Hawkeye-X
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:30 AM
Original message |
Can Jim DeMint be prosecuted right now under PATROIT ACT? |
|
That he himself signed? Hmm? Aiding and abetting a terrorist by blocking Obamas nominee for TSA?
Paybacks a bitch.
|
Overseas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message |
1. He certainly seems to want us to have a weaker workforce inspecting the bags. |
|
When Jim DeMint opposes unionization of baggage inspectors so intensely that he's willing to hold up appointing a well qualified chief executive for the TSA, he's really saying he'd like us to have insecure, underpaid, overworked inspectors. Seems like that kind of weakened workforce would be ripe for bribery.
I'd rather have a well-trained, well-respected, well-paid, well-rested workforce inspecting the baggage, on the alert for the one or two oddities among the thousands of bags and customers they review every single day.
Why would he prefer that they be weak and insecure?
|
blondeatlast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. Sad that this story is not getting out; the msm is completely ignoring it. |
|
I've traveled in other countries quite a bit and the screeners are professional, efficent, and generally pleasant.
I think the American people would prefer that the people keeping them safe be verything you describe. Good wagges and respect (and unionization) will do it.
|
msongs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. the head of the party prefers bipartisanship so let's don't point out deMint's role ok? nt |
Overseas
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
8. That is sad because it is so illogical of DeMint. To want insecure baggage inspectors. |
|
Maybe he wants to outsource the work to China? They could examine the bags and their workers aren't allowed to strike either.
|
Greyhound
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Anybody can be prosecuted under the PA and the MCA for any or no reason. |
|
Did you miss that part?
We don't even need a charge, just declare him bad.
|
ThomWV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |
onenote
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
gateley
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:43 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Even if he could be, it'll never happen, damn it. nt |
MidwestRick
(604 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message |
|
assume that unionizing any sector will better it. I've hired both union and non-union workers. Just because someone is in a union doesn't make them a better or happier employee.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 02:19 PM
Response to Original message |