Via the NYT: A Rebellion in the G.O.P. on Security, a Signature Issue
When the Reps start giving Bush difficulty on the security question, in an election year, it may be time to start speaking of hobbled water fowl.
Although it still seems to me to be rather reactionary on the part of many in congress to behave as they are just because the country in question is an Arab one.
I’m certainly willing to call him a lame duck.
Comment by Jan — Thursday, March 9, 2024 @ 8:33 am
Defying Bush, House Panel Votes to Block Port Deal - New York Times
The overwhelming vote by the House of Representatives to block the Dubai ports deal has been dubbed a “Rebellion in the G.O.P. on Security, a Signature Issue” by Carl Hulse, the NYT’s lead reporter on the issue.
After more than five y…
Trackback by Outside The Beltway | OTB — Thursday, March 9, 2024 @ 8:52 am
And don’t forget the GOP refusal to further cut entitlements this year (so much for “line-item budgeting”).
Comment by KipEsquire — Thursday, March 9, 2024 @ 9:33 am
I think the claims of hobbled waterfowl (I like that one!) are a wee bit premature. In fact, this issue could serve to give Repubs quite a bit of cover in supporting Bush on other measures that are more important to the party and administration. They got the Patriot Act after all (or most of it). Had the wavering members of the Republican caucus not come back on that issue, you could make the case that there was a wholesale desertion even on “security.”
The ports deal is just one issue, and hardly that important. In fact, what I fail to understand is not the reaction of some members of congress (that’s a no brainer in an election year!), but the initial line-in-the-sand attitude from Bush. That was just stupid from an administration that rarely does outright politically stupid things.
And it’s not just that it’s a company from an Arab country. It’s a state-owned company in a country that was a facilitator of Al Qaeda and recognized the Taliban until 9/11 made those positions just a bit too uncomfortable for them.
If it were a private company in one of the relatively liberal Arab countries (Morocco, for example) would the issue have had the same resonance? I don’t know, but I doubt it.
(Please note: the above should not be read as my having taken a stand on the substance of the issue, but rather of trying to understand why it blew up in Bush’s face the way it did, as well as the longer-term implications for Bush’s quack quotient.)
Comment by Matthew Shugart/Fruits & Votes — Thursday, March 9, 2024 @ 8:16 pm
I share your surprise at the poor political skills demonstrated by the administration on this issue.
I do understand the issue here, and saw no problem with a new review.
What vexes me most about the entire affair is that opposition was driven by a mixture of xenophobia and political posturing–which is an unpleasant combo, to put it mildly.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Friday, March 10, 2024 @ 12:25 am