Discuss as:

To politicize natl. security, or not to?

From NBC's Mark Murray
With a few Republicans already criticizing the Obama administration over the failed alleged terrorist attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound flight -- Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R) has taken issue with President Obama's silence so far -- it's worth noting that some Republicans have acted in ways that the previous administration would have attacked for being soft on terrorism.

For starters, it turns out that GOP Sen. Jim DeMint has held up Obama's pick to head up the Transportation Security Administration over concerns that the administration would allow airport screeners to unionize. (Per Ben Smith, a DeMint spokesman replied, "Democrats have only themselves to blame for not having a confirmed TSA administrator. President Obama waited 243 days in office before making a nomination and Harry Reid has been too busy trading earmarks for votes on health care to schedule debate on the nominee. This is an important debate because many Americans don't want someone running the TSA who stands ready to give union bosses the power to veto or delay future security measures at our airports.")

In addition, back in June, 37 Republican House members -- including Hoekstra, GOP leader John Boehner, Roy Blunt (who's running for Missouri senator), and Mike Pence -- voted against a Homeland Security appropriations bill providing more security funding.

On "Meet the Press" yesterday, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs urged both parties to refrain from politicizing national security. "I think going forward, the president believes strongly that this has to be a nonpartisan issue. This should not be a tug-of-war between the two political parties. I hope that ... everyone will resolve in the new year to make protecting our nation a nonpartisan issue rather than what normally happens in Washington, and that is devolving into politics."