esrosedotblog

TODAY'S WSJ QUESTION Revised 1030 AM--update at end

"Should the U.S. allow a Dubai company to manage American ports?"

I said NO as did 63% of over 7000 respondents; 37% yes.

I think that there is a case for the security thing. Look at the record and also how our 'friends' the Saudis continue to work it both ways as has Dubai/UAE.

On another plane, I am against it because these people, once again, are insiders. One of their key guys just took a top post at the US Maritime Admnistration. Treasury Sec Snow used to work for a company that was bought by the same company.

And another thing, it is almost as though bushie is piqued that it would even be questioned. His judgement?

Maybe substantively it doesn't make any difference. We have outsourced our ports (wrongly as far as I am concerned--Buy America--Stop Globalization!!) for years. This is probably just a paper thing anyhow.

But, it is just one more example of executive power taken to the extreme then taken up two more notches with resistance rather than negotiation.

All the congress is asking is to study it for 45 days WHICH IS BUILT INTO THE LAW AND THEY DIDN'T DO IT!

But, now, I am shouting.

I let my vote stand.

UPDATE: Clarity from the New York Daily News

WASHINGTON - The Dubai firm that won Bush administration backing to run six U.S. ports has at least two ties to the White House.

One is Treasury Secretary John Snow, whose agency heads the federal panel that signed off on the $6.8 billion sale of an English company to government-owned Dubai Ports World - giving it control of Manhattan's cruise ship terminal and Newark's container port.

Snow was chairman of the CSX rail firm that sold its own international port operations to DP World for $1.15 billion in 2004, the year after Snow left for President Bush's cabinet.

The other connection is David Sanborn, who runs DP World's European and Latin American operations and was tapped by Bush last month to head the U.S. Maritime Administration.