Wednesday, February 22, 2006


It has been awhile since I have posted on this thing. Even though no one reads it, I figured it would be a good way to fill time with not being in school this semester.

President Bush is in the sixth year of his presidency and has yet to veto any kind of bill. With republican control of both houses for almost all those years, on the surface that is not really surprising. Also consider the recent history of the veto. Democrat Bill Clinton served as President during a Republican majority in congress for most of his 8 years in office and only used the veto 37 times.

So I guess Dubya is getting antsy because he is threatening to dust off the old executive veto power if a certain issue does not go his way. Increased unnecessary spending? Yeah I know, that was a funny one. No it is not a pork bill. Actually the bill has to do with national security. Makes sense, this was a big reason the American people reelected Bush II. So what is that irresponsible congress up to? Cut of national/homeland security? Nope. Congress too lenient on immigration? Try again. Border control? Warmer.

Recently the Bush administration approved the sale of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company to Dubai Ports World. Ok, so what is the big deal? Well the sale of this London company means that Dubai Ports World, a company run by the state of the United Arab Emirates, will be running the operations of major ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. One red flag is raised.

The United Arab Emirates is not Iran, but there should be some concern. Even though we are not talking about Iran or North Korea here, the UAE is not exactly Canada.

Lawmakers from both parties have noted that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial base. In addition, critics contend the UAE was an important transfer point for shipments of smuggled nuclear components sent to Iran, North Korea and Libya by a Pakistani scientist.

Two red flags raised.

Ok on the surface this looks bad, but Joe Citizen does not know what the President or members of congress know. The opposition is just probably the Dems and a few Republicans that have a grudge with the White House trying to make the administration look bad...

"We must not allow the possibility of compromising our national security due to lack of review or oversight by the federal government."--House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois

"overly secretive process at the federal level."--Gov. Robert Ehrlich, R-Maryland

"The administration should freeze the contract ... until a full and thorough investigation is carried out,"--Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y (Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee)

"It's unbelievably tone deaf politically at this point in our history, four years after 9/11, to entertain the idea of turning port security over to a company based in the UAE who avows to destroy Israel," --Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina

Of course the usual suspects of Hillary, Schumer, and the rest of the left are jumping on this, but when in this era of bitterness between parties it is shocking the left and right can agree on anything. Three red flags raised.

Well the President Bush has threatened a veto if congress acts to stop this sale, but why? Here are some quotes on his reasoning behind it.

"It sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it's OK for a company from one country to manage the port, but not a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world,"
--The good track record of hating Israel and being a hub of smuggling in the Middle East?

"I can understand why some in Congress have raised questions about whether or not our country will be less secure as a result of this transaction, but they need to know that our government has looked at this issue and looked at it carefully."
--Ah the trust us we have looked into it argument.

"They ought to listen to what I have to say about this. They'll look at the facts and understand the consequences of what they're going to do. But if they pass a law, I'll deal with it with a veto."

So the question is why does Bush make his stand here? It is curious. This certainly conflicts with his wire tapping arguments. Better safe then sorry when it comes warrentless wire taps, but hey the ports will be fine. Bush has looked into this, that should be good enough for the American people and their representatives in congress. I swear Dubya is asleep at the wheel. Bush continues to disappoint most real conservatives over and over again.

Bravo Congress, make the President use his first veto on this or better yet override it.

No comments: