TSA…. Don’t Touch My Junk

Just a quick word of apology for not offering new material Sunday night as I had planned to do. We had a bit of a family crisis on Sunday/Monday and lost a family member early this morning, so things have been a little hectic. Add to that the fact that I got word of the passing about 5 minutes before I departed for my first day of work at the new job, and you can imagine the type of day that I have had. After no sleep last night I am simply exhausted, so I am going to attempt to crawl into bed and actually get some sleep. I will plan on doing the open mic tomorrow night, but there is the possibility that I will not be able to do it until the next night. I didn’t want to leave nothing to discuss for Tuesday so I found an article that I thought was interesting. I will save commenting on the article myself until I am more focused tomorrow. But I certainly look forward to hearing what everyone else has to say about it. The story is about the “Don’t Touch My Junk” guy with the TSA. I will also add the video at the bottom so that folks can see that as well. I will add my thoughts as soon as I am able. But I will say up front that I love that he said, “If you were anyone but the federal government this would be considered sexual assault.”

DHS Chief Says Abandoning Airport Scanners Would Be “Irresponsible”; CA Man Warns TSA Not To “Touch My Junk,” Becomes Online Hit

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Monday vehemently defended her department’s use of advanced imaging technologies and pat-downs at U.S. airports, saying to do otherwise would be “irresponsible” and that passengers who don’t like it can “travel by some other means.”

The metal detectors that “everybody’s used to” went into place in the 1960s, and, “It would be unwise to say the least … not to evolve our technology to match the changing threat environment that we inhabit,” she said.

This comes two days after a California wan was forced to leave San Diego’s airport for refusing to let security officers use full-body imaging or pat him down, telling them, “If you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.” At the same time, critics have launched an “opt out” campaign online, calling on those traveling the day before Thanksgiving to refuse full-body imaging, which would force Transportation Security Administration agents across the country to give pat-downs and, critics say, would let Americans “see for themselves how the TSA treats law-abiding citizens.”

“The government should not have the ability to virtually strip search anyone it wants without cause,” says the website OptOutDay.com. “We do not believe the government has a right to see you naked or aggressively touch you just because you bought an airline ticket.”

Napolitano, however, said she “really regrets” such calls for an “Opt Out Day,” insisting such full-body scanners “in no way resemble electronic strip searches” and travelers should “be realistic and use our common sense.”

“This is just the next generation of travel security,” she told reporters during a press conference at Ronald Reagan National Airport outside Washington. She said authorities have looked closely at “how can we best protect security and protect privacy, and keep those passenger lines moving — all of which are values that have been expressed to us by the traveling public.”

Specifically, she said, people scanned by imaging technologies with no “pings” are “done” in “about the same” time as those who go through metal detectors. Their images are only seen “in a private area, away from the gate,” and those images are “neither retained nor transmitted,” Napolitano said. But, if there is “a ping,” that “tells an officer where they need to search,” and such officers are “really the last line of protection we have for the aircraft,” according to Napolitano.

“We built privacy screens into the machines, we built privacy concerns into the procedures when they were deployed,” she said. “The [advanced imaging] machines have been in development for quite a long time, since before [the failed Christmas Day attack] . All we have done now is to accelerate their deployment. Why did we do that? Because our evaluation of the intelligence and risk indicated that we needed to move more quickly into the non-metal environment, to get [potentially dangerous] liquids and powders and gels off of aircraft.”

Those who “refuse” advanced imaging machines “can go to a separate area for a same-gender pat-down, which is conducted as a law enforcement pat-down should be, in a very professional way,” according to Napolitano.

Critics of the latest procedures, though, have been vocal, and online video of the California man’s encounter at San Diego International Airport has been viewed by hundreds of thousands. 31-year-old John Tyner recorded much of the incident on his cell phone.

When he arrived at the airport early Saturday morning, Tyner had already read extensively about full-body imaging machines and “the possible harm to health as well as the vivid pictures they create of people’s naked bodies,” according to a posting on his blog. So when TSA agents directed him to one such machine, Tyner refused, prompting one TSA agent to tell him he would have to undergo a pat-down.

“After he described the pat down, I realized that he intended to touch my groin,” Tyner wrote on his blog within hours of the incident. “Before he started the pat down, I looked him straight in the eye and said, ‘If you touch my junk, I’ll have you arrested.'”

When another TSA employee intervened, “I stated that I would not allow myself to be subject to a molestation as a condition of getting on my flight,” according to Tyner, who said he feels the government took away his rights after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Authorities subsequently told Tyner he couldn’t leave the airport without completing the screening because he “may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined,” Tyner wrote on his blog. And, authorities told him, he could face a civil lawsuit and a $10,000 if he left before the screening was completed, according to Tyner.

As for “Opt Out Day,” organizers say many Americans “only fly around the holidays and may not be aware of the security changes.”

“Once people are made aware of what is happening, they may have reservations about the new virtual strip searches and enhanced pat downs – especially for their children or spouse or other loved one,” OptOutDay.com says. “This country needs security measures in place that not only keep us safe but also do not grossly violate privacy or constitute an unreasonable search, like the current protocol.”

On Monday, Napolitano said TSA and her department are acting responsibly “with good intelligence, with risk-based analysis,” and with partners around the world, but DHS can’t be the only ones working to protect citizens.

“Look, everybody has a role to play,” she said. “And if people don’t want to play that role, if they want to travel by some other means, of course that’s their right. This is the United States, of course they have that right. But again, this is all being done as a process to make sure that the traveling public is safe.”

She said efforts by websites like OptOutDay.com amount to saying, “Well, we don’t want to be a part of that. We don’t want to play a part of security.”

Napolitano was joined at Reagan National Airport by TSA Administrator John Pistole and other top law enforcement officials as they announced expansion of the “See Something, Say Something” campaign, which urges travelers to notify authorities of any suspicious activity they may see.

“Look, we know the threats are real,” said Pistole, who spent more than 27 years at the FBI before joining Napolitano’s department as head of TSA. “Whether it’s 19 individuals with box cutters, an individual with a shoe bomb, whether it’s individuals with explosives in liquids, whether it’s an individual with explosives in his underwear, or cargo threats, we know that the threats are real. So what steps can we prudently take to make sure that the traveling public is safe?”

Asked about concerns over exposure to radiation from advanced imaging technologies, Napolitano said such concerns are unfounded, insisting the effects of full-body imaging machines “have been examined six ways to Sunday” by the entities such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Johns Hopkins University and the U.S. Science and Standards Association. They found that the radiation involved is “almost immeasurable, it is so small,” she said, adding that the exposure is equivalent to “about two minutes worth of being” on a plane, where passengers are routinely exposed to “miniscule” amounts of radiation.

Nevertheless, Napolitano said, if “adjustments” to the latest procedures need to be made, “We have an open ear, we will listen.”

See the Original Article Here: http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/15/dhs-chief-says-abandoning-airport-scanners-would-be-irresponsible-ca-man-warns-tsa-not-to#ixzz15PQ24c72


  1. Murphy's Law says:


    I have not had time to do more than skim this article, so I will reserve any comments about it for later. I just want to say I’m sorry for the loss in your family. You and your family are in my thoughts….

    also, I was unable to post last week on Veteran’s Day, so this is a belated thank you to you (and all those on this blog who are veterans) for your service- though I think every day is a good day to thank a veteran. You guys and gals are the best.


