Squaring the Culture




"...and I will make justice the plumb line, and righteousness the level;
then hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and the waters will overflow the secret place."
Isaiah 28:17

12/30/2009 (11:24 am)

Democrats Feign TSA Outrage

The latest in the endless string of disingenuous Democratic posturings involves Senate Democrats huffing and puffing over Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R, SC) objection to confirming Errol Southers to be Director of the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) by acclamation. They’re predictably getting help from the press: McClatchy newspapers and Huffington Post ran a story on Dec 28 entitled “Who’s Running the TSA? No one, thanks to Sen. Jim DeMint.” It’s a lie — there is an acting Director named Gale Rossides — but it’s an attack.

So let’s put the whole affair in perspective, shall we?

It’s Dec 30, 2009. The President has been President since Jan 21, 2009. There has not been a permanent head of TSA for almost a full year… and yet, McClatchy and Co. are blaming Sen. Jim DeMint for that. Has DeMint been stalling the Senate for a full year? Of course not. It took President Obama 8 months even to nominate somebody to the position. It took a Senate committee 3 and a half months to vote him out of committee. De Mint raised a single objection, based on the nominee’s failure to commit to a position regarding collective bargaining.

But now, Sen. Harry Reid is complaining that DeMint is “politicizing” national security. The Democrats mosied along at a yawn-inducing pace for a full year, then a miscreant tried to bring down an airplane with a bomb in his underwear, and suddenly it’s imperative that we replace the acting TSA director with a permanent director right now. Who’s politicizing what, here? If this is not a knee-jerk, ass-covering impulse on Reid’s part, what is it? And what kind of person jumps into action and points the finger at others after a full year of inaction?

Democrats are holding a debate over how they can best respond to the Republicans over the Flight 253 incident. Not about how best to secure the nation, mind you… how best to answer Republicans. If there was ever a starker contrast between the parties, I don’t remember it. One party actually cares about stopping terrorists. The other cares about how it looks, and how to retain power. And predictably, the party that cares about how it looks, automatically accuses the other party of caring about how it looks — because that’s the only motive they’re capable of imagining, being caught in that narcissistic mode themselves. Classic projection.

One of my favorite quotes observes that “ego is the anesthetic provided by kindly Nature to ease the pain of being a damned fool.” I’m not sure who said it, but he must have been thinking of Democrats avoiding the fact that they are moral vacuums.

The real issue regarding the TSA appoinment appears to be over unionization. Current TSA regulations allow TSA employees to join a union, but does not permit the union to bargain for the employees. This regulation has been upheld by the first 5 directors of TSA. Sen. DeMint asked nominee Erroll Southers whether he was going to uphold that regulation as well, and did not receive an answer. He wants to know before he allows the man to step into the role; the Obama administration, ever union-friendly, has stated that it favors union bargaining for TSA. Harry Reid objects because DeMint would not allow the nomination to be accepted by acclamation, nor to go through without debating the collective bargaining issue, meaning that the Democrats have to go on record supporting it. They could have held this debate at any time during the past 12 months — if they felt that national security was more important than, say, federal funding of abortions, or scuttling auto dealerships that contributed to Republicans.

Meanwhile, perhaps we should ask anybody who’s been through a transit strike, a teacher’s strike, or a policeman’s strike, whether permitting collective bargaining for the nation’s anti-terrorist security gate-keepers might possibly affect airport security.

« « Interpol Gets Full Diplomatic Immunity. Beware. | Main | Life On Wings » »

2 Comments »

December 30, 2009 @ 12:21 pm #

“Sen. DeMint asked nominee Erroll Southers whether he was going to uphold that regulation as well, and did not receive an answer.”

As in most if not all discussions with liberals, no answer _is_ an answer.

I can not tell you how many times – especially during the presidential campaign – I actually yelled at the television “Just answer the d*mn question!” Liberals have struck the words “yes” and “no” from their vocabularies.

January 1, 2010 @ 9:49 am #

A strike? What, and do without our security theater? Perish the thought.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>