Ron Paul: We should be able to sue TSA screeners for touching our junk; Update: Palin: It’s time for TSA to start profiling; Update: TSA agents hate new patdown rules?

posted at 8:37 pm on November 19, 2010 by Allahpundit

I’m intrigued, not because I think it’s fair to bankrupt some poor schlub trying to pay his bills by patting down crotches on government orders for 15 bucks an hour but because lifting their immunity might cause a full-scale revolt among personnel, thereby forcing TSA brass to change the policy. Besides, read this horror story at CBS or the surreal encounter Erick Erickson wrote about today at Red State. The system needs a common-sense jolt, and forcing screeners to take think carefully about every patdown would provide one.

It’s a nonstarter politically, though, isn’t it? Mark Krikorian:

Kick the Bureaucrat is a game conservatives love to play, and sometimes it’s justified, but this time it isn’t. The problem is the policy that the White House and its minions have instructed their subordinates in the civil service to carry out. And it’s not just the Obama folks; Bush insisted on this non-profiling approach, and Republicans ran Congress for four years after 9/11 and supinely permitted it.

I just heard Ann Coulter make this very point today, at David Horowitz’s shindig in Palm Beach (hey, a third-stringer like me can’t sneak onto the NR cruise, but this is a pretty good alternative!). Anyway, Ann said that the TSA people are actually big fans of hers, but they’ve been told to follow certain procedures, so what are they supposed to do? (She also suggested that everyone being groped should make “sex noises,” like in the “I’ll have what she’s having” scene in When Harry Met Sally.) Ironically, Ann’s fan base in TSA is likely due to the Democrats’ insistence that the function not be outsourced to private firms; this has meant that the TSA screeners are overwhelmingly Americans, often former military — almost the only Americans working at the big airports I’ve been to.

Float a bill making TSA institutionally liable for “outrageous” searches and you’ll have wide public support. Float a bill making Joe Junktoucher, TSA screener, personally liable and you might actually make the public more complacent about patdowns since most people don’t want to see some middle-class civil servant punished for enforcing bad policy. In that case, if your crank gets yanked, instead of complaining you might wonder how many kids the yanker has and decide not to make a fuss. There’s got to be a better way.

Update: Sympathy for the devil via Ward Sloane:

I love the TSA because I think it has the most impossible mandate of any government agency. It must be right 100 percent of the time. Terrorists only have to be right once…

TSA and its security officers are now maligned as “big brother” gone mad for people’s “junk.” Excuse me, and this is not a scientific poll, but I suspect that if you polled all TSA security officers – that is, the airport screeners making an average of about $32,000 a year, you won’t find a lot of them who want to touch other people’s “junk.” I am fairly certain they’d just as soon let someone through as pat down their “junk.” Think about it.

Update: Palin’s got a slightly different idea from Paul’s. Let the media freakout begin!

TSA: why politically incorrect 2 “profile” anyone re: natl security issues?we profile individuals/suspects in other situations! profile away

Update: The plural of “anecdote” is not “data,” but for what it’s worth, not all junk-touchers are happy about the touching. Note well, Ron Paul:

“It is not comfortable to come to work knowing full well that my hands will be feeling another man’s private parts, their butt, their inner thigh. Even worse is having to try and feel inside the flab rolls of obese passengers and we seem to get a lot of obese passengers!”…

“Molester, pervert, disgusting, an embarrassment, creep. These are all words I have heard today at work describing me, said in my presence as I patted passengers down. These comments are painful and demoralizing, one day is bad enough, but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments. If something doesn’t change in the next two weeks I don’t know how much longer I can withstand this taunting. I go home and I cry. I am serving my country, I should not have to go home and cry after a day of honorably serving my country.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 3

The better way is to leave it to the airport as to whom is screening whom.

OkieDoc on November 19, 2010 at 8:41 PM

So weren’t the German soldiers just “following orders” in the concentration camps. Didn’t they also have families?

Wrong is wrong. This groping is unconstitutional

stenwin77 on November 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

TSA workers are basically people who couldn’t make it at McDonalds.

csdeven on November 19, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Sue the TSA as a body for this crap! Sue Napolitano!

Illinidiva on November 19, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Tired of the most of the whining about the TSA screenings. The next time we’re attacked these same folks are going to demand the heads of the TSA people for not being tough enough and letting someone dangerous through a hole.

