McCaskill tells Demint his hold on TSA nominee is ‘nuts’

[marmar]

from thinkprogress:



McCaskill tells Demint his hold on TSA nominee is ‘nuts’.

Despite the attempted Christmas day airplane bombing, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) has continued to hold up the confirmation of President Obama’s nominee for the head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which handles airport security. Former FBI agent Erroll Southers was nominated for the position in September and has been approved by two Senate committees, but DeMint continues to obstruct the nomination because he wants Southers “to clarify his stand on unionizing the TSA.” Today, on CNN’s State of the Union, DeMint said that confirming Southers would “bring the security concerns of TSA under the authority of union bosses.” Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) responded, “with all due respect, this is 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.

Watch it: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/03/mccaskill-demint-nuts/


As Michael Whitney pointed out at Work In Progress, “is there any evidence that allowing TSA employees to bargain for better wages and workplace conditions would have caught or stopped Abdulmutallab? No. Would AFGE, the union that would represent the 50,000 TSA employees, ever consider vetoing or delaying security measures at airports? No. Does any of that stop DeMint from being a blowhard and saying this anyway? No.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/03/mccaskill-demint-nuts/

[TheWraith]

1. McCaskill rocks.

Missouri is lucky to have her.

[marmar]

4. Not all the time

http://www.openleft.com/diary/16104/we-pay-sen-mccaskill-174000-a-year-for-this-kind-of-whining



We pay Sen. McCaskill $174,000 a year for this kind of whining?
by: Natasha Chart

Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 06:00


Sen. McCaskill explains why the Senate can't be bothered to do anything about the climate bill:

Some senators are skeptical lawmakers will be ready to tackle another huge issue after finishing health care. "After you do one really, really big, really, really hard thing that makes everybody mad, I don't think anybody's excited about doing another really, really big thing that's really, really hard that makes everybody mad," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said. "Climate fits that category."

This is a grownup Senator talking?

Well, dagnabbit, I wish I'd thought of that when discussing future goals with ex-managers during performance reviews. 'No, no, I don't need to move on to any next project, I already did one really, really hard thing this year. And hold my calls, would you? They interrupt my Mahjong Titans time.'

But look, I've seen some of the Senate's other really, really hard work this year, and it sucked. Also, it was clearly written mostly by lobbyists anyway. Which is not only sleazier than having your Mom do your homework, it's lazier. It means these Senators didn't so much as have to supervise the staff manager that told the policy writers to stop screwing around and get that subparagraph on their desk, ASAP. That's like having your Mom's secretary do your homework.

This is some Subgenius level slacking going on up there in the Senate. If these Senators were on the government dime, why, someone might get angry about this. If we were paying for ... oh, right.

In closing, I can only sputter at this point. So I'm turning you over to the immortal inspirational speaking of George W. Bush. Here, in a 2004 debate with John Kerry, our former president laid out a nobler vision of a public service work ethic that, sadly, may deeply disturb Sen. Claire McCaskill:

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. In defense of Claire,

Missouri is a very tough state politically. I have known Claire for many years. She was our local DA here in KC and a state rep for many years before running for state auditor. And yes, she is progressive. But with all the wingnuts in MO, and the fact that she had a very tough election, she leans a bit too far right on some issues.

I really respect the way she handled her town halls last summer. I went to one and she did not tolerate any disrupters. Claire is tough and in the end, we will be glad she is representing us in DC. I will gladly volunteer on her campaign if she decides to run again.

[TheWraith]

6. I don't think your characterization is fair.

The fact is that the healthcare debate has paralyzed the Senate all year, blocking them from getting who knows what else done. Given the choice between another knife fight and potentially getting something done that we can point to in the mid-terms, it would be a hard case to make that doing the climate bill is going to be a better deal, particularly when one or two senators will be able to gut it if they want to.

[Sherman A1]

13. Agreed

As a Missourian I am not overly impressed with Claire.

[Parker CA]

2. Someone needs to bring it further and say that the next attack will occur bc of Demint's negligence.

[blondeatlast]

3. Sad that DeMent's obstruction is not covered by the m$m. The word needs to get out. nt

[MindandSoul]

7. Not just his "hold," DeMint is nuts!

[GoCubsGo]

8. That's an understatement

That assclown thinks school teachers who are never-married with children should all be fired. I am ashamed that this creature is my Senator.

[LeftishBrit]

9. And that isn't all that's nuts about DeMented!

[dgibby]

10. Here's a portion of an E-mail I received from DeMint

Dear Friend,

The recent terror attempt during Christmas was a sobering reminder that we cannot afford to undermine safety at our airports. Unfortunately, President Obama and his nominee to head the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) appear intent on allowing collective bargaining for TSA employees… effectively giving union bosses control over important security decisions.


Collective bargaining would mean that TSA officials would have to seek permission from union bosses before making critical changes to improve security, which could take weeks or months of negotiations. This is why we do not allow other national security personnel at the CIA, FBI, Secret Service or Coast Guard to collectively bargain either.

Unions may have been big campaign donors to Democrats in the last election, but we can’t allow politics to weaken our airport security. And this is why I have simply asked for a public vote on the President’s TSA nominee who has evaded answering whether he would unionize the agency, a decision that would be his alone to make.

And here's my reply:

I find your political grandstanding on this abhorrent, to say the least. YOU should be removed from office for playing with people's lives for your own political gain. Your tactics disgust me.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

15. Ironically, after all of the fearmongering that DeMint and other Repubs

have done in regards to the attempted Christmas bombing, does anybody really believe that people are going to be more worried about the fact Obama's TSA nominee might support unionizing TSA than not having somebody running the TSA at all? I know that the whole "unionizing" HS issue worked to the Repubs advantage to defeat Dems like Max Cleland back in 2002 because he voted against the HS legislation advanced by the WH which prohibiting unionization but somehow I don't think people are going to care that much now about THAT issue. Nobody really seemed to care as much about Sebilius' stance on abortion as Brownback did- once the Swine Flu hit us last Spring, anyway. :eyes: Republicans are playing politics with our national security! Dems should say it loud- and often- until his TSA nominee is confirmed.

[MindandSoul]

17. Good answer to that stupid mail, DGiibby! I'm with you!

[madrchsod]

11. assuming that demint has a set of balls...

why did`t someone in the whitehouse grab them till he agreed to the confirmation? that`s the way the party in power plays the game...but i guess rahm is to cultured to make sure it was done that way. interesting how not doing that worked out.

[spanone]

12. 'obstructionist' i guess that only applies to Democrat lawmakers?

i haven't heard that word uttered from the m$m since the democrats opposed the idiot one.

[bridgit]

14. Claire's cool but this is part of the problem with Dems - trying to be too civil - what Demint...

is doing is (((*Insane!!*))) and it's time to stop pretending that it isn't - "with all due respect, *this* is nuts" - 'this' comes too short cause it's 'that', it's name is Jim Demint and Jim isn't merely "nuts" he's insane if he thinks he's on the correct side of these important matters

[zbdent]

16. Will Demint's obstructionism get as much "liberal media" airplay as

Napolitano's out-of-context "The system worked" statement?