Bipartisan hysteria

Tony Snow:

Washington was wracked last week by a spasm of Know-Nothingism, starring Democratic and Republican members of Congress whose hysterics confirmed the Founders' view that the president, and not the legislature, ought to handle matters of national security.

At issue was a takeover of the British shipping firm P&O by a United Arab Emirates holding company, Dubai Ports World. The transaction, first reported in the British press last Oct. 30, should have been routine. P&O leases cargo terminals at a half-dozen U.S. ports, and pays the longshoremen who load and unload ships.

The ownership change wouldn't have affected anybody on American soil. DPW had agreed to keep the old British management team (comprised of Americans) in charge and would have retained the all-American force of longshoremen at the terminals.

Nevertheless, politicians acted as if the Bush administration, which gave its blessing to the deal, had just exposed America's tender commercial neck to the glinting scimitars of Araby. Republicans behaved worst.

Rep. Tom DeLay denounced the deal as "outrageous." Sen. Bill Frist vowed to put the decision "on hold." Rep. Peter King warned darkly of "very serious al-Qaida connections." And Rep. Sue Myrick, in the most childish letter ever written a president by someone other than a child, wrote: "In regards to selling American ports to the United Arab Emirates, not just NO -- but HELL NO!"

One problem: The United States didn't sell anything. Local port authorities still own the ports, including the cargo terminals rented by firms such as Dubai Ports. The Coast Guard still has exclusive responsibilities for security on the water. The Coast Guard, Customs Service, Border Patrol and local law enforcement still have the duty of maintaining security on the ground. The workforce affected by the change -- fewer than 400 laborers -- by law must have passed federal background checks.

...

There is more and Rich Lowry also makes some points on this subject:

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, styles himself an independent voice unafraid to speak truth to power. Judging by his performance in the controversy over a company that is owned by the United Arab Emirates potentially managing terminals at six U.S. ports, Graham is also unafraid to speak falsehood to power. He doubts whether we should “outsource major port security to a foreign-based company.”

He makes it sound as though the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and local police agencies — all of which provide port security — will be retiring as the UAE company Dubai Ports World takes over. This is fantasy. Graham insists that the White House has been “tone-deaf politically” about this issue. He is right, but that doesn’t make it politically deft to misstate facts in an inflammatory way.

Graham, unfortunately, isn’t alone. He is part of a bipartisan herd hoping to win the War on Terror through ill-informed hysteria.

...

Jonah Goldberg also sees the problem:

...

For five years, Republicans have chanted "trust the president" on national security. They even won elections on the issue. For nearly five years, Democrats have said President Bush should use more carrots and fewer sticks in his diplomacy in the Muslim world. They argued that we need to reward our allies with trade and trust (except when we actually did it in places such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia). Liberals lectured that equating "Muslim" or "Arab" and "terrorist" is not only bigoted but counterproductive, in that it will feed the "root causes" of terrorism.

But suddenly, virtually all leading Republicans and Democrats - with the laudable exception of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. - now argue that Bush can't be trusted on national security, that our Arab ally the UAE should go suck eggs, and that racial profiling of foreign firms is just fine. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., now even thinks Halliburton should run the ports. And Jimmy Carter is backing the White House.

...

In response to the port decision, (Lou) Dobbs ran one of his typically less-than-scientific online polls: "Do you believe national security should play a role in the national security review process?" He knew this was like asking "Do you think prostate exams should screen for prostate cancer?" He just didn't care.

And that's the point: Few politicians - or commentators - seem to care about the facts.

...

Will this bipartisan embarassment continue?