




President Bush is on the defensive on national security for the first time in his presidency over his administration’s decision to approve a Middle Eastern company’s bid to manage U.S. ports, leaving Democrats and Republicans all running to his right on the issue.
Republicans are openly talking about bills to halt the deal and sound eager to override a threatened presidential veto, while Democrats say the administration’s decision cuts deeply into Mr. Bush’s national security credentials.
Democrats even turned around White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove’s barb last month that they have a “pre-9/11 view of the world.”
“To paraphrase Karl Rove, Democrats and Republicans have fundamentally different views on national security,” said Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokesman Bill Burton. “For example, Republicans think we should outsource national security to a state used by 9/11 hijackers as an operational and financial base. Democrats think we should not.”
In the Patriot Act and NSA wiretap fights, some Republicans split from Mr. Bush, but the president was to their right on the security questions involved in those issues.
This time is different, and it comes as a surprise to House Republicans who two weeks ago heard Mr. Bush tell them at a retreat that terrorism is always on his mind.
“I wake up every morning thinking about a future attack, and therefore, a lot of my thinking, and a lot of the decisions I make are based upon the attack that hurt us,” Mr. Bush said.
Some of those in attendance said they can’t square that statement with the ports decision.
“It doesn’t jibe with it; that’s what’s confusing to everybody,” said Rep. Sue Myrick, North Carolina Republican. “I look at us trying to protect us and use every opportunity to protect us. They say we’re doing security on the ports, well, what security?”
The administration has approved the sale of a British company that manages operations at six U.S. ports to Dubai Ports World, a state-run company from the United Arab Emirates, after securing agreements from the company on security matters.
The White House says politics never entered into the matter.
“The president doesn’t view it as a political issue, the president views it as the right principle and the right policy,” said White House press secretary Scott McClellan.
“I don’t think anybody during this process was looking at it in any way other than the national security standpoint because that’s what they’re charged with doing under this process that was mandated by Congress,” Mr. McClellan said.
Frank J. Gaffney Jr., president of the Center for Security Policy and a conservative adviser to Republicans on national security issues, said Mr. Bush will have to relent on his stance, but in the meantime he will suffer political damage.
“It’s going to be at some cost to the president, and unfortunately that cost is only going to grow as he tries, as he did with Harriet Miers, to hang in there,” Mr. Gaffney said.
View Entire StoryBy Julia A. Seymour
Planned Parenthood flap preceded by assault from anti-chemical activists

By Rich Campbell - The Washington Times
Imagine this: Peyton Manning coming out of the tunnel at FedEx Field this September, poised ...

By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times
When Lt. j.g. Timothy W. Dorsey fired his fighter jet’s missile at an Air Force ...

By Paige Winfield Cunningham - The Washington Times
Pointing to growing unease that President Obama’s proposed contraception coverage rule doesn’t protect religious freedom ...
Independent voices from the TWT Communities

An inside look at the world highlighting not only green issues affecting us all, but everything from green travel to green technology.

Join us for an extraordinary adventure through the San Francisco Bay Area.