Quotes of the day
posted at 10:35 pm on December 29, 2009 by Allahpundit
“Reid’s office announced Tuesday the leader will invoke a cloture vote on the nominee in order to end debate and vote on the matter. Political fighting around the failed bombing of a Christmas flight to Detroit has intensified in the past several days.
“Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has held up the nomination of Eroll Southers to head the TSA, which handles security at the nation’s airports. Reid spokesman Jim Manley labeled DeMint’s hold on Southers as ‘outrageous’ Tuesday as Democrats sought to cast Republicans as a party obstructing tighter security at airports.”
***
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
I would also like to submit a recomendation for a censure against the President of the United States for not submitting a nominee for 9 months.
Thune on December 29, 2009 at 10:38 PM
Demint has a great point here. We can’t afford to deal with Unions in the airline industry.
We need flexibility. I couldn’t agree more with Demint.
therightscoop on December 29, 2009 at 10:40 PM
I’m with DeMint here – keep the union thug tactics out of the arena of airport security personnel. That’s one of the areas that must never be politicized nor held up for ransom.
Intrepid on December 29, 2009 at 10:40 PM
2nd!
—-
Priorities people…priorities
healthcare boondoggle or national security….hmmmm….
cmsinaz on December 29, 2009 at 10:41 PM
Turnabout is fair play!
juanito on December 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Just what we need, union thugs as airport security– welcome to America, illegals.
anXdem on December 29, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Uh, why doesn’t the Democratic leadership (sic) go have a nice talk with their very own Chris Dodd concerning his little role concerning recent mandate changes that resulted in a reduction in airport security.
Then come on back with your charges of obstructionism on the part of the Republicans.
pilamaye on December 29, 2009 at 10:43 PM
dear leader had to fill his czar posts first….
cmsinaz on December 29, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Seeking political cover for a near catastrophic security failure by blaming Reid’s inability to bring a vote on a guy wanting to unionize the TSA to a floor vote. Speaking of which, do you think Obama would pull a Reagan when these unionized TSA Security folks decide to strike?
Me neither.
BKeyser on December 29, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Demint must stay firm on this.
The longer he does, the more attention this mess will get.
-Obama’s negligence in not nominating anyone until now.
-The corruption of unions.
-And what do we know about this guy? Will he be another Van Jones?
The pressure will be great for him. Send Demint letters of support!
katy on December 29, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Hey! The union leaders just care about the job their members do. Look at the results in education since the creation of the Dept of Education. The teacher unions have done a bang up job.
WashJeff on December 29, 2009 at 10:45 PM
I thought unionizing airport security under the TSA was going to make us all safe…?
Seven Percent Solution on December 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Transportation Security Czar announcement scheduled at Noon Eastern tomorrow.
WashJeff on December 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Poor ‘wittle dimmies can dish it out – all I hear is BLAH BLAH BLAH when they whine & moan about obstruction – face it, utopians cannot rule – they are too busy day dreaming.
OT – anyone know why lgf lost their linky luv? (I wondered what took so long)
Ris4victory on December 29, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Yeah, ruining kids and spending $$.
ted c on December 29, 2009 at 10:47 PM
I thought the TSA would not be needed after Obama was elected.
– Obama voter
WashJeff on December 29, 2009 at 10:47 PM
bayview on December 29, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Well, ya know, it’s not like Obama has a history of a slow decision making process. (Afghanistan troops, Somalia pirates, TARP, Stimulus, jobs pivot, blizzard of trial balloons, health care, Gitmo closing, . . . )
Skandia Recluse on December 29, 2009 at 10:47 PM
It’s another Osama Obama “shout-out” to his buddyroos at SEIU!
What the hell has happened to our government? As long as we have a bought-and-paid-for, America-hating hack in the White House and congress-members who sit in the laps of unions and make every decision based on possible political gains, we haven’t got a chance of surviving as a nation.
Impeach. Recall. Investigate. Indict. Arrest. Imprison. It’s what must be done if our Constitution, security and economy are to make it past this next year.
