Observe that the WSJ editorial on the weekend — “Ports of Gall” — summarizes in cogent prose the facts of the matter of the port imbroglio. I mention that in the course of last week’s report, I learned that the jingoism, demagoguery, and base poor research by members of Congress are a sizable threat to rational political discourse.
The facts are that there are four major terminal operators on the planet. Number one is a private owned but
All four of these enterprises share terminals and or facilities at ports around the planet. P&O operates one terminal at New York/New Jersey. The Danish company operates another terminal.
Not one of the four firms, two Chinese dominated/owned, one Euro owned, one now proposed to be UAE owned, is responsible for or in the business of providing security, inspection, policing, management or intelligence gathering for any of the ports in the U.S. or elsewhere. These are vendors who must make money or wither. And making a profit in the
Questions to be asked about the port imbroglio is who among the pols who are misbehaving with bad facts or conscious distortions are also taking phone calls or meetings or cash from longshore or stevedore unions or patronage posts that do business with port authorities.
Quick version is to follow the money.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?