Security and Ports.

There is quite the fuss going on over the deal which would hand commercial control of six major U.S. ports to a state-owned Arab company.

From CNN'S Situation Room: (emphasis mine)

BUSH: The transaction should go forward, in my judgment. If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward. The company has been cooperative with the United States government, the company will not manage port security. The security of our ports will be continued to be managed by the Coast Guard and Customs. The company is from a country that has been cooperative in the war on terror, been an ally on the war on terror.

Weldon represents the "concerns" of Congress:

REP. CURT WELDON (R), HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: This White House did nothing to communicate with Congress on this deal. With all the concern about port security going on in America right now at a minimum, leaders of both parties should have been brought in from both houses and had this deal reviewed.That didn't occur. And it's a little late right now to announce it and say the government's behind it. We're not going to stand for that.

And Bartlett responded:

DAN BARTLETT, WHITE HOUSE COUNSELOR: Well, it's understandable. I know he takes port security really -- it's a top priority for the chairman, as it is for this president.We've done a lot of things, Wolf, since 9/11 to improve our port security. And there's a specific process that was followed here, Wolf. And I must remind you, this -- a deal was announced, this transaction was announced back in November. This is not something that just came out of left field in the last couple of days.

It seems to me that there is a lot of political posturing going on because it is an issue that politicians think they can look good being against. It's easy. But just like the wiretap issue, I question those who act like it is "news to them," when in fact they knew about it for a long time. Just when they found out there could be some political capital out of it, they decide to be outraged.

McCain agrees with the President:(emphasis mine)

“We all need to take a moment and not rush to judgment on this matter without knowing all the facts. The President’s leadership has earned our trust in the war on terror, and surely his administration deserves the presumption that they would not sell our security short. Dubai has cooperated with us in the war and deserves to be treated respectfully. By all means, let’s do due diligence, get briefings, seek answers to all relevant questions and assurances that defense officials and the intelligence community were involved in the examination and approval of this transaction. In other words, let’s make a judgment when we possess all the pertinent facts. Until then, all we can offer is heat and little light to the discussion.”

Let's face it, if Bush had brought most of our boys home after Afghanistan, he would have sailed into a landslide in 2004 and the left would have had little to bash him with. But he didn't. He put our safety before his own legacy and that proved to me, right there and then, that he would always put our security before politics. So I have to trust him on this. Plus, we can't say to the Arab world, "Come and be more like us" and then reject the very things that help them be more like us.