MrScribbler on December 29, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Who told you to think, you’re supposed to just sit there, drink your koolaid, and vote for the big (D) every two years./s
ted c on December 29, 2009 at 10:48 PM
my bad :-)
cmsinaz on December 29, 2009 at 10:49 PM
BHO is beginning to panic a little of this security issue. Two speeches in two days from the beach and now he is dragging Dingy out of his holiday stupor to try to get something done that should have been done eight months ago. Dear Leader, indeed!
d1carter on December 29, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Eroll Southers, censured by FBI for abuse of power, to head TSA. What could go wrong?
amerpundit on December 29, 2009 at 10:51 PM
Right on, Katy. DeMint is the only one in the Senate who can actually connect the dots. I have sent him a couple of “atta boys” in the last month alone. Too bad he isn’t my senator.
BetseyRoss on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Never let a Dutch-citizen-thwarted-crisis go to waste.
Marcus on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Good Lord…these CNN anchors get their line of questioning straight from AxleBlob and the Ballerina.
Yeah, PantLoad in Chief came out and said ‘The system didn’t work…after 4 whacks at it.
Ah….Regan….Air traffic controlers…’Yer FIRED!!’
BigWyo on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Yes, of course; because nothing says “security” quite like “unionized public sector employee.”
massrighty on December 29, 2009 at 10:53 PM
Obstruction my fanny!
The Dems in general and Obama in particular are like a small child who always wants to be in charge, is suddenly elected king of the playground, and suddenly is found to have no idea how to do anything right besides talk big.
If it weren’t for an unprecedented level of incompetence, the Republicans would have been steamrolled in a matter of weeks, with millions watching the live vote count on TV and erupting into wild joy when ‘free’ healthcare became the law of the land.
Dark-Star on December 29, 2009 at 10:53 PM
YAWN…………GOP caves into Dems in 5……..4……..3…..
PappyD61 on December 29, 2009 at 10:54 PM
I thought Zero and his merry band of losers didn’t want to politicize terrorist threats.
SouthernGent on December 29, 2009 at 10:54 PM
+1
d1carter on December 29, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Ron Paul could be a great VP.
moonbatkiller on December 29, 2009 at 11:02 PM
Has any other name been put forwaed for the job? If no, then it’s about the Unions, not the security of the country.
OldEnglish on December 29, 2009 at 11:02 PM
Imagine airports run with the blinding efficiency and modernization of the DMV…
//shudders//
massrighty on December 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Seems to me, the Democrats’ own Robert Gibbs was warning people not to politicize this….
notropis on December 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM
“could be” allows only that it is possible.
NOT that it is likely.
massrighty on December 29, 2009 at 11:04 PM
To the Dems, Testosterone = Obstructionism. DeMint has it, the Dems don’t.
AubieJon on December 29, 2009 at 11:04 PM
forwaed? forwaed? What the heck? forward, idiot!
OldEnglish on December 29, 2009 at 11:04 PM
If I’d refresh before I posted, I could save myself some typing.
On the other hand, if I did that, I’d never have anything to post….
notropis on December 29, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Hahaha, good one.
scalleywag on December 29, 2009 at 11:05 PM
Hey, he showed up during lunch…not my problem.
BigWyo on December 29, 2009 at 11:06 PM
If this is “Erroll Southers” from Los Angeles, it seems he prefers a “game theory” strategy of random security checkpoints that pop up out of nowhere and check people at random. As useless and far away from direct profiling as a strategy can get.
That is all I can find about the guy, and all of that was located in google scholar search.
Buddahpundit on December 29, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Yeas, I agre wif yuo, ‘cuz I wuz ejookated in a pulbic skool!
Intrepid on December 29, 2009 at 11:07 PM
You put unions in this, and it will be even more dangerous. It’s hard to fire someone when a union is employed. Look at the teachers unions.
So now….pay a TSA employee a lil money to look the other way, and they probably will. Will this person be fired? Hard to say….after all the procedurals are gone thru, they might just be able to keep their job, and benefits.
capejasmine on December 29, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Great, unionized airport security.
One guy to wave you through the scanner.
Another to look at your ticket.
A different dude to mark it with a highlighter.
A fourth guy to give the ticket back to you.
Number five tells you to move along.
And none of them are allowed to do the job of the other.
