Which makes more sense:
Having upgrades to American port’s security infrastructure paid for by our British friends or by Arab oil money? I’ll opt for the latter.
Charles Schumer and new best friend Michael Savage are busily misrepresenting the takeover of port operations by Dubai Ports World as a takeover of “port security.” Security in American ports is provided by Customs and the Coast Guard. If the companies involved in operating cranes, hoists and other machinery in these ports are so intimately connected to port security that they are more important than Customs or the Coast Guard, there’s a much greater issue than which foreign country the company is based in.
Other Democrats are using the language of protectionism. The chair of the Florida Democratic Party was quoted in the Miami Herald with perhaps the tastiest soundbite “How can President Bush come to Florida and talk about homeland security when he’s outsourcing the security of our ports?” Of course, that’s not what’s involved. The Coast Guard and Customs Service will still be run by Americans, still be part of the Federal Government. (Whether that should be great comfort I’ll leave for another discussion.) The language used is doubly inappropriate though. This isn’t “outsourcing” anything – this actually involves foreign investment in US infrastructure and US jobs, the polar opposite of outsourcing.
Of course, the lipservice to standard protectionist dogma along with Chuck Schumer’s newfound commitment to national security gives away the game as far as the Democrats real motives. It’s not about security. It’s not even really about misguided economic protectionism. It is about using racism to politically damage the Bush administration, pure and simple.