Ratner's Anti-Globalization Rant: No Foreigners Should Own Ports

Fox & Friends Weekend/NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

by Mark Finkelstein

February 25, 2006

Look for Ellen Ratner on the barricades next time the World Trade Organization gets together for a coffee klatsch. On this morning's Fox & Friends Weekend, Ratner hurled the verbal equivalent of a paving brick through the window of a Mickey D's. Ratner escalated the flap over the UAE ports deal to an entirely new level, claiming no foreign companies, regardless of nationality, should control our ports, or for that matter other significant chunks of our economy.

Claimed Ratner, the real issue is "what kind of jobs, what kind of outsourcing are we going to do in this country?"

When fellow "Long & the Short of It" guest Jim Pinkerton said that foreign policy considerations [such as the potential relevance of the port deal to our ability to get intelligence and site bases in the Middle East] are more important than who gets port jobs, Ratner replied skeptically "is it?" Apparently for Ratner, the ability of the longshoremen's union to place a favored few of its own is more important than our country's national security objectives.

When host Page Hopkins suggested that the debate had become muddled because people didn't understand that the UAE company wouldn't have responsibility for port security, Ratner steered things back to her anti-globalization polemic:

"I don't think that is the issue: the issue is where do we outsource who owns airplanes, railroads, all those kind of things."

Hopkins: "Are we going to cherry pick and hold Arabs to different standards?"

Ratner:

"No, no, I would feel the same way, when I realized that Britain was running the ports I felt the same way. It has nothing to do with the Arab situation. It has to do with what are we outsourcing - who owns what in America?"

Hopkins: "But if we stop all foreign investment?, where will that leave us?"

Ratner: "We have outsourced everything [sic] and now our standard of living as statistics show this week has gone down."

Pinkerton, while expressing his own concerns about the ports deal and advocating a thorough vetting during the 45-day delay, scored this point: "It doesn't hurt our standard of living to allow foreigners to invest $8 billion in the US."

But Ratner couldn't be budged from her xenophobia:

"We don't allow our radio stations to be owned by foreign investment. There are certain things we don't allow. It has nothing to do with whether they're Arabs or Canadians or British. The fact is there are certain industries we're keep in America and we're not doing that and that's a big problem."

Continued the suddenly jingoistic Ratner: "Why don't we have American companies owning some ports in China or Dubai or anywhere else? Why has American business given up on this? We're a strong country. We ought to be owning ports."

Ellen Ratner and Patrick Buchanan - who knew?

[raybbr]

I'm sorry, I thought you were familiar with the term. It's the title of a book which portrayed Americans in a very ugly light:

I didn't know about the book.

Still, you used the term in response to my question as to why people like Dane are so effuse in their defense of outsourcing, off-shoring and capitulation to foreign govts.

I thought you were drawing a parallel to those who oppose this deal and would therefore in your eyes, be "ugly Americans" who were confirming the charges in the book of "American arrogance, incompetence, and corruption "

[RedEyeJack]

The hypocrisy and demagoguery in this issue are out of sight. It's like vocal segments of the population have been asleep for 50 years. Where were all these voices when the U.S. Merchant Marine was being restructured and de facto outsourced to Liberia? Its not just the ports. Nothing traveling on the ocean is in an "American" ship either. Do they want to correct that too?

[Fruitbat]

BTW, Where did you learn your superhuman typing speed?

I can't read as fast as you type :-)

LOL... I type my thought process. It's not quite that quick, but it comes from experience. I write professionally in a non-political arena. I'm used to pounding out articles as fast as I can think.

Thank heavens for the development of the PC and spellcheckers however. I remember taking typing classes in HS. Great for keyboard familiarity, but the old "white out" or correction paper just ain't the same. Heck, that wasn't even that long ago. It's amazing to me how quickly technology has developed.

Think about it, the web/net was just coming into consumer utility about ten years ago.

: )

[Kaslin]

If you want to see what a moron looks like. Just look at Ellen Ratner

[aligncare]

I envision a near future in which Arabs are not tainted by this blaspheme known as Jihad.

I really am a...'get along with everyone' kind of guy. I love all cultures - but, especially my own American culture.

[truemiester]

Dubia would not CONTROL the ports. They would manage them. We control the ports in the US. The Coast Guard, Commerce, Customs are all still there.

[Fruitbat]

To all those debating me on this:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1585336/posts

Even if they're just bluffing, is this out of the realm of possibility?

What about other non-AQ terrorist supporing muslim types? Couldn't they 'infiltrate' UAE politics or other institutions or at least threaten them harm, perhaps behind the scenes, if they didn't "do this or that?" Of course the answer is a resounding "yes." To think otherwise is utterly foolish and naive.