MikeknaJ on November 19, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Oh boy, talk about padding the pockets of trial lawyers. Everyone and their grandmother will be claiming to have been violated.

We must have a lot of prudes in this country. Don’t want to go through a scanner because you’re afraid someone might see what you look like without clothes on, so you opt for a pat down from the same people? Tell me what I’m missing.

I think I’d rather them see me than feel me.

But either way, this is all being blown out of proportion the last week.

ButterflyDragon on November 19, 2010 at 8:46 PM

Just put Adrian Monk in charge of TSA. Problem solved.

Christien on November 19, 2010 at 8:47 PM

This is assault. I don’t care about the assailant’s home life.

Chazz on November 19, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Don’t touch my Junk or Package Flying Insurance!!

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Not exactly a fan of this. While TSA agents are works program rejects, they don’t make the kabuki theater policies. They act like retards for the most part because they are employed by retards. Our betters in Washington have no damn idea what they are doing and it shows.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:48 PM

Why not just make all politicians and bureaucrats legally accountable for their actions…

… and forced to live under the laws and regulations they force upon us?

Oh, wait…!

Seven Percent Solution on November 19, 2010 at 8:48 PM

Planes Trains Automobiles – Rental agreement.avi

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1weV3YBm6s

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 8:49 PM

LOL… Penn Jillette already did it.

DaveS on November 19, 2010 at 8:50 PM

Somebody FedEx Poor Paul a clue. It’s not the TSA screeners who are the problem here.

Skandia Recluse on November 19, 2010 at 8:52 PM

So weren’t the German soldiers just “following orders” in the concentration camps. Didn’t they also have families?

Wrong is wrong. This groping is unconstitutional

stenwin77 on November 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

I think this entire program is a ridiculous charade that needs to be scrapped in favor of something that actually works. But I would not go so far as to compare TSA agents fondling to Nazi guards helping to enable mass murder. That is just a little bit over the top.

Besides, if the wankers in congress can pass a law allowing suits to be brought against TSA agents, why not instead pass a law fixing the program and stopping TSA Molestation Club instead?

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Why not just make all politicians and bureaucrats legally accountable for their actions…

… and forced to live under the laws and regulations they force upon us?

Oh, wait…!

Seven Percent Solution on November 19, 2010 at 8:48 PM

Seven Percent Solution:Exactly SPS,Commom Sense!!!!!!:)

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 8:53 PM

How much junk could Joe Junktoucher touch if Joe Junktoucher could touch junk?

ted c on November 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Tired of the most of the whining about the TSA screenings. The next time we’re attacked these same folks are going to demand the heads of the TSA people for not being tough enough and letting someone dangerous through a hole.

MikeknaJ on November 19, 2010 at 8:46 PM

You might have point if groping us was actually making us safer.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM

TSA is only enacting the will of Congress.

It is Congress we must sue on the grounds that this action is an unconstitutional imposition on freedom of movement within the Union and a violation of the 4th Amendment for unreasonable searches as going through an airport is not being on federal property nor is it under federal jurisdiction but those of the States they are in.

Actually you could probably have a good go on all of TSA being that: an imposition of federal authority on properties in the States without individual agreements from each State for each and every airport.

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

canopfor,

I’ll see you and raise.

Christien on November 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

In that case, if your crank gets yanked, instead of complaining you might wonder how many kids the yanker has and decide not to make a fuss.

yeah right AP. Thems just the mental gymnastics I want to be going through when homeboy is rolling my jewels between his thumb n’ forefinger thinking mean things about me…..

ted c on November 19, 2010 at 8:56 PM

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 8:49 PM

“…You can start by wiping that efing dumb-ass smile off your rosy efing cheeks…”

LMAO

OkieDoc on November 19, 2010 at 8:57 PM

So weren’t the German soldiers just “following orders” in the concentration camps. Didn’t they also have families?

Wrong is wrong. This groping is unconstitutional

stenwin77 on November 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

This was exactly my point several days ago. Nazi soldiers used the defense that their immoral and injurious behavior was justified because they were just following orders.

Holding government officials like Incompetano and the undereducated TSA workers accountable for unconstitutional behavior is actually a good idea, but it remains to be seen whether it will change TSA’s current procedures.

