Vetoman, Vetoman, Vetoman

The last time this happened it was much bigger news and I stayed out of it. This time, I'm actually more ticked off:

Democratic leaders in Congress said they had dropped their demand for union bargaining rights for airport screeners in the hope of reviving antiterrorism legislation that had stalled because of a presidential veto threat.

New York Times, 07/10/07

First of all, every single headline on this story says that the Dems dropped demands, or made concessions, or whatever . It makes us look weak. Second of all, Republicans never ever hesitated to put the opposition on record as voting against Homeland Security. My suggestion: I say make Bush veto the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, and let Republicans vote to support their contention that whistleblower protection is a bigger danger to the United States than terrorists. Let them argue about how disastrous for our security it would be to have union representation for TSA employees, and ask them how disastrous unionization has been for first responders like police officers. Then, let someone like John Gage, head of AFGE, give a press conference asking Reid and Pelosi to send Collective Bargaining Rights as a separate bill, because our airport screeners are worried first and foremost about our security, unlike Republicans who just like to kick labor out of habit, even if it means that innocent people die in the meantime.

In summary, throwing labor under the bus in order to save the GOP the embarrassment of an unpopular vote against homeland security might (might) get a security bill passed more quickly. At the cost of base support, credibility, respect, and possibly elections.

Summon the frickin' vetoman. Make him use the damn pen. Go from there.