Bishop on December 29, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Man–loved how DeMint turned her words back at her! Perfect–”The president had 8 months to make an appointment…”
I think she cut it short ’cause she craped her pants she was straining so hard to prove her point….
lovingmyUSA on December 29, 2009 at 11:16 PM
It figures. USELESS.
Buckeye Babe on December 29, 2009 at 11:19 PM
I very much doubt this will happen, with or without unions.
But what I’m more concerned with is if the government orders an “everybody works double shifts because there’s an emergency,” the union boss will say: “let’s look at that contract language again.”
Or even: “I wouldn’t call it a strike, but there’s quite the ‘virus’ going around — maybe we’ll have to cut back a bunch of flights until the miracle ‘cure’ is found in our next paychecks….”
In addition I’d worry about the unwillingness of individual TSA employees to go the extra inch, much less the extra mile, beyond the letter of their job descriptions, assuming they get union representation.
On the other hand, almost all (big city) police departments in the US are unionized, and they still manage, by and large, to do good work — simply because of the dedication and decency of most individual officers.
Perhaps with more stringent screening, a whole lot more proficiency testing, an end to affirmative action hires, and probably some better pay, the TSA could survive unionizing, as well.
notropis on December 29, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Thank God we have a conservative leader in Jim DeMint.
cubachi on December 29, 2009 at 11:30 PM
I know Erroll personally and have worked with him for many years. I think he is an excellent choice to head up the TSA. BTW he also has excellent contact with Israeli aviation security experts. I don’t know what the deal is about unions but Errol is extremely capable and fit for the job. DeMint shouldn’t be obstructing this nominee…
palinforamerica on December 29, 2009 at 11:33 PM
CANNOT wait until 2010 and Hapless harry is out of a job.
B+ Reid.
jukin on December 29, 2009 at 11:36 PM
What a shock Sen. DeMint has good reason to hold the vote.
After the many obstrutions Democrats threw up that politicized troop safety the libs have plenty of gall not to mention CS for crying about having to go through the proper and justified process.
But hey, we knew that.
Speakup on December 29, 2009 at 11:37 PM
The “deal” is that Southers wants to unionize the TSA. DeMint is using a procedural strategy to delay his nomination from being voted on.
Miguel Estrada and Carol Rogers Brown have not commented on this strategy, but they could. DeMint learned his lessons well, from his brethen “across the aisle.”
Dems have stones like boulders to complain when strategies they perfected are used to thwart an outcome they desire.
massrighty on December 29, 2009 at 11:51 PM
I’m more impressed by the common sense. Watch and see the attacks from the media on this. Gonna be brutal……and well…for the most part…lies….
BigWyo on December 29, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Why do you personally feel it’s so important to unionize the TSA? How does that make us more secure? If that’s not how you feel, why aren’t calling for the Democrats to drop the union demands so that they can hire your unqualified buddy? It looks to me like the Democrats are obstructing themselves.
Buddahpundit on December 29, 2009 at 11:59 PM
If you can show me where Erroll said he wanted to unionize the TSA workers, that’d be great.
But as far as I know, I don’t think Erroll’s top priority would be unionization – he’s just not that type of person at all. He is very mission oriented.
Besides, if Congress wants to they can easily pass a law making unionization at the TSA illegal. But from what I know of Erroll I know that safety and security are his absolute top priorities. He is a smart guy, sharp, and has the best connections in aviation security.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:00 AM
If the TSA gets unionized.. which is what Obama and CZAR’s.. want to do.. will it make them any more effective?
NOT!
We should be looking for terrorist, not screening for bombers.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Sorry, but do you really think this congress, with its democrat filibuster proof majority in the senate and 70+ majority in the house, is going to even bring up a vote that bars unions from any industry?
Intrepid on December 30, 2009 at 12:03 AM
Wow! That’s impressive. Did I say I wanted to unionize the TSA workers? Try to stick to the facts. I claimed that Erroll was a good nominee. Nowhere has he stated that he supports unionizing the TSA workers. He simply hasn’t answered DeMint’s question.
