Posted on 03/01/2006 4:59:32 AM PST by FerdieMurphy
Last week, I skewered Democrat opportunists who have turned into tough-sounding profiling advocates to exploit the White House ports debacle.
Today, I must express bottomless disgust with those on the Right who have turned into mush-mouthed race-card players to shift blame away from President Bush for his miserable mishandling of the situation.
It's one thing for feckless grievance-mongers on the Left to accuse Americans genuinely concerned about national security of Islamophobia. It's quite another for the Right to sink to such a level in accusing all good-faith critics of demagoguery. Reasonable people can disagree on the process pitfalls and security implications of the deal. But the elite Right has simply lost its marbles:
Here's GOP strategist and Muslim voter outreach architect Grover Norquist in the Los Angeles Times dismissing critics of the deal: "The only whiners left by next week will be the registered bigots."
Conservative commentator Larry Kudlow: "This whole brouhaha surrounding the Bush administration's green-light to a United Arab Emirates company slated to manage six major U.S. ports has nothing to do with protecting homeland security. Allow me to give it its proper name: Islamophobia."
New York Times columnist David Brooks: "This Dubai port deal has unleashed a kind of collective mania we haven't seen in decades. First seized by the radio hatemonger Michael Savage, it's been embraced by reactionaries of left and right, exploited by Empire State panderers, and enabled by a bipartisan horde of politicians who don't have the guts to stand in front of a xenophobic tsunami."
The UAE is our "friend," we are told, and to question that assertion, we are scolded, is to engage in reckless prejudice and life-threatening insult. Yes, well, some friends are more equal than others. To instinctively trust a longtime, stalwart Western democracy more than an Arab newcomer with a mixed record on combating terror, international crime and Islamic extremism is not "Islamophobia." It's self-preservationism in a time of war.
We are at war, aren't we?
President Bush himself is ultimately responsible for encouraging the race-card players, thanks to his stunning comment that "those who are questioning" the deal need to "step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company."
Yes, there are countless homegrown terrorists across England, where Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., the maritime company purchased by state-owned Dubai Ports World, operates. So what? So, now, a peaceful Western democracy that is infiltrated against its will by al Qaeda is on the same plane as an Arab federation whose ruling emiratis ran interference for Osama bin Laden before Sept. 11, which continued to be a logistical hub for al Qaeda for years after, which refuses to recognize the existence of Israel, bans our textbooks as "racist" because they point out Syria's state sponsorship of terrorism, and is boycotting Denmark over the Mohammed Cartoons?
Now, all the proselytizers who tell us to collect the dots and connect the dots want us to throw them all away lest we give offense?
Yes, the UAE has taken steps to cooperate in the War on Terror after the Sept. 11 attacks. Give them a pat on the back. But don't tell me that their actions over the past four years elevate them to the same level of partnership and trustworthiness as Great Britain.
That's offensive.
Perhaps Bush should consult with his own Justice Department, which understood the need for heightened scrutiny of Middle Eastern illegal aliens in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, and instituted temporary targeted fingerprinting and registration policies for Middle Eastern tourists, businessmen and students.
Bigots!
Perhaps he should ask his own Border Patrol, which is on heightened alert for illegal Middle Eastern border-crossers.
Bigots!
Perhaps he should ask his own FBI, which is zeroing in on mosques and Muslim charities instead of Lutheran churches and the March of Dimes in the domestic War on Terror.
Bigots!
(But don't bother asking Transportation Department Norm Mineta anything -- well, other than "Why the heck are you still here, Normie?")
The sad lesson of Portgate: Scream "racism" loud enough, and people will blame the messengers and back down. By the Bush standard, we who put American security above Arab sensitivity are all bigots now.
Isn't that the truth.
The woman who FIRST played the race card now decries being caught playing the race card.
are you refering to post 58? I heard Norm on O'Reilly talking about the bill, if you want to know more maybe you can read the O'Reilly transcript from last night.
If what I stated above was to take place (which it wouldn't) I am willing to see 2/3rds of the Republicans thrown under the bus if 4/5 of the Democraps go with them.
The fact that Portgate is getting this level attention does not bother me. I think it deserves it. Although I STILL haven't come down with a firm opinion either way. I can't think of an issue in which I can see both sides of the argument like I can this one (Among the participating CONSERVATIVES, at least, not the political minded liberals)
The fact that AbleDanger, Chinagate, etc. have NOT received the appropriate level of media concern and attention (IMO, at least 10 times the level of Portgate is justifiable) proves to me we live in a "government media matrix" a la Keannu Reeves and Laurence Fishburne.
If there was any justice, the media would have their First Amendment credentials taken away for their incompetence bias, and collusion with the Democrat Party.
Someone explain something to me. I don't get any of the comments about this being a matter of "race" at all. What race is it that we are allegedly bigoted about? Arabs are considered in the U.S. as of the Caucasian race. Most are a Semitic peoples just like the Jews are. Jews are considered Caucasian; Arabs are considered Caucasian. Where does racial bigotry come in at all? Now there may be religious bigotry, as Arabs are mostly Muslims, and it is the hardcore Muslim ideologues that are causing all the trouble. But I just don't get at all comments of racial bigotry. It's just hurling those words out there in order to stop real discussion of the issues, by dismissing arguments against the ports deal as bigotry. It disgusts me, and too many Pubs, including Bush and the Bushbots have stooped to this level. It's just like what the Dems do, not what I would ever expect from Pubs.
On thing I am sure of, however, is that playing the race card is a sure sign of weakness in your arguments.
You can disagree with MM about the ports issue, but she is dead on about the Right playing the race card.
only reason this has gotten the news is because its an election year.
That seems backwards to me. All I can say is watch Hillary Clinton. One day she was talking about vouchers in terms of which religion was OK, the next day the only good Arab is a dead arab.
Who's next on your list? Ann Coulter?
I've said this before, but what are Americans but a people sunning themselves into a stupor at a resort while foreign help handles all the details of running this resort?
This scenario would last until time to behead the guests.
If some of us are going to love muslims, then do it from afar....across oceans preferably. The closer they get to us the more we're likely to end up dead.
The UAE in a recent year voted against the USA in the UN 100% of the time. This entire picture of foreigners running things inside the USA stinks!
Homeland Security is comprised of a gaggle of geese.
Experts?
They are on permanent OJT that will last for decades.....meanwhile.....
These US "managers" would no doubt be selected from the enormous pool of bureaucratic numbskulls who are responsible for most every SNAFU.
:^)
I would have put a sarcasm tag on that line, but I thought it might detract from the rest of my post.
good observation
>"The woman who FIRST played the race card now decries being caught playing the race card."<
-Malkin also used the race card word: "Islamophobia" ?
Can you quote her verbatim, or provide a link to where she "first played the race card"?
I never said that, but nice try.
>"I never said that, but nice try."<
You said:>"The woman who FIRST played the race card now decries being caught playing the race card."<
Can you back up that statement with a quote from Malkin?
I'd like to see where she is playing the race card.
Try reading any (most) of her columns.
You're ducking from your assertion:
>"The woman who FIRST played the race card now decries being caught playing the race card."<
Perhaps you should retract your statement as being factual, since it appears that you can't provide a quote that backs up your claim.
For instance, in this article:
PORTGATE AND THE RUBBER-STAMPERS
in her rant about Dubai, she conventiently left out this important fact:
May 2005: Dubai signs a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. to join the Megaports Initiative. Dubai will be the first government in the Middle East to participate in the scheme, which is intended to detect and seize shipments of radioactive material
Now why would she do that?
BTW, you will note that she is NAME CALLING in her article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.