[aligncare]

Because it seems to me that some on this thread are not making the same distinction that I see, between 'Jihadists' and 'Arabs or Muslims'.

I treat Muslims (along with many other nationalities) in my practice as a doctor. As I've said, I love all people - unless and until they prove to be...unlovable. Jihadists are unlovable. Muslims are just fellow Americans to me. Some good, some bad. As long as they love America, I'll stand with them - especially if they're conservatives ;-)

[pnut22]

This is all about politics.. period. Great Britain cooperates with the union, the UAE will not. The dems have, as usual, no concern for protecting this country, and that includes financially as well as militarily. It's all about me, me, me.
Menendez - $39,500
Clinton - $4500
Lautenberg - $9000
Schumer - $4500
Dodd - $2500
Boxer - $6000
Peter King - $5500
Jerrold Nadler - $22,500
Contribitions from the longshore mens union and John Boweers, the union president. Also it's sad that any polling done on this issue is meaningless. Most people have no clue what is even being discussed. If people had to take a quiz on an issue before giving their opinion, there would be 2 or 3 who would have a clue.

[aligncare]

What's the hurry?

I believe I just heard on Fox News that a 45 day waiting period was just agreed on. Can anyone confirm that?

[aligncare]

To me, computers work by magic...and Bill Gates is god.

[Fruitbat]

I heard that as well...

[Fruitbat]

To me, computers work by magic...and Bill Gates is god.

Indeed! LOL

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP for excellence in freeping, and excellence in writing.

[aligncare]

You make many well reasoned points. Some are difficult for me to reconcile.

I guess because I'm in the people business, I cannot in all good conscience paint all Arabs with a broad brush. I refuse to stereotype people.

Again, what sold me is General Tommy Franks. I love that guy...In a platonic, macho way; not a Brokeback Mountain sort'a way:-)

[OldFriend]

It's about politics. The groundswell was being orchestrated during the Cheney frenzy.

Hannity is first and foremost a NYer so that's where he wants to pander.

[N. Beaujon]

Ooooops...I realize now that the reportage is from a Mark Finklestein. Thanks, anyway, Governsleast, for posting it, which is also a service.

You have no idea what this man gives for his country. He watches these liberal airheads so we don't have to. A regular Patrick Henry. (I can see Governs epitath now-which I pray I never have to- but: "I regret that I have but one stomach lining to give for my country.")

[Fruitbat]

I love the guy too! : )

As to stereotyping, we don't need to stereotype them, they've done a fine job all by themselves. But again, when the Koran says things like...

[8.39] And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do.

...and...

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful....

...what are we supposed to think?

Let's say that it read like this:

And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Christ;

...along with plenty of other supporting data essentially prescribing world religious takeover along with the suppression of anything "non-Christian" without providing a methodology for doing so thereby leaving such methodologies to the readers?

Can you imagine the outcry! Yet, that's what we have with Islam. Yet, no one seems to care.

You make many well reasoned points. Some are difficult for me to reconcile.

Thanks. I'm analyst. I think in these ways. The points are designed to stimulate some thought for purposes of getting to the heart/core/root of issues, not in simply placating media types.

I'm not so sure they are "difficult to reconcile," rather that solution/reconciliation may force us to go where we would rather not. But hey, we're not the ones with "fundamental religious documents" spouting out hatred and designs on world conquest in such a way.

Prior to WWII many didn't want to come to the necessary conclusions as to Hitler's wilings either. The result: We waited until nearly too late and fortunately were aided by some big blunders by Hitler. Not saying we should eradicate the ME, but I would certainly put a lid on Islamic development in free countries. That is of course unless one deems Islam, based on a drop-in-the-bucket couple of statements from the Koran, to be compatible with civil societies when intermeshed with those of other religious persuasions. Clearly, if they are truly Koran-adhering muslims, they must reject such tolerance. Clearly.

I guess because I'm in the people business, I cannot in all good conscience paint all Arabs with a broad brush. I refuse to stereotype people.

I'm in the people business too. I see things as they are however. Some people are criminal, some are not. Some people are bigoted (in many ways), others are not. Some people have an intent to rape,maim, or harm, others do not.

Again, I don't "paint all Arabs with a broad brush." But if I told you that there was an escaped illegal Mexican immigrant convicted rapist and murderer on the loose in your country. Then you receive a knock at your door and an "illegal Mexican type" is standing there with you, your wife, and kids inside. You gonna let him in?

; )

[Wiz]

Entities having political and security values, and the issue of protectionism... but national security could not be sacrificed, allowing foreign firms, especially Communist and those under dictatorship to afford to purchase firms that are running broadcasting, military, and infrastructure services.

[aligncare]

Your post is interesting and I would like to engage in further discourse. But, my family beckons on this beautiful Saturday. I'll be responding later. Bye for now. It was a pleasure all.