If DeMint were honestly concerned about unionization at the TSA, he can easily submit a bill that forbids it rather than tie up a nominee.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:07 AM
This is payback for how the Republicans dealt with Max Cleland, but pushing the unionization of the TSA didn’t do much to help Max Cleland get elected.
Buy Danish on December 30, 2009 at 12:10 AM
Bishop on December 29, 2009 at 11:15 PM
That’s exactly how it is in London.
Schadenfreude on December 30, 2009 at 12:11 AM
If your Democrats were honestly concerned about getting the nominee through, wouldn’t they just drop their union demands?
Buddahpundit on December 30, 2009 at 12:13 AM
The TSA is not an industry. Its a government agency and yes I do believe that this Congress would pass such a bill and now would be a perfect time to submit it. We should be asking why forbidding unionization wasn’t written into the original bill in 2001 when the R’s had a slim majority.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:14 AM
Clearly that is the Demint’s point.
If Southers had a clear and defined stance on the subject, in other words a yes or no to unions, Demint would be out of line.
12 months into the Obama admin of obstruction and lies tells me you haven’t been paying attention.
katy on December 30, 2009 at 12:16 AM
Whoa….you haven’t been paying attention..
katy on December 30, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Sorry? My Dems? Let’s not make it personal, shall we? Besides they’re not “my Dems.”
And also if you could show me where the Dems have demanded that the TSA unionize, that’d be great too.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM
All we want is Americans working for America. Thanks.
Travis1 on December 30, 2009 at 12:26 AM
I got a better idea. Let them unionize.
Then at the first hint of a strike, President Palin, like President Reagan did, fires their asses. Then adopts EL AL’s method of screening passengers.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Obama Administration Spares Foreign Terrorists, Focuses on Torturing Domestic Airline Passengers http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/12/obama-administration-spares-foreign.html
Mervis Winter on December 30, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Here you go!
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:32 AM
Barack Obama, in one of his many pandering speeches to unions, promised to push for this. It is not at all clear that this promise has expired.
DeMint wants the opportunity to formally ask Southers about this. Harry Reid has refused to schedule any questioning or debate time, and demanded that Southers be approved without debate. DeMint’s “hold” is simply that he won’t grant unanimous consent to approve without debate. He wants to actually question the nominee before a confirmation vote, and have a recorded vote.
That, in Reid’s view, is obstructionism.
notropis on December 30, 2009 at 12:32 AM
Proof?
According to Demint, both Obama and Napolitano have sought to unionize security.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBs1OEEakNU&feature=player_embedded
katy on December 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM
That reporter’s a twit.
Mojave Mark on December 30, 2009 at 12:35 AM
I like it! Personally can’t wait for President Palin…
Btw, Erroll has worked with closely with El Al security in the past and supports/understands their methods. Personally, I’m not sure that unionization really would have much of an affect on security – I mean it didn’t stop NYPD from saving people on 9/11. And it doesn’t stop honorable policemen and firemen from doing their duty everyday. Besides ultimately, if unionization is wanted, it won’t be Erroll who makes the decision but the President and the Secretary of Homeland Security – unfortunately… But Erroll has stated that he would do nothing to jeopardize the safety and security of the traveling public… just sayin’
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:35 AM
If recent history is any indication anyone Obama nominates is garbage.
elduende on December 30, 2009 at 12:37 AM
+1
katy on December 30, 2009 at 12:39 AM
That may be. But we’ve got to get through the next couple of years until Palin kicks Obama’s butt out of the White House.
If you wanna place blame on Obama and Napolitano that’s fine but Erroll is one of the good guys just trying to serve his country.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:44 AM
Neither can I. It is, her destiny.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:45 AM
If we can keep Obama blaming Bush for the next 3 years, all credibility for Obama will be lost.
As if it’s not already lost.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:48 AM
Hussain doesn’t nominate anyone who will obstruct Hussain’s mission to destroy our country.
Hussain doesn’t nominate anyone who will have frictional relationships with Hussain’s commie-marxi-socialist masters.
Being nominated by Hussain for anything is reason enough for any patriot to be ashamed and withdraw .
macncheez on December 30, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Sorry palinforamerica, but I have to be suspicious of any of Heir Zeromister’s nominees also.
