Port Security

It is an interesting world we live in! A British company was managing some of our ports when it was taken over by an Arab company from United Arab Emirates. According to the news I heard, the President didn't know about it. On the other hand, I heard that the deal had begun some time back and had been cleared by a number of agencies within the government. When the President did hear about it, why didn't he immediately tell Congress and others? The word, "Arab," immediately sets a lot of people off, so when they heard that, they were quite upset. Both Democrats and Republicans immediately castigated the President and threatened legislation to stop the transfer of management. Why is "Arab country" such a bad phrase? Certainly there must be friendly Arab countries, and the UAE seems to be one of them, an ally which has helped with the war on terrorism. I hear people saying that some of the men involved in 9-11 were from that area, and I hear that they were one of few countries to recognize the Taliban. It seems easy to vilify a country if one wishes.
A further thought: We are in the area because we wish to "promote democracy." Wouldn't it promote democracy if Arab countries become involved economically with western countries? Also, there is much concern expressed about port security. But the U.S. Coast Guard controls security and that won't change with a change in the country managing the ports. I hope that the transfer of management will proceed, and I also hope that we might become more tolerant of Arab countries, and aware of their aspirations, and their involvement in today's world.
What this whole situation says to me is that this administration does a bad job of communicating, and communication is so important to everything we do. I wonder how much more damage this incident will do to the administration. It is fascinating to live through times such as these. When we have moved on and look back at history, I wonder how differently this affair will appear.

VP shoots hunting mate!

The news is always interesting to read. I wonder how much I have read in recent days about the hunting accident of Vice President Cheney. If this had happened to an ordinary person, we probably would have heard nothing of it unless it involved someone near to us. Why, then, is it such a big story? It was an accident and the accident was due to two people who were careless. Why did Whittington go past the line of hunters? And then why was Cheney so careless as to shoot him? These are unanswerable questions. So why is there a big story? It can only be because we all like to make big stories when they involve people in high places. I would like for us to forget it and get on to important things. Just as we remember a vice president who couldn't spell potato, we will remember a vice president who shot his hunting mate. That is just the way we are.....