President Bush has recently offered the following challenge to lawmakers:
"step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard'.
Let's for a moment presuppose that the legislative branch of the government ever owes the executive an explanation for anything and focus on if this particular legislative body owes this particular executive an explanation for anything. From signing statements to executive orders to the condescending "we'd be happy to listen to any of your ideas", this executive has held the legislatures in contempt while trying to poison the judiciary.
More below the fold
Now that the supine Senators and Congresspeople are sensing the tough slog this mid-term could be, they are bristling over White House miscues and trying to make political hay out of what is in essence not a pressing matter (yes- national security is important; so is healthcare, civil liberties and deficit-spending. You don't see the Republicans in an uproar over those, because those would affect -them-). The President has rebuked them and is threatening a veto. More importantly, however, he is positioning himself as if the legislative branch is answerable to him for their opinions.
This is an unnatural flow of authority within our liberal democracy and thus the question should not be why the legislative branch owes the executive an explanation for the unequal treatment of Middle Eastern countries. The question should by why the executive feels it is okay to enforce a national security regime that treats Middle Eastern members of the "Axis of Evil" differently than the sole Asian member of that trio.
Three countries were listed as evil in one speech: Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Iraq we have successfully transformed into a nightmire/quagmare (the unholy union of nightmare and quagmire); now we're rattling our sabers at Iran. Many pundits are predicting "military escalations" against the Islamic regime will be executed before year's end. If Democrats do not marshal an electoral gain this Fall, I predict the American bombs will be falling by November 12th.
Counterpoint to our sandbox adventures, we have North Korea sitting on a nuclear arsenal. We have blustered toward them but the Chinese hegemony in that region has kept us in check. This has occurred despite reports that North Korea has long range missiles that could reach West Coast cities. Nevermind that with Japan being the world's banker and right next door- even long range missiles would not be needed for North Korea to send massive chaos running through the global economy.
When there are tangible links between UAE and the terrorists of 9/11, along with intelligence regarding the UAE's facilitation of nuclear technology reaching such global luminaries are Pakistan and Iran, as well as the fact that Dubai Ports is not just UAE affiliated by state-controlled, a very worrisome circumstance appears to have been willingly fostered by this administration. It is from this rhetorical position that the executive demands the legislative explain itself. It is within the larger context of his penchant for Middle Eastern adventurism and Asian demuring that he demands an explanation from those he deigns not explain himself to.
The legislatures are correct to awaken to this issue. This should be the point from which they launch a counter assault on Bush's desire for the unified executive. There should be hard questioning of this decision and in specific why Bush feels he is owed an explanation for the legislative branch's legislating of solutions.
The latter wreaks of hubris and I'm afraid that the legislative response is as fleeting as opportunism. As I said earlier I am appalled that it is over this issue which Republicans are starting to revolt. Where was this outrage over the slashing of Medicaid or the horrific Medicare Part Death that was shoved through? Where was this outrage when Bill Frist stood on the most hallowed of American grounds and made a mockery of our institutions and his title of doctor? Where was this outrage when Spectre refused to swear in Gonzales? Where was this outrage when New Orleans drowned?
Those are instances which proved political mettle. The Republicans were meek and ineffectual against executive expansion, exploitation and bungling. Now that the nexus of their web of influence is threatened by a hard slog midterm, we see a feigned ferocity and indignation over executive arrogance. We see them scoring cheap points over an issue that is largely symbolic more than relevant. (As has been pointed out by many an astute observer, the day to day running of the ports will remain under the purview of Americans).
So in the end I believe this particular political drama is one lacking in almost any substance. The Presidential challenge of the legislative explaining itself is laughable; luckily it's funny enough to blind most to the gross opportunism of the GOP at this moment.
I do, though, have a real question for the GOP Senators who are swearing vengeance against the UAE controlling six ports:
Where has this outrage been when your fellow Democrats proposed legislation to ensure that all of that cargo is checked?
Where was your outrage when it mattered?