McCaskill says DeMint holding up TSA nominee over unionization is nuts

[cal04]

Run time: 03:52 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlAi75azRtc   Posted on YouTube: January 03, 2010 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: January 03, 2010 By DU Member: cal04 Views on DU: 2911

 
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/03/mccaskill-demint-nuts/
With all due respect, this is nuts, holding him up over whether or not somebody’s going to be able to bargain for a better benefit.…This man will get confirmed and he’ll get confirmed by a wide margin. And playing games with the process, all it’s doing is hurting the traveling public because the most important frontline agency to protect Americans right now on flights is being held up over political stuff.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. The wingnuts are salivating over his past indiscretion

Watch that talking point take over this union bashing crap.

[napi21]

2. I don't understand DeMint? 1st he admits he's holding him up

then he says he NOT and Reid could bring his approval to the floor at any time he wants! I've always known DeMint was a nutball, but at least he didn't used to contradict himself in the same damn interview before!

[TheEuclideanOne]

3. The reality is that he is not holding up the TSA nominee

The republican party is HOLDING EVERYTHING UP! This just falls under that umbrella. The are trying to prevent the government from accomplishing anything and this successful terrorist act is just a side effect from that. If you were to examine all aspects of government, you would find example after example of how the country is suffering as a result of this obstructionism. The Democrats should be pointing out that being the party of NO really does have a demonstratable negative effect on the country. If it wasn't DeMint, it would be somebody else holding this up. If it wasn't the union issue, it would be some other issue. The point is to stop anything from happening. The country should be more outraged by this obstructionism. The people on the plane should be outraged because they essentially almost died as a result of this obstructionism.

[RayStar]

5. The party of NO

It doesn't matter what the people want if the Democrats are connected the Republicans will "Just Say NO".

[bjobotts]

11. You're right.Each repub has a hold on a different nominee.Doing everything to cause failure to Obam.

[bjobotts]

12. Each is just an excuse to block success for purely political gain.It will backfire on them.

[bjobotts]

13. They have exactly the same policies they had under Bush.They are ridiculous now.

[JHB]

18. It'll only backfire on them if someone makes an issue of it.

I'd love for that "someone" to be the Democratic Party and the Obama administration, but so fat they still seem to have the "bipartisanship" tune stuck in their heads.

[dotymed]

14. Obstructionism

is absolutely the name of their game. ie....HCR, they INSISTED that almost any benefit to the average American (80%), be stripped from the bill..public option on down.. and then they voted, in unison to defeat a bill that they had shaped. It is waay beyond obvious that any bill, idea or nominee presented by Democrats will be automatically opposed by rethugs. So Dems, forget the "bi-partisanship B.S., do not fall for the bait. Actually, the Dems realize this, but the "obstructionists" make a very convenient scapegoat. Please stop it Democrats. You ARE the majority, act like it. Use reconciliation at every opportunity to pass progressive legislation that actually benefits the majority of Americans; the very people that you are supposed to be working for. When the rethugs held the reigns under Frist, they Never hesitated to jam their conservative agenda down the Dems throats. That is the way it has become, in this post-bush era. The rethugs will not play nice unless you leave them no choice. So, I suggest putting Progressive (people beneficial) rules back into HCR and using a simple majority (51) to pass real reform (public option too) and if necessary, threaten the "nuhclear" option or implement it if necessary. Democrats are losing their seats with every pansy assed bi-partisan act they participate in. The rethugs are counting on this. BTW, all of the pro-Union (which every American deserves, not huge CEO paydays and lay-offs) legislation was hard fought for and won before Reagan era. He was able to pass only minimal anti-union legislation despite his majorities and trickle-down B.S. Use these pro-Union LAWS to build on and HELP the approximately 80% of Americans who are financially dying while wall street blooms. We will have a very poor Democratic turnout otherwise. I may abstain because I am sick of the majority acting like they are the minority...and we get hurt...not them.

[TheEuclideanOne]

16. Yes, I like your suggestion

Don't consider to maybe, possibly use reconciliation this one time as an exception because this is a really import bill but promise to never use it again and apologize afterwards. Instead, cram it up their fucking asses and say this is how it is going to be done. Use reconciliation even in cases where it is clearly not needed just to make a point. Get some balls democrats. Don't leave all of the work to Grayson.

[FarLeftFist]

4. It's disgusting how anti-union the repubs are....

Unions are extremely necessary in the fight against corporate greed and class warfare. I wonder if DeMint hates all the union members of the fdny/nypd and medics among many others that charged into 2 burning buildings on 9/11 to save people's lives.

[democracy1st]

6. dayum man this guy is nuts

[AlinPA]

7. Democrats in the senate need to get tough with this slimy bastard.

[bjobotts]

8. DeMint says he's not holding him up when he's had a hold on him since his nomination

[bjobotts]

9. Is Demint relasing his "hold"? Now he's just 'praying' for his demise I guess.

[bjobotts]

10. McKaskill is seeing just how dysfunctional repubs have made the senate.

[Igel]

17. No.

Parsing words.

A hold doesn't prevent the Senate from holding a vote on a nomination. It means that the person placing the hold may make life complicated and take up time. Majority leaders don't like this--they plan things out, count votes, and want things to go smoothly to both avoid embarrassment and to preserve the illusion that they're really in control.

It pays to know the definitions of words.

"hold - An informal practice by which a Senator informs his or her floor leader that he or she does not wish a particular bill or other measure to reach the floor for consideration. The Majority Leader need not follow the Senator's wishes, but is on notice that the opposing Senator may filibuster any motion to proceed to consider the measure." http://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/hold.htm

It's essentially a gentleman's agreement that holds stop nominations of judicial candidates from a senator's home state. It's also a gentleman's agreement to consider holds as binding--although it's often overlooked when necessary.

This is distinct from a secret hold, which is binding within a limited context: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_hold . However it's obvious to anybody who reads or watches nearly any medium that "unanimous consent" is hardly necessary for many of the Senate's actions.

[burning rain]

15. No surprise that DeMint should be the Senate's foremost foe of unions.

South Carolina is a right-to-work (for less) state and he represents the most ferociously conservative faction therein. The Southern model of labor relations is frankly feudal, having as its ideal workers on the level of serfs and owners as lords. DeMint will not be satisfied until auto workers make what Walmart clerks do. We by contrast should be fighting to unionize Walmart.

[BAPhill]

19. Whats wrong with South Carolina?

Joe Wilson - Nut bag
Gov Sanford - Nut bag
Jim DeMint - Nut bag

Whats the deal?

[midnight]

20. K&R.

[ProgressOnTheMove]

21. If folks can run up posters making a stink about how they are playing with peoples security..

we can really make people see what they are doing. Add a tinyurl to this u tube too that'd help things along too.

[hmorehead]

22. Jim DeMint IS nuts

[wordpix]

23. what's nuts is the entire senate acceding to one obstructionist!

Just hold the damn vote!