Higher US Involvement in the UAE Administration of the Ports
A favorite pundit of this Think Tank is Charles Krauthammer. On the ports sale to the UAE company, Krauthammer is against it, sees the Democrats as being hypocrites (they would cry "racial Profiling" if a shiek from the UAE was given heavier airport scrutiny) and recognizes the downside of the deal is not as dire as being portrayed by opponents. He says that since the time to have stoped the deal was at an earlier stage,
[A]t this point doing so would cause too much damage to our relations with moderate Arab states. There are no very good options. The best exit strategy is this: (1) Allow the contract to go through; (2) give it heightened scrutiny by assigning a team of U.S. government agents to work inside the company at least for the first few years to make sure security is tight and information closely held; (3) have the team report every six months to both the executive and a select congressional committee.
Like we said, Vet it and Increase Security.
But then defeating this deal has finally united the parties. As Jonah Goldberg notes:
Bipartisan consensus is often a troubling sign, particularly when it's on an issue few know much about....Democratic and Republican politicians respond by insisting that the UAE is a bad country full of bad Muslims and Arabs, while Britain is a nice country where everyone likes us. I'm as Anglophile as they come, but you might have noticed that Britain has a surfeit of jihadi nut bags, such as the guys who blew up the Underground and want to behead Danish cartoonists. Besides, the same Dubai company bought CSX's American port business in early 2005, and nobody seemed to care then.
It a bipartisan issue. Per Goldberg, Senator John McCain is not one of them. For that, he goes up another notch to me.