If he’s really that good as you speak, then, there will be a time when we’ll need him. Now is not the time.
I want this administration to fail based on its socialist policies. I don’t want good people go down the drain with the rest of the bile.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 12:57 AM
Personally I don’t think he’s ever had credibility. Has he?
I’m glad our servicemen and women are the kinds of patriots who would not withdraw from their service. When it comes to issues like finance and labor – I agree with you. But when it comes to security, Erroll is a well meaning guy and just wants to help.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 12:57 AM
If barfy gets his union thugs at TSA, President Palin can fire them just like Reagan did to the air traffic controllers.
lonestar1 on December 30, 2009 at 1:01 AM
I agree and I think Erroll really is just trapped in the middle of politics here and I know he would serve regardless of who was/is in charge – he is just that kind of guy. I don’t disparage people I know who choose to enlist in the armed forces today because the CinC is a fascist.
In my mind, this administration has already failed.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 1:01 AM
I know I can always count on you!!!
lovingmyUSA on December 30, 2009 at 1:11 AM
How well does he yield to political pressure?
Does he have the stones to stand up to Hussain and his czars ?
Does he understand that his job will be to anticipate and foil islamic terrorism and not to investigate it ?
Is he capable of being effective against a workforce that will push back and pushback hard if forced into efficiency?
When he has to choose between servicing his masters and be secretive or serving the people of USA and be open about it, what will he choose ?
How many unqualified muslims he plans to promote for diversity ?
macncheez on December 30, 2009 at 1:17 AM
After recent events, somehow I don’t think that poodle dog is going to hunt.
MB4 on December 30, 2009 at 1:18 AM
If you are referring to Bush’s credibility as compared to Obama, or even Clinton, then yes, Bush did have credibility.
You always knew where Bush stood on the issues.
With Obama, you never know and still don’t.
Maybe that’s the problem with the GOP these days. It’s easy to blame everything on Bush, when Bush is not the single point of failure. Leadership, maybe, but not the whole. Bush did protect us. Obama took a 180 view of terrorism and we almost had a tragedy of epic proportions.
You never saw Bush giving shout-outs to his peeps after a muslim shot up a bunch of soldiers. Yet, Obama did.
Bush’s tax cuts grew the economy, and paid for most of the war. Obama is going to tax the economy into bankruptcy, and still try to fight a war.
Credibility…. history will judge.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:19 AM
I blame the Patriot Act.
It’s a Portuguese Water Dog named Bo – Jangles
/snark
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:23 AM
No! I was referring to Obama. Not Bush! Good Lord…
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 1:25 AM
But Obama, doesn’t like to use the term, Victory.
You fight a WAR to WIN. There is no ambiguity.
Otherwise, you are not fit to serve.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:26 AM
My most sincere apologies
Please, let me do an Obama bow to you.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:27 AM
He doesn’t yield well at all. To him its not about political pressure its about safety and security.
Absolutely.
Absolutely. As I mentioned before he is very very close with his Israeli counter parts. And we conservatives are always saying how we should look to Israel, well I know that when it comes to aviation/transportation security, Erroll will have Israel as a close friend to help him in whatever his needs are. That includes best practices and technology.
No question.
Always service to the USA.
I doubt he plans to promote any unqualified muslims for diversity, just work for one.
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 1:32 AM
Please… not necessary!
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 1:34 AM
Aw come on… it’s in vogue don’tcha know.
I understand your support for this individual.
I would rather save our best for rebuilding the Dam, rather than use them to plug the holes.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:41 AM
I don’t get it.
If Mr Errol is all that, how come he is a nominee and not a target of the thugocracy?
macncheez on December 30, 2009 at 1:51 AM
I didn’t get the Beatles Magical Mystery Tour either, but it grew on me over time.
Kini on December 30, 2009 at 1:58 AM
Not sure. My question is who brought him to the attention of the administration in the first place. Has to be from someone in Los Angeles…
palinforamerica on December 30, 2009 at 2:05 AM
Well he should shield his back with kevlar when these thugocrats start hugging him
macncheez on December 30, 2009 at 2:18 AM
That was looocie !
macncheez on December 30, 2009 at 2:24 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »