lots of room for improvement in that department. The UAE investment has zero impact on security, as I understand it.
Comment by forest hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 8:30 pm
LOL Hey Steve the Electoral College is written into the body of the Constitution, it cannot be overturned by a law. You would have to open a new Constitutional Convention, which since you need conservatives for the votes on that, will NEVER happen.
Now to all the Dems out there that believe this was about security. It is time that you stick to your beliefs and write a law that says there can be no foreign management of any terminal in any port in the United States of America. Seems like that is the only way we will be “secure”. I feel safer already, don’t you?? Where did I leave my Jello and my nail gun???? - Lorica
Ohhh and lastly I don’t think it is time to give up being a conservative, or a Republican. I do believe that GW’s constant backing of moderates is now biting him in the tushie. It is time for the Republican party to become a truly conservative party. Sorry but is there another way??? Since Republicans have to fight any given day on 2 fronts, Dems and Media, why do we need the 3rd front of our “moderate” brothers in arms. LOL What is the old saying, with friends like these…..???
Comment by Lorica @ 3/9/2006 - 8:45 pm
In defense of steve
When it refers to the …population centers… I’m not sure how this impacts the cardboard houses under the bridges and in the parks but steve can explain it better as soon as returns from his incoherency class
“THAT WOULD BE BOTH COASTS IF YOU’RE LOOKING AT A MAP.”
What if you’re not looking at a map? 
Inquiring minds want know. 
Comment by forest hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 9:11 pm
- Well Forest I count myself as “common folk” too. The really dumb thing about the whole port fiasco is that many of the port stations are already owned by other companies in other countries, and always were, before and after 9/11.
- This is an investment issue. If I own stock in GM, I doubt anyone would be worried I was going to be able to have them change the car designs for me, or for that matter expect to be involved in any of the day to day on the ground operations, any more than any other stockholder. That just isn’t the way it works. The same US Coast guard would handle all security. The same management on the ground would be in place. The same long shoreman would handle all port work. So absolutely nothing about the ports themselves would have changed.
- Now if the idea of any non-American corporation holding investment in critical operations like say our ports or airports, etc, bothers people, well that’s an entirely different argument.
- That’s not what the Democraps were pushing. They were Demagogging the issue with fear mongering, and the Liberal press of course was carrying their water.
- One minute they were berating Bush for not “reaching out” to our moderate Arab neighbors, but the instant they thought they had a political issue they could make brownie points on, they did a Kerry 180.
- But either way the end result is the same. On the flip side we need investment to offset the imbalance of trade, either by others buying our products, or value investments in American enterprises. Maybe this was not a big investment, but this sort of isolationism is a tendency of the left so I’m suspicious when I hear them start talking about “Those foreigners”. They just naturally hate the “global economy” system because it also globalizes welfare nanny state questions, and anything that may screw up their beloved entitlement programs gives them hives.
- Liberals don’t have a clue anyway concerning economics, except tax and give away programs. That should have been evident to everyone who reads ST regularly, when we were treated the other day to an euridite essay by one of the resident trolls explaining in impeccable logic that doing nothing is preferable to a no risk opportunity to double your retirement fund. It really is remarkable how backward the left tends to be in areas of economics in general. Its no wonder no one trusts them with money issues.
- Profiling bigotry, as we’ve seen with this port investment non-issue, is only acceptable when a Liberal does it.
- Bang
Comment by Big Bang Hunter @ 3/9/2006 - 9:22 pm
“If I own stock in GM, I doubt anyone would be worried I was going to be able to have them change the car designs for me, or for that matter expect to be involved in any of the day to day on the ground operations, any more than any other stockholder”..but we’re not talking about a small minority shareholding position here; rather, a 100% ownership position. Ask Rick Waggoner if he thinks Kirk Kirkorian ownership position will have no effect on operations…and his position is a lot less than 100%.
Comment by David Foster @ 3/9/2006 - 10:43 pm
>Last I heard the AZ governor ordered
>troops to the border to help protect it.
Not really… they’re just doing vehicle and computer maintenance. They’re not patrolling or protecting anything. But it really sounds good to tell the voters, “I sent the National Guard to the border!”
Comment by CavalierX @ 3/9/2006 - 11:13 pm
>the population centers in the United
>States will have the power that they
>should have
Poor Steve. The electoral college was set up precisely so that the population centers couldn’t dictate to the rest of the country. The wisdom of the Founding Fathers in protecting us from people like you is awe-inspiring.
Comment by CavalierX @ 3/9/2006 - 11:17 pm
Bang wrote, “Well Bak… the Teflon Lady launched a full frontal attack on the whole issue of border security by damning the idea of our soveriegnty and right to protect our boders as “Police statist tactics” by an out of control Adminsitration.
Yes. I saw that.
And yes. That won’t win her favor with “legal” hispanic voters.
Comment by Baklava @ 3/10/2006 - 11:28 am