I fully understand how important it is for ordinary TSA workers to make a living, but blindly taking orders, even though some may realize how unethical their orders are, makes the TSA agent liable for the abuse inflicted on travelers. Nazi soldiers didn’t receive immunity because they were taking orders, and TSA agents shouldn’t either.

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 8:57 PM

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Legally speaking I agree with you if a plane is not going to cross state lines. But once you book passage on an interstate flight the federal government does have explicit authority under the constitution to impose their own laws and regulations.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:58 PM

I don’t blame the TSA workers. I blame whoever came up with scan/pat thing. It does not make us safer. Criminal Profiling is the way to go. Scan/Pat those who fit the profile. Ask questions the way Israel does, pull aside those who don’t add up.

IowaWoman on November 19, 2010 at 8:59 PM

Forget suing. Charge them with sexual battery. Put them all on sexual predator lists. That’s what it’s for isn’t it? To protect the public?

J in STL on November 19, 2010 at 9:01 PM

What I don`t get,is that in 8 years of President Bush,
I never heard of TSA Assaults,and now,under Obama its
nightmarish!

And,again,if this was under Bush`s watch,the Leftys would
be going ballistic,and so far,as I can tell,listening to
media and the net,not so much!!

The only stories I`m, hearing are Love Pats by a Senator!

Call me crazy,but this sounds like an attempt to send the
entire Airline Industry,pardon da pun,off the runways fin
ancially!!

Sounds more like the UNIONS are flexing their muscles than
safety!!

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Ron Paul is proving to be the Barry Goldwater of our generation: despised in his prime, but repeatedly right about a government meant to be limited by the U.S. Constitution.

shawk on November 19, 2010 at 9:01 PM

I want every single politician to be required to go through this every single time they fly. This means from AF-1 down.Every damn one.

katy the mean old lady on November 19, 2010 at 9:02 PM

LOL… Penn Jillette already did it.

DaveS on November 19, 2010 at 8:50 PM

Perfect story showing what’s wrong with the media reports. Penn insists his genitals weren’t touched (but he still wanted to press charges for assault) and the cop insists Penn’s crotch was grabbed (while Penn is telling him it wasn’t).

A perfect example of media hype turning fact into fiction.

ButterflyDragon on November 19, 2010 at 9:03 PM

852 miles door to door,15 hours, my car,my music,clean rest rooms, good food, 18 MPG in the road tank with leather heated seats,fall foliage,and our junk in he back. Our privy parts in tact.
2Hours to airport 2hours of lines and TSA BS,3hours on plane,hour to get to car,hour on the Mex. to Minn. hwy I 35 to home. 6 plus hours of hassle or just a nice drive my way.
I love SW Airlines but can not put up with BNA and AUS “security”.

Col.John Wm. Reed on November 19, 2010 at 9:03 PM

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 8:49 PM
============================
“…You can start by wiping that efing dumb-ass smile off your rosy efing cheeks…”

LMAO

OkieDoc on November 19, 2010 at 8:57 PM

OkieDoc: Tee-hee ya,a bit later in that scene,he falls,and
Candy tells the guy to help him up,and reachs down,
gropes his private parts a lifts him up,but I coul
dn`t find that scene segment!:)

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Float a bill making Joe Junktoucher, TSA screener, personally liable and you might actually make the public more complacent about patdowns since most people don’t want to see some middle-class civil servant punished for enforcing bad policy.

Is that what the left does with cops? No.

ted c on November 19, 2010 at 9:05 PM

I want every single politician to be required to go through this every single time they fly. This means from AF-1 down.Every damn one.

katy the mean old lady on November 19, 2010 at 9:02 PM

I think they should go through it every time they enter the capital building.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:06 PM

DaveS on November 19, 2010 at 8:50 PM

…She said, “Well, the airport is very important to all of our incomes and we don’t want bad press. It’ll hurt everyone, but you have to do what you think is right. But, if you give me your itinerary every time you fly, I’ll be at the airport with you and we can make sure it’s very pleasant for you.”

I have no idea what this means, does it mean that they have a special area where all the friskers are topless showgirls, “We have nothing to hide, do you?” I have no idea. She pushes me for the next time I’m flying. I tell her I’m flying to Chicago around 2 on Sunday, if she wants to get that security guy there to sneer at me. She says, she’ll be there, and it’ll be very easy for me. I have no idea what this means.

Absolutely hysterical. Go for the VIP treatment evertine, hahahahaha.

OkieDoc on November 19, 2010 at 9:06 PM

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:58 PM

In the 1950′s Congress made it clear that air travel was covered under maritime travel jurisdiction: do we do this at each and every port when individuals are traveling inside territorial waters and never leaving them? Ships can do just as much if not more damage to building than aircraft due to the types of material that can be delivered easily from them: bio, chem, radioactive, and good old explosives.

If there is not a full search of each and every ship in US territorial waters going from US port to US port, just like they do at airports, then where is the justification? That terrorists use aircraft more frequently? They do use ships, also, as the Israelis can attest to.

The interstate trade authority does have limits.

Is this put on passenger vehicles going interstate?

Buses?

Trucks carrying hazardous materials need special licensing and schedules, but terrorists wouldn’t put that down for their loads now, would they?

Surely AMTRACK gets this, right?

Cars?

Just where is the limit on federal power and imposition of same on the States under the regulation power of interstate commerce? As this is also travel, this is an imposition on the innocent public using means to harass and intimidate the public… and to this point in time not one single instance of a terrorist being caught before boarding has ever shown up. That would be a huge ballyhoo by TSA, no?

If you mean security, just how much liberty are you willing to trade away for it? Full body cavity searches? Because al Qaeda has already gone that far… where does it stop and rational behavior take over?

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:07 PM

The government needs to maintain a website letting the public where all TSA screeners live. Think of the children.

malclave on November 19, 2010 at 9:08 PM

stenwin77 on November 19, 2010 at 8:43 PM

BOOM!

That is some irrefutable logic right there.

Aquateen Hungerforce on November 19, 2010 at 9:08 PM

canopfor,
=============

I’ll see you and raise.

Christien on November 19, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Christien:Oh that was a hoot,lol,forgot about that scene,
I`ve got to watch Spinal Tap again,hehe thanks!:)

canopfor on November 19, 2010 at 9:09 PM

But I would not go so far as to compare TSA agents fondling to Nazi guards helping to enable mass murder. That is just a little bit over the top.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 8:53 PM

The behaviors are not identical, but the mindset is. It’s the attitude that if the actions are in one’s job description then the individual worker isn’t responsible for the behavior, even if it’s illegal or unethical. Somehow they aren’t accountable because a superior directed them to molest, grope, naked-scan, fine, and coerce passengers.

Put yourself in a TSA screeners place. Would you grope passengers because Janet Incompetano told you to?

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:09 PM

I think they should go through it every time they enter the capital building.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:06 PM

There,
I would just like them to pee in a cup and be breathalyzed.

katy the mean old lady on November 19, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Look, as long as the TSA will buy me a drink first and let me light up before I board, I’m good with it.

Aquateen Hungerforce on November 19, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Maybe someone can answer this question. How many foreign countries with flights going to the US have the pat-downs or body scans?

I talked to one friend that said the only place she’s seen pat downs on her travels are in Kuwait.

I’ve talked to several friends from SE Asia that said there are no scanners and there are no pat-downs (as of now).

It would seem that if this is the case, not only are the scanners invasive, but most likely they are a waste of money.

Perhaps we need to defund TSA? Or at least reform it.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:10 PM

Oh yeah, and they have to look me in the eye, so I know they aren’t thinking about someone else.

Aquateen Hungerforce on November 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM

AP,

Am I supposed to have “sympathy” for people who sexually assault American citizens and take porno pics of them for money?

Um… no.

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM

The government needs to maintain a website letting the public where all TSA screeners live. Think of the children.

malclave on November 19, 2010 at 9:08 PM

The TSA Predator List.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:13 PM

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:10 PM

In answer to your question: none.

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:13 PM

U.S. Constitution; 4th Amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized…”

Are we still Americans?! When does the Second Revolution commence? People used to die for these things.

shawk on November 19, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Why not just waterboard all passengers. No permanent physical damage except possible emotional trauma depending on the individual. What’s the difference?

Electrongod on November 19, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Oh yeah, and they have to look me in the eye, so I know they aren’t thinking about someone else.

Aquateen Hungerforce on November 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM

Snort!
And flowers and a phone call the next day.

katy the mean old lady on November 19, 2010 at 9:14 PM

The scary part is that al Qaeda was known to have cargo vessels under their control via intermediaries.

We still, to this day, do not have 100% screening of incoming cargo vessels. I doubt we are even getting to 10% of all cargo incoming via shipping.

Be a heckuva thing to wake up and find good parts of Miami, San Francisco, Boston or any port city of their choosing suddenly vaporize or become irradiated or be ground zero for a nasty toxin or bacteria. And, yes, al Qaeda has been dabbling in all of that as the outbreak of the plague at one of their camps in Algeria will attest to.

This was supposed to be ‘job one’ of security for the Nation.

Nice knowing we put full body scans and pat downs of citizens ahead of losing a good part of a US port and/or its population, no?

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Um… no.

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:11 PM

I’m not sure what I think of TSA given that the government does have responsibility to defend the country; but is TSA really defense and if it is, couldn’t DHS or FBI do their job?

Anyway, weren’t the TSA employees trying to unionize? Or was that the left trying to force them to?

My sympathy is not very deep with these people.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM

I think this entire program is a ridiculous charade that needs to be scrapped in favor of something that actually works. But I would not go so far as to compare TSA agents fondling to Nazi guards helping to enable mass murder. That is just a little bit over the top.

Yeah, but I wonder if any TSA agents have declined to do the intense body searches.

Remember when Obama said: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Just a thought…

Fallon on November 19, 2010 at 9:16 PM

Breaking: Mitt Romney taking an internal poll about this issue! Also may consider commenting on Fed’s criminal QE2 pending longterm outcome! Stand by….

shawk on November 19, 2010 at 9:16 PM

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Don’t read too much into my response to you. Read my other posts in this thread alone. I believe the current groper policy is too much. I only said that because a plane crosses state lines the federal government can claim some kind of authority under the constitution.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM

In answer to your question: none.

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:13 PM

If that’s the case, this whole thing is outrageous. Where are the defense hawks? If what you say is correct, we are invading the privacy of our citizens while most likely turning a blind eye towards the threat from international flights – which btw the underwear bomber was on.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:17 PM

Put yourself in a TSA screeners place. Would you grope passengers because Janet Incompetano told you to?

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Its an impossible question to answer. I would never apply for such a job.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:18 PM

Nice to see Palin leading the way. Nothing against Paul, but Palin has the clout to at least steer the national dialogue.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Its an impossible question to answer. I would never apply for such a job.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:18 PM

Why? I wouldn’t apply not because I believe it’s below me (and of course, full disclosure, I have no interest in working security), but more because I view it as an inefficient agency. What’s your reasoning, out of curiosity?

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:21 PM

It’s occurred to me on more than one occasion that this administration knows there are better and more effective security alternatives out there. But they don’t want better security because it’s control over the masses that matters most. It’s like a strange and dark harbinger of what more will come.

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:22 PM

but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments.

You don’t have to. You aren’t a slave to the gov’t, are you?

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:23 PM

couldn’t DHS or FBI do their job?

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:15 PM

TSA is under DHS.

malclave on November 19, 2010 at 9:25 PM

It would be nice to know how many actual terrorists have been caught by the screeners. That would tell us whether it’s worth it or not.

exhelodrvr on November 19, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Tired of the most of the whining about the TSA screenings. The next time we’re attacked these same folks are going to demand the heads of the TSA people for not being tough enough and letting someone dangerous through a hole.
MikeknaJ on November 19, 2010 at 8:46 PM

No. They will be screaming that the TSA chose to touch our junk randomly rather than a much more effective use of profiling. Isralies do a more effective job without touching anybodys junk.

oddjob1138 on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

this is a case of doing something to promote the “general welfare.”
Congress could act and sort this out.

ted c on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

U.S. Constitution; 4th Amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized…”

shawk on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

I don’t give a rip about their “bills”, AP. When I see a criminal thug sexually molesting my wife, I see exactly that. Why should the fact that they are doing it for money some how make it better?

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

In 30 years as a cop, it was never a full on grab in searching prisoners. And I never missed any weapons. Matter of fact, if I’d used the new and improved TSA technique, my butt would have been in the Internal Affairs office explaining why I should not be charged with sexual assault.

This new ‘search’ is because an ex-FBI agent now running TSA is tired of “tests” in which someone smuggles a weapon through a checkpoint. Guess he figures if the agents really probe, they won’t miss anything.

A better question for Pistole is “Why weren’t they trained correctly in the first place?”

There is also the sneaking suspicion that it was designed to FORCE people to use the full body scanner.

GarandFan on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

Yeah, but I wonder if any TSA agents have declined to do the intense body searches.

Fallon on November 19, 2010 at 9:16 PM

That is a good question. But the TSA employment screening process may prevent anyone with a shred of liberty mindedness from getting hired. That would not surprise me considering who they did hire. Rejects they can easily control.

I read in another of these threads about someone who told a story of a former military man applying for a TSA position. Apparently he was rejected because he was overqualified.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

Hire the Chippendale’s to go with you and when the feelee starts let the boys grind away,maybe a couple of pole dancers, would sure liven up the rest of the day.

Col.John Wm. Reed on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM

Paul makes a great point. Make every single representative and Senator go through the scanners and submit to an enhanced pat-down; make every executive cabinet member do the same.

So sick of these nanny-staters setting rules for the rest of us to live by. They fly in private jets; they have chauffeurs (so they don’t have to worry about not being able to use a cell phone in a car late at night if they’re broken down by the side of the road).

If the sheeple submit to this travesty we’ve abdicated our supposedly unalienable rights and our great heritage as Americans.

Firefly_76 on November 19, 2010 at 9:27 PM

I have an idea!

Instead of seats on a plane, we have ‘pods’. A small Jetsun-like enclosure that each passenger sits in, alone, with their luggage.

The pods are fully enclosed, sound-proof and explosion-proof.

So, no more bad-breath, B.O., screaming babies etc… And if anybody sets a bomb off, you just see a little flash in a pod while another jihadi puree’s himself toward 72 virgins.

Drop the pod off at the next stop for cleaning, and keep flying the friendly skies!

cntrlfrk on November 19, 2010 at 9:27 PM

I have no sympathy for the whining TSA agent.

If you don’t like feeling people’s junk and reaching into their fat rolls, get a new freakin’ job, you pathetic union leach.

IronDioPriest on November 19, 2010 at 9:27 PM

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:18 PM

The interstate commerce clause is a favorite way for the Left to go after State sovereignty. It was not seen as an all-powerful imposition of the federal government upon the States, but was to ensure regularity of trade and to ensure that States would not try to tax each other or exclude each other’s trade. Searches of innocent citizens for travel without suspicion is not part of any mandate given to the federal government.

Air travel is no different than any other form of travel between the States. Perhaps some profiling of those who perform terrorist actions could be done, instead, and leave the innocent public unmolested. As it is the innocent are grabbed because we are afraid to look at the guilty. That is a very strange use of the interstate commerce clause for individuals who are citizens, who are not on federal property and who are not under suspicion of seeking to commit any crime.

It is time for the TSA to go as it is providing a false sense of security, and now even that is gone and we are left with the imposition of power upon our persons.

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:28 PM

TSA is under DHS.

malclave on November 19, 2010 at 9:25 PM

Yeah, OK. I guess what I was thinking is that instead of worrying about hiring gov’t employees to pat people down (private security could work here, too), have DHS (if we have already) do the job of TSA by collecting information on fliers coming in and out.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:30 PM

There is also the sneaking suspicion that it was designed to FORCE people to use the full body scanner.

GarandFan on November 19, 2010 at 9:26 PM
Exactly see Ann Althous on Instapundit.

Col.John Wm. Reed on November 19, 2010 at 9:30 PM

but I have to come back tomorrow, the next day and the day after that to keep hearing these comments.

You don’t have to. You aren’t a slave to the gov’t, are you?

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:23 PM

Exactly. The TSA agent laments that he can’t take the taunts. Aw. Well, take a hint dope. It’s a miserable and disgusting thing to do to people. They’re trapped in a horrible position of having to endure the screeners grope or face a 11K fine. And so they taunt him. Is that surprising?

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:31 PM

Passengers that set off the alarm in the “regular” line must be patted down in airports that do not have the full body scans. There is no other option for them. Many who have complained have been in this situation.

d1carter on November 19, 2010 at 9:33 PM

Why? I wouldn’t apply not because I believe it’s below me (and of course, full disclosure, I have no interest in working security), but more because I view it as an inefficient agency. What’s your reasoning, out of curiosity?

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:21 PM

The one thing in life I would have done differently if I had it to do all over again would be to serve in the military. But beyond that government work holds no interest for me. Law enforcement is not my cup of tea and anything else in the government is a bureaucratic nightmare where you trade ingenuity and freedom for structure and boredom.

I used to be a UAW member working for GM. I quit there because it was a bureaucratic nightmare itself where personal achievement is never rewarded. I can not ever bring myself to work under such conditions again.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:34 PM

DHS – yet another Charlie-Foxtrot given to us because the answer to any problem is a bigger and less efficient and more costly and officious bureaucracy.

Just like the Director of National Intelligence: an added layer for everyone to go through and point fingers at, instead of holding those doing the generating of INTEL accountable.

When you add layers of bureaucracy accountability goes down, costs go up, and power is put into less able and visible hands, and when caught doing something awful those hands then point at each other so no one can track down exactly who ordered what.

Smaller government is more accountable government, less costly government, and more transparent government.

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:35 PM

Exactly. The TSA agent laments that he can’t take the taunts. Aw. Well, take a hint dope. It’s a miserable and disgusting thing to do to people. They’re trapped in a horrible position of having to endure the screeners grope or face a 11K fine. And so they taunt him. Is that surprising?

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:31 PM

Two points,

1) It seems to be suggested that we feel compassion for the poor TSA agents that are forced to do their job. How can TSA employees think that we – the travelers – have a bad attitude about this, when they’re the ones talking about being emotionally damaged from the taunts. The fact that they can’t seem to deal with the (natural) taunts, makes me wonder if they should even keep their job.

2) What would we say to a friend that found themselves working for a “bad” employer? I would encourage them to either try to reform the system or leave. The same should be true for TSA agents.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:36 PM

U.S. Constitution; 4th Amendment:

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized…”

shawk on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Nazi soldiers used the defense that their immoral and injurious behavior was justified because they were just following orders.

All right. Jumpin cheese and rice!

Can we get a little context and perspective here people for rice sakes!

Taking a pair of nail clippers is hardly pulling gold teeth and giving someone a pat down search is hardly the SS leading the Jews off to the gas chambers!

Do some of you people read what you’ve typed before hitting ‘submit’?

Good G-d Almighty!

I’m just as much against this intrusive crap as many of you. But could we tone the hyperbole down to Threat Level Orange at least? I know this is a Herr Doktor thread (kinda) but can we leave the crazy locked up in the attic for a bit?

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

I go home and I cry.

Poor widdle baby. If you don’t like sexually assaulting people, here’s an idea: STOP DOING IT.

Oh, that’s right. You don’t like it so much you’re willing to give up your taxpayer paycheck for the “work” that you do. Oh, wait, I forgot that you can’t really even be fired.

Stop trying to defend these power-tripping community college dropout thugs, AP. Suing a few of them into bankruptcy is the only thing that’s going to put a stop to this lunacy. Once they figure out that they might be actually held responsible when they sexually abuse citizens, watch how quickly they refuse to do it.

CTD on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:28 PM

I agree. Again, my response to you only touched on legal authority. It did not touch in any way on how that authority should be used.

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:34 PM

Thanks for the interesting answer.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

NotCoach on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Legal authority is only the part of it, agreed.

We are not getting security via the TSA. Who stopped the Shoe Bomber? Passengers.

Who stopped the fourth plane on 9/11? Passengers.

Who else has been stopped by passengers? If the effective means of stopping terrorists is passengers, then it is time to get rid of TSA and let the airlines and passengers figure out the best way to protect themselves while traveling. This has the benefit of having a good track record when ‘security’ misses someone. Of course that means having to trust our fellow citizens who aren’t bureaucrats but who do have a vested interest in staying alive.

ajacksonian on November 19, 2010 at 9:40 PM

Palin’s got more balls than the Spalding factory. Not serious, my ass.

The Mega Independent on November 19, 2010 at 9:41 PM

How much junk could Joe Junktoucher touch if Joe Junktoucher could touch junk?

ted c on November 19, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Joe Junktoucher would touch as much junk as Joe Junktoucher could touch junk.

Mirimichi on November 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM

I’m just as much against this intrusive crap as many of you. But could we tone the hyperbole down to Threat Level Orange at least? I know this is a Herr Doktor thread (kinda) but can we leave the crazy locked up in the attic for a bit?

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

I wouldn’t go so far as to say TSA agents are guilty of starting a second Holocaust, but I think what’s really disturbing is that the pat downs aren’t that far from pat downs that German citizens would have had to go through when leaving Germany – for fear of them smuggling gold or goods out of the country. I could be wrong with my historical facts, but I did think that the German gov’t at the time had some intrusive “screening” procedures.

These procedures are being enacted – for who knows what reasons – and there doesn’t seem to be a clear line where they stop. The second TSA starts doing random cavity searches, I will stop flying and you’ll see the airline industry crash.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM

Paul makes a great point. Make every single representative and Senator go through the scanners and submit to an enhanced pat-down; make every executive cabinet member do the same.

Firefly_76 on November 19, 2010 at 9:27 PM

Because you expect them to do what, exactly?

If your answer is anything other than said pol going through the procedures and coming out the other side going, “Why, I don’t see what all the fuss is about…” then perhaps you should rethink that statement.

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM

I believe along these lines
one must defer to the authority of…

hold…hold…hold…

Undercover Boss!!

In this episode, Senators and Representatives take to the airports in random congressional districts and States to play the part of TSA screeners!

It’ll be a fun show as we follow the training of each member in:

-how to tell junk from junk.
-when is a pat down a “love pat”?
-the difference between a “full”-johnson and a “half”-johnson.
-how to smoother the cries of toddlers.
-where the blind spots in camera angles are.

And more!!!!

OkieDoc on November 19, 2010 at 9:45 PM

If something doesn’t change in the next two weeks I don’t know how much longer I can withstand this taunting. I go home and I cry. I am serving my country, I should not have to go home and cry after a day of honorably serving my country.

Buddy, I feel your pain. No, wait, that’s your hands on my stuff.

Listen up, champ. You are violating the Fourth Amendment, and getting paid to do it. Ergo, you are NOT honorably serving your country. You are serving those who would take her over and turn her into a fascist state. Find another line of work, before you become one of them.

manwithblackhat on November 19, 2010 at 9:46 PM

TSA workers are basically people who couldn’t make it at McDonalds.

csdeven on November 19, 2010 at 8:44 PM

They do have that…sort of…aura. But for all that, they are just like us. Since Allahpundit offered anecdotal evidence, I will too. At Burbank I was waiting for a ride outside and ducked into some (nook? cranny?) for an illicit cigarette. Moments later I realized that I was sharing the nook with another smoker, a hostile looking McDonalds-looking TSA agent. I looked her in the eye and thanked her for the job she was doing. The young woman practically went faint with relief and gratitude.

She knows there is a problem with what she does as an individual. She is still young enough that she hasn’t learned to suppress her natural aversion to it and cover the breach with overarching arrogance and callousness.

The problem is always, always, always with the collective.

RushBaby on November 19, 2010 at 9:47 PM

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM

I don’t disagree with you and your facts are correct.

What some people here are missing is a bit of context.

I wrote about it in the Glenn Beck mystery missile thread and I’ll write it again here:

As Benjamin Franklin said: “Passion governs, and she never governs wisely.”

The kind of remarks I highlighted don’t do anything to further debate, just inflame people’s passions. Negatively I might add.

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:47 PM

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:37 PM

Calm down. Did you even read the rest of the post or did you just cherry pick because you needed someone to beat up? Go back and read what I said at 9:09 P.M. or STFU.

anXdem on November 19, 2010 at 9:48 PM

The kind of remarks I highlighted don’t do anything to further debate, just inflame people’s passions. Negatively I might add.

catmman on November 19, 2010 at 9:47 PM

Maybe. I just don’t like it when people will say, “Oh, don’t even compare that to the Nazis because Nazis killed people.” Well, the Nazis did more than just kill. They stripped their citizens of any independence. They elevated the State. Took away God. &c.

Now, that said, I don’t think that’s what you were doing.

MeatHeadinCA on November 19, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Even profiling, while justified, is unnecessary given the room for improvement in screening procedures.

Ortzinator on November 19, 2010 at 9:53 PM

The problem is we don’t profile because we are politically correct and that it what going to kill us.

djohn669 on November 19, 2010 at 9:53 PM

Why not grope people for a wage?

Read the job posting at TSA’s website.

Inanemergencydial on November 19, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3