  2. Remember this fact;

    The whole mess was started by the airlines trying to stop people from flying on other people’s tickets.

    The airlines did not want to pay or act as their own policeman and anger their customers, so they created a “security” problem and had the government mandate a check of ID etc.

    Unintended consequences = today.

    It is pointless to yell at the DHS or the government – they are deaf, dumb, violent, irrational, and dangerous.

    Yell at the airlines – hitting the airlines bottom line – getting under the airlines skin – that is where this stuff will be stopped.

    Do not fly. Take the train. Tell the airlines you will not fly and will take the train until THEY fix THEIR problem.

    “Keep your hands off my junk!”

    • Napalitano is also the one who said “the system worked” last Christmas. Uh, no it didn’t and it’s not looking like this system is going to work either.

      Paraphrasing: Any pings and you’ll be patted down in a professional manner. From what I saw on TV they were feeling every curve..not patting them down.

      We could all protest by wearing full Muslim headscarves..they get a pass.

      Don’t even LOOK at my junk! 👿

    • Bottom Line says:

      Yeah, lets boycott the airlines so they experience serious financial trouble and/or go bankrupt, thus prompting more bailouts.

      “Your papers please” have turned into “lemme see you naked or feel your crotch”

      Say, isn’t American Fascism swell!

    • Bottom Line says:

      My replies keep getting lost when posting on SUFA lately, then when I try to re-post, I get a wordpress duplicate post error screen telling me that I’ve already said that…but it never shows up later. Perhaps it has something to do with my posting on other wordpress blogs under a different name.

      My above explanation makes it not a duplicate and it’s a good thing I copied in anticipation…

      My reply(again):

      Yeah, lets boycott the airlines so they experience serious financial trouble and/or go bankrupt, thus prompting more bailouts.

      “Your papers please” have turned into “lemme see you naked or feel your crotch”

      Say, isn’t American Fascism swell!

    • My wife works for an airline and I think that is ridiculous. Both the airlines TSA has been able to stop someone going through security with a different name on the ticket for years, you don’t need a body scan or pat down to know if they are the person who bought the ticket.

      If this is going to keep me and my family safe, I will gladly go through a body scanner.

  3. USW

    A direct response to your direct question: “What Do You Think of this Guy’s Stance?”

    I think his stance is far to narrow. Will have no luck at Minneapolis Airport.

    Sorry my friend, couldn’t resist.

    Also sorry for your loss. My thoughts are with you and your family. Call if you need help.


  4. post for comments

  5. I’d like to present a small silver lining to the creation of the Leftist police state. Look at it this way. The GOP is gaining power. They will not dismantle the police state. However, they won’t hesistate to use it against their political opponents. And whom might those opponents be? Why the marxists in power and their supporters thtough out the country. Our liberal friends are putting all the controls in place that the Republican will need to round them up, convict, and then imprison them! All that we need to do is help the GOP take control of the liberal created police state, and then use it to eliminate the liberals! Careful what you wish for, Obama-Bots. Yeah, we’ll still be stuck with a police state but at least we won’t have to put up with those nasty leftists because they’ll all be in FEMA camps, convicted of treason! I’ll be voting accordingly. Have an ObamaDay Liberals. :o)

    • I like that line of thinking. Palin? You? The sky is falling 🙂

      • I figure WTF, we’re going down anyway. I might as well get a little satisfaction and inflict some payback on all those dumb motherf*ckers who love Obama. Payback’s a bitch, and her name is Palin. Take that you f*cking stoopid liberals…..

        • I guess that answers my question 8)

          • I don’t think we’re a gonna make it ’till 2012. But I support Palin also. If only to piss off the Progressives.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Nooooooooooooooo! Actually, Yeeeeessssssss! Nominating Palin: there’s one way to ensure another 4-yrs of Obama!

              • Methinks you have misunderstood. I didn’t say to nominate her for President. I wouldn’t do that to her.

                If she ran for President, some Progressive peckerheads would make slanderous and untrue comments about her trying to humiliate her. They would dig into every orifice she owned looking for ANYTHING to get het out of the race. Because they are terrified of her. That is YOUR problem Buck. You are terrified that she might actually win if she ran. If you weren’t you wouldn’t make comments like you do.

                I don’t want her to run because it might ruin her as a fine person that she is now. The office would FORCE her to compromise some of her principles, which would make her a lesser person.

                • Buck the Wala says:

                  The prospect of her as President does terrify me, because she is completely unqualified for the job.

                  • Yeah I know what you mean. 2 unqualified Presidents in a row may be a bit much.

                    Obama has already shown how much damage can be done by somone being President who has absolutely NO freakin’ idea what they are doing! 😀

                  • HAHAHAHAHA!
                    I’m going to enjoy watching Leftist go into meltdown when Sarah takes control of the police state…

                  • Buck,

                    because she is completely unqualified for the job

                    Pray tell, who is qualified to run your life?

            • LOL! Great minds think alike. A shirt that says “Payback’s a bitch and her name is Palin” might just be in order next election cycle!

  6. Bottom Line says:


    I offer my condolences to you and yours, and appreciate you writing in spite of having such a day.

  7. Bottom Line says:

    WTF! My replies keep getting lost!

  8. Sounds like not too many have done international travelling. Bogota, Colombia…pat down search and it is all male searchers.. Rio de Janiero…pat down search’s all male. Beijing, China…pat down search’s of all Americans and Euopeans. Pat down search’s on train ride to Great Wall…Tokyo, Yakota, and Socorro, Japan…pat down search’s and all male. Lisbon, Portugal….pat down search’s all male….Rome and Napoli, Italy…pat down search’s all male…..the list goes on. Most countries profile with common regularity. And ALL OF THESE pre 9-11. So, we are not the first and will not be the last.

    If you do not like pat downs, the answer is quite simple. Do not fly. Take the train or boat. The only problem I have with it is touching me when I do not want to be touched. I do not care about scanners and being naked on screen,….who really gives a damn. So, don;t want your junk touched…..don’t fly. BF is right….hit the pocket book….but, personally, lack of adequate screening means that I will also not fly…..my choice.

    I expect to get pat down search’s in foreign countries. I expect to be searched. I do not like it but that is the way it is. My significant other has been “patted down” many times in different countries. So, now it is here. You have the choice.

    • Buck the Wala says:

      D13 – you’re absolutely right in that such pat downs have been standard practice in many countries both pre- and post-9/11. Unfortunately it has become one of the costs of flying. But let’s not confuse this for adequate security either. While some security clearing is reasonable, this does go beyond that line. Look at the world’s most secure airline – El Al. Given they receive the (to me, minimal) benefit of such pat downs, however they conduct an interview of each passenger by trained security officials before those passengers even go through airport security.

      Also, trains and boats (at least in this county) usually do not present viable alternatives to flying.

      • Agreed on all points….and I did not say I liked it at all but it is reality. Only you can make a determination for yourself if the pat downs are over the line. For many it is and for many it is not. It is a personal choice. Viable transportation alternatives or not….it is still your choice. If I wish to fly and I know in advance some person is gonna grab the jewels….then I have a decision to make. That’s all.

        Yes, El Al has very good security…..and they are NOT politically correct. But if we were to adopt the El Al policy in the UNitesd States…..think of the screaming then.

      • Buck,

        Home run sir. I thought Bush screwed the pooch when he did not request assistance from Israel on airline security. We would have had effective security within weeks. Instead, we have done what Washington always does, throw common sense out, throw money at the problem. Have a bunch of conferences at five star hotels(but not in Arizona).

        Napolitano should be fired, and if Bush were Pres. the media would have been relentless(consider how the FEMA director was treated after Katrina).

        I also wonder how much damage a “shoe bomb” could do to a plane at 35,000′? I think it would only be effective if placed properly. And are there portable explosives out there that a passenger can smuggle on board that bring down a plane, or is it a myth?


        • LOI,

          Re: Shoe Bomb

          …to the plane? Not much.

          To the person’s foot, it will be blown off with part of his leg.

          To the adjacent passengers, maybe injury from flying toes of the bomber.


          Planes are very resilient. A hole won’t do much other than make the cabin a bit colder and noisier.

        • LOI,

          There is always a potential to do “something” critical to risk an airplane.

          If a small electrical fire in a VCR can cause the crash of a jet liner (Swiss Air), anything is possible.

          But likely??? No.

          Given the number of flights and all that goes “wrong” – planes are simply not that fragile. They fly along at 600 mph hitting birds and go right on. The forces on a plane in turbulence @ 600 mph are incredible. Landing a 300 ton plane @ 200 mph – the impact with the ground – is shattering.

          Yet…the plane is just fine.

          If the threats were so significant, planes would have been falling from the sky in the hundreds a long time ago. They didn’t.

      • I can’t believe it Buck. You and I are in agreement! Has Hell frozen over?

      • Buck,

        Re: Train

        What’s your hurry??

        If the only people who have to fly is business travelers, the airlines will go bankrupt.

        Business travel is way down – video conferencing is growing leaps and bounds and eliminating much of the need of travel.

        • Buck the Wala says:

          Not necessarily in a hurry, but if I want to head out west for an extended weekend, can’t exactly take the train. If I want to head to Europe or Asia, definitely can’t take the train. Even if I wanted to head down to DC for the weekend and not drive, taking the shuttle is often about the same price as the Acela and much much faster.

          If the only people who have to fly is business travelers, the airlines will go bankrupt. True, but that’ll never be the case and you know it – if I’m taking a week vacation, I’m not going to be stuck on a train for two or three days out of the short time I have.

        • Buck the Wala says:

          Not necessarily about being in a hurry to get somewhere, but if I decide to head out west for an extended weekend, can’t exactly take the train. If I’m going away for longer, do I really want to spend a substantial amount of time sitting on a train to get there?

          If I’m going abroad, definitely can’t take the train. Even if just heading down to DC for a weekend, the shuttle can be about the same price as the Acela.

          • Buck the Wala says:

            Hmm…that’s weird…didn’t post at first so rewrote, didn’t post again so went to sleep and now both posts are up…

  9. “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -Benjamin Franklin.

    “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.” -4th Amendment to the US Constitution

    Either we are a nation of liberty or a nation of tyranny. This situation indicates we are closer to tyranny than we are to liberty.

    • Agreed Swamp Fox. We’re definitely closer to tyranny. The worst part of it is that most Americans want it that way.

      Where in the constitution does it say all rights are null and void on aircraft?? What will the people say when these are x-ray devises are at the courthouses (some already are), the mall, the bank, the movie theater, etc? What about the roving vans? Now, think about our liberal nannies wanting to outlaw all kinds of things they say are terrible for us and expensive for our Obama given health care. Will salt be outlawed? (see NYC) What about food the hasn’t been FDA approved? ( see S510) Right wing literature? How about those RFID chips for school children? You know, just to know where they are at all times and ‘keep them safe’. Will we decide the government needs to RFID everyone so we can ‘be safe’? Where does it end? How does creating a high tech version of the East German police state make us safe? Will you be safe when that midnight arrest takes place because your neighbor wanted an extra gasoline ration and claimed you said something subversive?

  10. A Puritan Descendant says:

    Constitution wise, is this an unreasonable search? I don’t think so with possible terror threats, but you may have a different opinion. You do have the option to be patted down if concerned about radiation.

    I tend to agree with Napolitano’s comment > “Look, everybody has a role to play,” she said. “And if people don’t want to play that role, if they want to travel by some other means, of course that’s their right. This is the United States, of course they have that right. But again, this is all being done as a process to make sure that the traveling public is safe.”

    The part of all this I don’t like is being told that if you refuse both the radiation and the pat down, you then can’t leave until they at least pat you down. Not sure what the solution for that is other than avoid airlines once you are educated in what you are going to have to submit to.

    Rainy day here, guess I will go bottle cider, Later

    • Puritan says: “you then can’t leave until they at least pat you down.”

      D13 says: I have heard this but I have seen no confirmation of this…did I miss it somewhere?

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        GM Colonel, from the above article >

        “Authorities subsequently told Tyner he couldn’t leave the airport without completing the screening because he “may have an incendiary device and whether or not that was true needed to be determined,” Tyner wrote on his blog. And, authorities told him, he could face a civil lawsuit and a $10,000 if he left before the screening was completed, according to Tyner.”

    • I definitely agree that travelling by plane is not a right. However, I have trouble with the fact that by choosing to travel by plane, we give up our right to being searched by either pat down or full body scan. I just don’t see where simply choosing to fly equates to probable cause.

      In my mind, the type of searches they are performing equate to an unreasonable search when it is performed on someone that is a law abiding citizen.

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        I ‘think’ the probable cause only applies to warrants, but only ‘IF’ I am reading it correctly. ???

      • Swamp….let’s do away with TSA and take the government completely out….and D13 Airlines decides it wants to screen and pat down passengers as a seciruty precaution not only to protect passengers but to protect my millions in investment…and you say???????

        • If the government is removed from the equation regarding provision of security, then the consumer (the paying passengers) decide how much security is necessary. If the airlines don’t provide sufficient security, then they lose business.

          The chief role of the government in all this would be to ensure individual liberties are not being violated. I’m afraid as it stands now, the government views their role as one to ensure security while turning a blind eye to individual liberty. The way I view things, this runs counter to the main role of the US government.

          • Agreed…and if the private company goes too far…simply do not use them. You do not need government mandated individual liberty protection.

          • Swamp Fox,

            The chief role of the government in all this would be to ensure individual liberties are not being violated

            Not to hijack the thread …. I have to address the thinking here, however.

            When one posits such a role for any entity -to avoid irrationality- one must also contemplate the essence of the role.

            If one claims an entity’s “chief role” – one has to determine if this role is aligned with the basis or core principles of such an entity.

            If it is not, you are asking the Devil to perform Jesus miracles.

            Questions need to be answered, such as:
            -who determines rights?
            -who determines what violates rights?
            -who determines the response to the violation to rights?

            • Thanks for the questions.
              “-who determines the rights?”
              I was thinking of the unalienable rights endowed by the Creator. In my mind the government has no authority to determine rights, only defend those rights each individual has naturally. When the government gets into determining rights, it is treading into waters it has no business treading.

              Thinking aloud here: I suppose, in that same vein, one has to ask: If the government has no authority to determine rights, should they really have any authority to determine what violates said rights, or the response to such violation. I think I get where you are going here.

  11. In my business I deal with flight kitchens. Couple months post 9/11 a sleeper cell was pulled right out of one of the kitchens that I’ve been in daily for 20 years. Security in that building?..a retred security guard who can barely walk. Those workers have total access to the cabins of the planes. I’ll be more settled about a pat down when the support crew gets the same treatment.

  12. USW….I was remiss earlier…please accept heart felt condolences…..I stand ready to assist if needed.

  13. Good Morning All 🙂

    First and foremost, I’d like to pass on my condolences to the USW family for their recent loss.

    Now, one whackjob “Muslim” tries to blow up his shoe on a plane, now everyon who flys must remove their shoes. ONE “muslim” tries to blow up his “junk” and we have body scanners, soon to be for everyone. So, that means that the government is here to protect US, from US, but there is but one common denomitator to this puzzle, and it’s not Grandma Kettle that we need to be concerned with. Political correctness is a flippin joke.

    I say that racial profiling should be encouraged, then we wouldn’t be talking about this. Let those who fit the profile take the damn train. The TSA should be disbanned, and like BF said, let the airlines worry about the safety of their million dollar aircraft.


  14. 1) The security measures in airports are still highly ineffective to a creative threat. The only thing they catch

    are the stupid ones and the pranksters. As such, it is not worth the negative aspects. Having been through airport

    security and seen a variety of ways I could still hi-jack or bring down a plane while simultaneously being appalled

    by the violation of privacy and individual rights, I feel airport security is more than just a security blanket

    that is worth the effort to keep people calm.

    2) The items restricted make almost no sense at all.

    3) The playing on fear to justify what they do is both an abomination and par for the course.

    4) The fact that the FDA has inspected and tested the scanners 6 ways from Sunday does not give me any confidence

    at all. Health risks are not on my top ten list for reasons to get rid of scanners, but FDA approval and assurances

    might put them there.

    5) If airlines were doing this on their own, that would be one thing. A company has the right to work out whatever

    level of interaction with their customers that they want. This is not something the airports are doing voluntarily.

    It is a private company being forced to be vile by the government and its regulations.

    6) The costs of security far outweigh the risks of not having it. People can travel another way if they dont like

    the security. That is true. However, people can also travel another way if they don’t like the risks that they

    perceive to exist in the absence of security. Leave it to the market. Why is it that the government can say “like

    or leave it”, but if a private company does that its all evil and stuff. For you statists out there, how does the

    government saying “deal with it, or find another means” get a pass, but a business saying that is the primary

    excuse for more regulation? It’s mindblowing.

    • Yes sireee……like I was telling Buck…El Al has the best security out there but try to do that here…..and the screaming would be loud and clear.

      Leave it to the private companies….and let the people decide.

    • The truth is that people are dumb. Americans, in particular, are reactionary panicky animals who are completely subsumed by their knee-jerk responses to any perceived “threat.”

      3,000 people died in 9/11. There are 300mm people in America. Your odds therefore are 1 in 100,000. My odds are several times worse that I’ll get killed in a dear-strike accident in my car (except that Common Man is doing a good job thinning the heard).

      If we put a fraction of the energy we put into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq into wiping out deer, I promise you they’d be extinct by now.

      But terrorism is flashy and grabs our attention. And it’s unpredictability makes us feel vulnerable and scared. We don’t like to feel scared. So we take action! But, er, we don’t really have anything we can reasonably do.. don’t matter, take action!

      And thus the upped airport security. Not because it works, but because it makes people feel like they’re safer. They’ve surrendered their rights, privacy, and convenience for the illusion of safety.

      So, as I said: People. Are. Dumb.

      • Common Man says:


        You and I have kind of had this conversation in the past. “People are Dumb”. If you mean ‘dumb’ in the sense that they are passively ignorant, then I agree. If you mean they lack intelligence or moronic, then I disagree.

        I think the general population are just too self-absorbed and lazy. Additionally, they are also very well ‘conditioned’, as that has been a progressing effort of the government for some 50+ years.

        Although there are more and more waking up each day, there are a great many who believe that the government should do things, regulate, protect, restrict and establish guide lines. I see this mostly in those between 18 – 40 years of age, with a larger percentage comparably between 18 and 25. That age group has been subjected to far more conditioning, and for most of their lives.

        I have a neice that is a kind and delightful soul. She is well educated, honest and a hard worker, but she has a warped sense of how the government should operate. That is the result of being raised in a ‘liberal’ environment. Both her parents are in the medical profession, devote church-goers, voted for obama, and do a great deal of charity. Now, none of that is neccesarily wrong, but their, and her life-structure have ‘educated’ them to believe things like:

        -Universial health care via the government because people won’t provide for others unless they are forced to do so.
        -Those who make more should be forced to contribute to charity or pay higher taxes so that those less fortunate can be supported.
        -If you are not a Christan, your doomed to hell
        -Bill Clinton was a great president
        -Unions are needed to keep management from taking advantage of workers
        -We need more government regulations to ensure everyone is treated equally

        I guess my point is that I think people are more conditioned than dumb. And if we look at them in that way we might be able to re-educate them.


        • Ignorance is temporary,
          Stupid is forever.

          I mean dumb in both senses you mention. Specifically, I think that they are short sighted, but it has also been my experience that many people simply lack the raw brain power to grasp the reality of the world they live in.

          As to your liberal family, I happen to agree with many of the things you say they believe. Some I reject. But here’s the million dollar question: what proof do you have that you are right and they are wrong? What proof do they have that they are right and you are wrong?

          In the absence of proof, we’re all just using our best guesses.

          • I haven’t spent much time at SUFA lately. As I read your posts I keep having the same thought. Where is the real Mathuis, and what have you done with him?

            Has something changed?


            • He’s here. He’s still a liberal.

              But he believes in cost-benefit analysis. And he does not believe the costs of “enhanced security screenings” etc are warranted given their effectiveness and odds against their being needed.

              It’s like requiring everyone to walk around with lightning rods in case they get struck by lightning. It’s preposterous (and it wouldn’t work anyway without proper grounding).

              The math doesn’t add up, so Mathius rejects it.

              But if you’re worried about what happened to the “real” Mathius, take a look at yesterday’s article where he advocated for a 60% top marginal tax rate.

              • That’s the only way the progressive message can work-you must look at each individual case of taking away our freedoms separately and argue that it’s okay because it’s just this small amount. Have you ever looked at the whole picture and combined the overall cost. You and others of your age, will in the end decide what this country will become-you better choose wisely.

          • Mathius,

            that many people simply lack the raw brain power to grasp the reality of the world they live

            I completely disagree.

            It has been my experience that exactly opposite is the case.

            People have all the ability and brain power – they are human with human brains after all.

            It is the desire to do so that may be lacking – and for most, with good reasons.

            People are concerned about themselves and their small 150 member “family and friends” – and no one can stretch much past that without some really “heavy thinking”.

            Such takes time as well as effort – and time is a resource that is not renewable. If you spend time and effort “here” you cannot spend time and effort “there”.

            People have to choose what is important to them, and ignore everything else.

            When these “other things” become important, it often comes when the Person is unprepared for them – hence, they have to work out of their paradigms and rote.

            We must be very forgiving towards our fellows – as well as cautious regarding their unthoughtful opinions.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              Not to put words in Mathius’ mouth, but I believe the formula is as follows:

              Individuals are smart.
              People are dumb.

              Individuals are selfless.
              People are greedy.

              Etc. etc. etc.

              At least that’s how I’ve always seen it.

              • nope.. not really.

                It’s true that none of us is as dumb as all of us, but individuals are generally quite stupid, quite greedy, and quite lazy.

                Not everyone. But on average.

            • Flag, I’d hazard a guess that you are somewhat above average intelligence. I suspect that you, despite our disagreements, hold a similar opinion of me.

              Intelligence is a mult-faceted thing and there are geniuses in math who can’t put together a simple sentence. Genius here, idiot there. Try to average it up and it becomes somewhat meaningless, I know.

              Still, when you look at a “normal person,” they’re closer to a dolphin than they are to you and me or the other denizens of SUFA.

              It’s true that People. Are. Lazy. But that only exacerbates the problem. They are also dumb, and that’s the real root of the problem.

              Evolution didn’t design us to think about the world and contemplate the nature of reality or the broad sweeping forces that affect our lives. It designed us to be smarter than our food and smarter than the things that consider us food. Most people meet that goal.. barely.

              You and I, and USW, and Buck, and Cyndi, and D13, and JAC, and DPM, and the rest.. we’re outliers by more than one sigma. In your case, probably three. We are not “normal.”

              • Good Grief Matt-have you ever heard the phrase “to smart for your own good”. Have you ever considered that maybe you are the one who has been manipulated. Manipulated into believing that some how those who are smarter have the right to DICTATE to those they believe are less than they are. This attitude has lead to a lot of horrific goings on in the history of this world. I consider myself “normal” and I don’t think I am so stupid that some group of elites should be able to control me or anyone else.

                • I don’t necessarily believe that either – though I don’t agree that you’re normal.. I’ve had enough conversations with you to have a higher opinion of you than that.

                  There’s more to life than brains, but brains are the reason humans are the dominant species on this planet. Brains are the reason why we, not the velociraptors, are at the top of the food chain.

                  Brains are the reason we have the internet and aren’t hunting and gathering. We would be foolish to discount their value.

                  • Matt, as smart as you are-you miss the point-it has nothing to do with whether I am normal, or above normal-it has to do with people deciding that they are smarter and thus worth more than those who they think are stupid-this attitude leads to things like sterilizing people-letting people die because they aren’t really contributing to society-I am talking extremes but our history are full of these extremes. I do not believe that you support such horrors but your attitude leads to these types of horrors. I know I am being a little harsh but I find your thought processes on this are dangerous. As far as you may not believe that either-that is exactly what you said. People are dumb so the elite should make the decisions-where did I misunderstand you? Or do you just not like the implications of where your attitude can lead.

                    • I’m pretty sure I never said smart people are worth more. Just that their opinions are generally worth more.

                      We ignore the lessons of history at our peril and I know all about the ways this thought process has been hijacked, misapplied, or turned to evil. I approve of none of it.

                      But it is a fallacy to think that, all men (and women) are created equally in terms of brain power. And, while I don’t suggest the elite should make all the decisions without input from the non-elites, I do think that the elites are generally better equipped to make decision on a macro scale.

          • Common Man says:


            I don’t have an issue with my family members contributing to charity or encouraging their children to do aa well. I do have a problem with them indicating that others should do also and that the government should regulate/enforce such behaivor.

            I also have aproblem with like minded people telling those who act or believe differently that they need to conform.

            Believing people are stupid pre-determines your effort and determination to educate them. Therefore they are either left behind or provided little information.

            In time that position may very well leave you the last Pirate standing in world of Buccaneers.


            • I don’t think that we should not educate some people based on IQ.. that’s not it at all. I think everyone should be educated to the highest extent feasible.

              However, I think that some people need to be CEOs and some people need to be janitors. And if we’re going to try to make good decisions, we’re better off listening to the guy using the executive washroom rather than the guy cleaning it.

              But we’ve gotten somewhat sidetracked from my original point which is that the teaming masses don’t care if the “fixes” actually work as long as they can sleep better at night believing they do – this is dumb.

              • Common Man says:

                No, it is not stupidity, it is conditioning combined with self-absorbtion.

                I won’t argue that we expect certain people to have answers to certain questions, or solutions to problems, like doctors, lawyers, teachers, bankers, etc. But this is not a measure of intelligence, it is a measure of conditioning and training.

                People are by nature just as easy to condition as dogs, cats or cattle. How they are conditioned is the key to their contribution or the lack of it.

                You don’t hunt, but I can promise you that if you were to spend 1 deer season with me, do what I say and learn what I teach you then you too could successfully harvest a deer or two.

                And you can’t argue that it is a level of intelligence, because I can do the same for a 12 year old or a mentally handicapped person. I know I have successfully trained (conditioned) both examples.

                The majority of the masses are, as you say ‘content’, but that is because the masses have been conditioned to be that way.

                We have seen a huge awakening in the last 2 years of people starting to question and think for themselves, it just took a couple of smacks in the head to wake them up.

                Just look how far you have come….Ha, Ha


                • 1. Have you ever owned a cat? They only let you think you’re training them. They are really in charge.

                  2. Hunting is a great example of what I’m not talking about. You’re saying almost anyone can be trained to hunt and maybe that’s true. But most people cannot be trained to be theoretical physicists. It wouldn’t matter how hard they worked or how well they’re trained, most people just aren’t equipped to do it.

  15. Ray Hawkins says:

    TSA Screening Is Security Theater


    A snippet: “”Well, most security has to happen before the airport. You think about the liquid bombers who were captured in London. They were captured because of investigation and intelligence. If you want to deal with the terrorist threat, you’ve gotta do it before they get to the airport,” Schneier said.”

  16. I wonder how many US born citizens without a criminal record have purposely attempted to transport dangerous articles onto an airplane in the last 15 years? I wonder how many non-US citizens have tried to bring dangerous articles onto an airplane either flying too or from the US? I am betting the numbers and percentages for non-US citizens is much, much higher; as a matter of fact I’m betting the numbers for US born citizens is practicaly 0.

    It is amazing that our country has advanced to a point where almost every aspect of our day-to-day lives is determined by minorities, and the government using those aspects/circumstances to impose additional laws, conditions or restrictions on the majority. Almost every current restriction/condition/law that we deal with is the result of some minority screaming that they are being discriminated against. BTW: In this content ‘minorities’ makes references to groups not specific races.

    It seems that if you are an average US born law abiding citizen that conducts him/herself in a moral and rightous manner you are now the primary target for additional restrictions, conditions and laws.

    It really seems like the core values of Joe or Jill Citizen, are the primary targets for extremists when determining what to object too or restrict. I wonder how long it will take for the Joe’s and Jill’s of the world to finally stand up and shout; “I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it any more.”

    Things for Joe and Jill are evolving just like the old story of “How to catch wild pigs”. The fence is being progressively built around us as we go about our normal day, and the majority either don’t realize, or don’t care that we are eventually going to be coraled.

    As an example: At hunting camp this past week one of the guys told the story about how his local government had written legislation that enabled it’s citizens to defend themselves when threatened in their home, work place or out and about in public. It basically said that it was now legal and lawful for a citizen to use reasonable force to protect themselves or their property/person if threatened. He was excited about the fact that there were public officials that had the common sense to write a law that enable citizens to do something they already had a right to do.

    I pointed out to him that I would have stood against such a law, because the government does not have a right to impose resrtictions or conditions upon a natural right. And that by declaring this new law, they were removing a natural right, and could therefore monitor/manage citizen conduct. He thought I was crazy for not wanting a law that enabled me to protect myself. I argued that I already had that right, and that I didn’t need a government to tell me so, or create certain conditions around it. He never got it.

    This will be the basis for our eventual downfall; people not fully understanding the differences between unalienable rights and laws, and standing against those who wish to impact, change or restrict our unalienable rights.


    • OH and BTW:

      For all the hunters out there.

      I was fortunate enough to bag the biggest Buck I have ever seen. He was 225 pounds field-dressed, had a 23 inch inside spread and 10 points. He walked in at 8:05 am Friday morning sauntered up the same path I took to the stand and gave me a perfect broadside shot at 25 feet. It was all I could do to keep from wetting myself. The unofficial green score taken back at camp was 157.

      He is now butchered and the cape is in the taxidermists freezer.

      Oh, and although I don’t want it to sound as if I am bragging I also took two big does later that morning and early afternoon.

      What a day, although now I have to go out and buy more broadheads.


      • Congrats! Out near Jackson?

        • Anita;

          Yes, and the Rut is on big time. The day before I took him he and a smaller Buck were hasselling 3 does behind me some 70 yards for almost 30 minutes. Initally I couldn’t see much, but I was hearing a great deal of whizzing and snorting, so I first thought it was a couple of Bucks fighting. But, I didn’t hear any antlers cracking, and we have never heard or seen bucks fighting on the property, mostly because the Doe population is around 15 – 1. After a few minutes I caught enough movement to see the 3 Does and realized they were being chased by the two Bucks. That was when I first layed eyes on the Big Boy.

          It was a day I will never forget, and probably never better.

          Oh, and that night one of the Doe were ground into hamburger and the guys at camp ate very, very well.


          • Way to go CM! Wish I was at camp for one of those burgers!I have relatives in Leslie. They got one each, 3 total, from that area too. That’s six from the area that I know of.

            • Common Man says:

              Well, the herd is getting thinned, but I am willing to bet that there will be just as many, or more next year.

              We did notice a significant increase in Buck sightings this year verses last year. That may be in part that my brother-in-law, his wife, his neighbors and myself took 15 Doe’s off the property last year. Although I did manage to take a nice 9 point last year the next biggest Buck was a 6. The big boys stayed in the swamps and waited on the ladies to come to them.

              Time will tell and in the mean time burger’s and backstraps for everyone.


      • Big congrats CM! 🙂

        We managed to hang two does during our first archery season. That ellusive trophy buck is still out there, and I did see several throughout the season, but out of bow range. Rifle season is less than two weeks away, and it lasts for two weeks. Our rut is really late this year, very little activity. I have read that the prime rut period will begin after the 21st and run into rifle season, which will be a first for me.


        • Season starts this Saturday, I am locked, loaded and drooling at the mouth in anticipation. Wow only a 2 week gun season, ours is 8 weeks long.

        • G and Bama;

          The rut is in full swing here. As I mentioned above the Big Boy had his nose where the sun don’t shine most of the time I watched him. And as a result of spotting him the day before I harvested him, I named him: “Babe”, because he was as big as the Blue Ox.

          Hope you folks hang some backstraps and fill the freezer soon. Shoot straight and enjoy the season.


      • Awesome…

      • A real man would have taken the buck down with nothing but a bowie knife.

        • and his teeth. HUAH!!! Congrats on the buck….and not the Walla kind.

        • Matt;

          I am 6’5″ and 270, played college football and spent the next 6 years managing a fitness center. So, even though I don’t workout like I use too, am now 55 years old, I am still capable of holding my own. However, had I jumped on that critter with a knife I more than likely would have been the story instead of him.

          BTW: If you have never spent time pursuing game with a bow you cannot understand the rush known as “Buck fever”. Redbull, jolt, monster and all the other energy drinks don’t hold a candle to the rush you get pursuing game in the woods.


          • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            Never killed anything more substantial than a rodent.. I don’t have any real desire to. Killing, even if you’re going to eat what you kill, doesn’t appeal to me. If survival were on the line, I would have no problem with it, but it’s just not my cup of tea.

            But I don’t begrudge you your rush. To each their own.

            • Buck the Wala says:

              I killed this weekend. It was quite the rush, taking that lobster and tossing it to its death in the boiling water…

      • Congrats!

        I would trade the cost of more broad heads for 3 deer any day.

        • Common Man says:


          Yeah, broadheads are cheap, but I used the last 3 of my prised “Crimson Raptors” by Crimson Talon broadheads, which are no longer manufactured, and I just haven’t found a broadhead I like nearly as much.

          They make massive holes and becasue they were designed to spiral through the animal they left significant blood trails. I have taken several deer, 1 huge russian boar and a huge black bear with them, and in each case I had no more than a 70 yard trail.

          I guess the company stopped producing them because they are really only good for one kill. The mechanicals on them were so damaged after a shot that you just couldn’t use them again.

          Crimson Raptors did exactly what their namesake would have done.


  17. I propose a new company – we call it “Take Your Chances Airlines”

    (A) They never fly over populated areas.
    (B) The pilots are protected by blast-proof doors and cannot receive communication from the cabin.
    (C) There is no screening, you just get on the plane – ID check only.
    (D) No Sky Marshalls.
    (E) Fresh baked cookies will be served on all flights.
    (F) Booze will be served at cost – no $5 mini-bottles. No limits, served in solo cups.
    (G) There will be no safety presentation – all the information will be in a flier in your seat-back that you can choose to read or not.
    (H) Seat belts will be provided but you may choose to wear or not.
    (I) Smoking will be permitted. Nobody will ask questions if you smoke smell suspiciously unlike tobacco.
    (J) You are always free to roam about the cabin.
    (K) Seats are not assigned.

    I’m open to more suggestions. Who is with me?

    • Forget the peanuts..I want real food…steak ..potatos…

    • So you’re all for groping, right?

      • Naahhhh…..how perverse……mile high club memberships available.

        • See DPM…he is membership chairpirate.

          • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            Y’AARR! Don’t like it? Choose another airline.

            It’s like me matey Flag always says: If they aren’t hurting you, leave them be. If they are, hurt them back until they stop.

            Pirate Air: You’re on your own, matey!™

      • NudeAir, everyone will know what you’re packing.

        • Now we’re talking… everyone gets issued a spa robe once on the plane. Every plane has a sauna and roving masseuses. There’s also a poker room in back and table games. Add in a full bar, and we’re all set. Include a smoking lounge with separate air handling.

          Tickets are dirt cheap, pay as you go for services/gambling/drinks.

    • Mathius,

      All that needs to be done is to conceal carry. There will be no problems on the plane by the passengers.

      • Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        Conceal carry if you like. Open carry if you like. Neither is necessary, but both are allowed.

        It’s Pirate Air, not the wild west. I think most people can generally go 5 hours without a shootout.

      • That would fix several problems.
        1) terrorists would not fly with CCW, cowboy wannabe’s, shoot and ask for another round.
        2) liberals would not fly with us conservatives with guns

  18. This story continues:

    John Tyner, the man who was kicked out of a San Diego Airport for refusing to submit to invasive TSA groping measures, is now the target of a TSA investigation and an $11,000 dollar lawsuit.

    According to Michael J. Aguilar, chief of the TSA office in San Diego, “Tyner is under investigation for leaving the security area without permission. That’s prohibited, among other reasons, to prevent potential terrorists from entering security, gaining information, and leaving,” reports Sign On San Diego.

    Naturally, while considering it a security threat to allow Americans to leave a checkpoint if they refuse to be sexually molested, the TSA isn’t nearly as concerned about the security risk posed by hiring illegal aliens to work in sensitive areas like cargo management and also giving them the green light to fly planes.

    In addition, TSA agents told Tyner to leave, before claiming that he would then be sued.

    “If you’re not comfortable with that, we can escort you back out and you don’t have to fly today,” Tyner was told. When he tried to leave, he was then accosted again, proving that the whole fiasco was a set up.

    The TSA is attempting to send a clear message by pursuing Tyner, that there is no real choice at airports, that you will either be fired with radiation and have officials see your naked body or you will be sexually molested by minimum wage thugs.

    This is designed to create a chilling effect so as to prevent million of other potential refusniks from following Tyner’s example and standing up to Big Sis.


    • And the plot thickens!

      Forget John Tyner’s “don’t touch my junk” experience at the hands of TSA goons in San Diego recently, another victim of Big Sis was told by TSA officials that it was now policy to go even further when dealing with people wearing loose pants or shorts.

      Going through airport security this past weekend, radio host Owen JJ Stone, known as “OhDoctah,” related how he was told that the rules had been changed and was offered a private screening. When he asked what the procedure entailed, the TSA agent responded, “I have to go in your waistband, I have to put my hand down your pants,” after which he did precisely that.

      Stone chose to conduct the search in public in the fear that the TSA worker would be even more aggressive in a private room.

      “If you’re wearing sweat pants or baggy clothing, I was wearing sweat pants they’re not baggy, they’re sweat pants,” said Stone, adding that the agent pulled out his waistband before patting his backside and his crotch.

      Even the TSA agent who put his hands down the man’s pants was embarrassed at what he had been told to do by his superiors, apologizing profusely to the victim.

      A 54-year-old Missouri City man experienced similar treatment when he was going through security at Fort Lauderdale Airport.

      Thomas Mollman was subject to a groping by a TSA officer that was tantamount to sexual molestation.

      “I was wearing shorts at the time – between the underwear, right on the skin, all the way around the back, all the way around my front, 360 degrees, touched inappropriately,” he said.

      “This was an assault. This was no different than a sexual assault,” said KTRK Legal Analyst Joel Androphy.

      The level of abuse appears to be getting worse on an almost daily basis. First TSA agents use the back of their hands, then they outright grope you with the front, and now they are being trained to put their hands down traveler’s pants. What’s next? Mandatory bodily probes?

      Even as the resistance to airport oppression grows, Big Sis and the TSA are responding by making the pat down procedures more invasive. Napolitano has figuratively said to the American people ‘let them eat cake’ as she slaps them in the face.

      Given the fact that the TSA’s own woeful background checks for their own employees allows rapists and pedophiles to get jobs as pat down agents, will you allow TSA workers to put their hands down the pants of your daughter or wife?

      Me thinks the TSA is run by perverts!

  19. My latest suggestion for saving 1.1 billion in Federal spending:



    • Agree! Quite frankly, anything that has “Community Service” anywhere in its title, mission statement, general description should be “closed for business” immediately.

  20. You realize that you are undergoing these intense patdowns because of a pair of underwear right?

    Let’s get realistic a moment. My career before I retired was law enforcement/corrections. I have “patted down” thousands of people over the years and I can tell you that this level of personal searches at the airport isn’t making you any safer. Oh, those TSA workers would likely find large items concealed on your person (read: firearms), but bomb laden underwear – I think not. What are they going to do, strip search you when the feel extra thickness underwear and find – to your intense embarrassment – that you need to wear Depends?

    I remember a class on body searches years ago, for a class of correctional officers. The instructor was wearing a standard issue orange jumpsuit and after giving a little instructional training had each member of the class pat search him. We were instructed to take our time and be as through as possible. Twenty officer in the class found less than 10 of the 30, yes 30, items secreted in the jumpsuit. The most deadly item we missed was the thin wire garrote hidden in the collar of the jumpsuit.

    I could easily get a bomb past TSA tomorrow if I wished, without detection. I won’t say how since I don’t wish to give any potential terrorist the information.

    D13, good sir. I appreciate that many other countries already have patdown searches. Good for them, but this isn’t any “other” country. If the US wanted to be a follower we’d have fallen into the European socialist-lite system decades ago.

    For those discussing the 4th Amendment. You don’t really think the government or any court would let that argument hold water do you? Both would simply tell you it doesn’t apply because you voluntarily waive any 4th Amendment right when you chose to fly.

    So in the end these searches are just another attempt by the government (a successful one so far) to fake you into believing this is necessary for the protection of the US and her people. Yeah, right!

  21. Also, my apologies if I duplicated something someone already said. I didn’t read all the comments before posting. I was writing inbetween steps to get the Mrs her egg/bacon/cheese biscuit ready nrfore she leaves for work. 🙂

    Lastly, USW – my condolences on your loss.

  22. My take on this airport thing. They do not have the right to do what they do.

    Having said that. If you don’t want to be groped or scanned, don’t ride airplanes. Something MUST be done for more security OR something bad WILL happen again. Of course, something bad may happen anyway.

    But you can’t expect people to just stand by and ALLOW it to happen because your rights may be violated. And having said that, we go back to the top. THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT.

    BUT. They will do it anyway. Bush started the Patriot act. Obama shows no interest in repealing it. This being because, like all Progressives, including Bush. Obama loves being in every facet of people’s lives. All about control. 9/11 gave it to them, and those assholes ain’t ever going to give it up without force.

    Seccession anyone?

    • Esom and all,

      I think this is one of the proper roles of the federal government. This is about security threats that cross state lines, as well as the borders of other countries. They have both the right and authority because we gave it to them with the TSA and re-affirmed it with homeland security. We elected Bush, congress and the senate that passed these measures(Flag and the non-voters not included), so we bear the responsibility for their actions as our proxies.

      A separate issue, are they being effective? I would say no. Most of their security measures are PR BS. It is to show they are doing “something”. A terrorist successfully setting his underwear on fire let them claim victory.

      If we want true security, we will drop the PC thought and co-operate on security. Airports are restricted area’s, if you enter one, you give up some of your rights. You expect the government to make sure you are not sitting next to some nutjob who will explode after getting his peanuts. And this same nut has no problem strapping knives or explosives to a child, so age does not excuse security measures.

      Given a choice, I would hire Israel to oversee our airport and port security.
      As Buck said(and Flag has mentioned), a trained human will detect things that no amount of rules and procedures can ever address.
      Second choice, require airlines to see to their own security. Don’t tell them how, let them figure out the best and most cost effective way to fly us safely.

      • An interesting video.
        1)I do not know if this is real, or fake
        2)I do not think such an explosive would bring down a plane unless properly placed, which would be service area’s more than passenger access.

      • Ain’t that what I said?

        I don’t believe it is their proper role exactly; but hell, they have to do something or bombs will be going off on every plane that gets into the air.

        Although it would be nice to live in that world where Terrorists aren’t trying to kill us, we must unfortunately live in the REAL world where they ARE.

  23. Here’s what I don’t understand. It seems in any other situation where risk is assessed, there is profiling. Why can’t we profile airline passengers, using past incidents to determine likely risk factors? If we would do just this, as El Al does, wouldn’t this all go away or at least significantly reduced. For goodness sakes, even Buck agrees with this!!!!

    BF, you claim this is an airline problem. (The whole mess was started by the airlines trying to stop people from flying on other people’s tickets) Really? I don’t see it being quite so simple.

    Interesting to hear the comments about picking another form of transportation – both from SUFA posters and Big Sis herself, Napolitano. “High Speed Rail” was all the rage here in WI – being rammed down our throats by the Feds with the permission of our Dem Gov Doyle. Since the election, our Rep Gov Elect Walker has put a halt on those plans (I believe Gov. Elect Kasich did the same in Ohio). Now I wonder why the push to get rail in and if there is some connection between these air travel intrusive measures?

    • Kathy,

      It is an airline problem, started by a business paradox of their own creation.

      Because I know the source and root of the problem does not make the solution “simple”.

      It points to who is responsible to solve it – and it isn’t the TSA nor you (directly).

    • If you turn security over to the airlines, they will do the same thing and maybe more, because they would be liable for any incidents and damages. They can’t afford to lose planes, crews, and passengers, much less the bad PR from a hijacking that requires ransom and/or the police storming a plane.

      It would throw the entire travel industry into chaos…

      • WTF?
        Really? You think the airlines would destroy their own industry? I get that they might be concerned over liability, but to think they would not do a decent cost analysis, and put the whole industry into chaos is a ridiculous concept. If indeed they did such a thing, they deserve what they get. They can fail, and smarter persons will buy their assets when they fail, making a smarter, cheaper, more efficient airline that is not so full of fear that they cannot function.

        My guess is that if they were really in charge, they would find a MUCH better balance than we currently have. Anything else would be self-destructive. Some businesses may engage in self-destructive behavior, but such things do not last without government support. The only industries that have survived such foolish action have done so by seeking government help. A good example is the music industry. They have survived their failure to adapt to new technology by seeking legal action to support the status quo. Without it, they would have long since failed, and the whole industry would have changed for the better by now.

        • Jon,
          I’m surprised by your response – how did you get that out of my comments? What makes you think the airlines continuing the current security measures would destroy the industry?

          They absolutely would do a cost/benefit analysis, and it would show that a hijacking or bombing or two would destroy the industry.

          The current security measures have a known cost the airlines can handle and passengers are willing to tolerate. Any hijacking or bombing has completely unknown costs and risks. No airline would reduce security and accept that risk.

          • Todd,

            The current security measures have a known cost the airlines can handle and passengers are willing to tolerate. Any hijacking or bombing has completely unknown costs and risks. No airline would reduce security and accept that risk.

            Deja Moo.

            Current “security” measures are pointless. They protect nothing and no one.

            They are theater that fools the likes of you into believing “something is being done”.

            The airlines already know how to secure their planes, and its all in their hands to do it.

            The transfer of security to the imbeciles of government has worsened the security profile, not made it better.

            It has transferred responsibility to the government- who is immune from law suit and the consequences of damn poor planning and implementation. (See dismissed law suit of injured passengers suing the Chicago light rail because of failed maintenance. The city was discharged of responsibility because they said the people didn’t vote enough tax money – therefore,not fixing a known maintenance failure on the tracks was not their fault. The judge agreed.)

            The current security has no cost to the airlines which is why they do nothing about it.

            • The current security has no cost to the airlines which is why they do nothing about it.

              The airlines are billed by TSA for security costs.

              • Todd,

                airlines are billed

                This is completely false.

                The airlines are NOT billed, no more than the clerk who collects your money is “billed” by the company she works for.

                The airlines collect the TSA fees – a direct pass-through cost to the passengers.

          • You stated that the airlines would do the same or more, throwing the industry into chaos (which would destroy the industry). Now you are saying hijacking would destroy the industry, so we have to have these measures.

            Perhaps I misread your comment and you originally meant a hijacking would destroy the industry. However, I still say that enough security would destroy the industry due to the costs associated and the reduction of customers. The math does not work. Hell, the math clearly shows that airline travel is one of the safest means, even before all this security, and including all of the incidents. Its just not that damned scary. People are just into the hype. The greatest risk to the airline industry is really nightly news.

  24. No 3-year olds are going to blow up our planes!


  25. Here’s a funny!


    Jennifer a manager at Wal-Mart had the task of hiring someone to fill a job
    opening.. After sorting through a stack of 20 resumes she found four people
    who were equally qualified.. Jennifer decided to call the four in and ask
    them only one question. Their answer would determine which of them would get
    the job.

    The day came and as the four sat
    around the conference room table, Jennifer asked, ‘What is the fastest thing
    you know of?’

    The first man replied, ‘A THOUGHT.’ It just pops into your head. There’s no

    ‘That’s very good!’ replied Jennifer.
    ‘And, now you sir?’, she asked the second man.

    ‘Hmmm…..let me see ‘A blink! It comes and goes and you don’t know that it
    ever happened.. A BLINK is the fastest thing I know of.’

    ‘Excellent!’ said Jennifer. ‘The blink of an eye, that’s a very popular
    cliche for speed.’ She then turned to the third man, who was contemplating
    his reply..

    ‘Well, out at my dad’s ranch, you step out of the house and on the wall
    there’s a light switch.. When you flip that switch, way out across the
    pasture the light on the barn comes on in less than an instant. ‘Yip,
    TURNING ON A LIGHT is the fastest thing I can think of’.

    Jennifer was very impressed with the third answer and thought she had found
    her man. ‘It’s hard to beat the speed of light,’ she said.

    Turning to Bubba, the fourth and final man, Jennifer posed the same

    Old Bubba replied, ‘After hearing the previous three answers, it’s obvious
    to me that the fastest thing known is DIARRHEA.’

    ‘WHAT!?’ said Jennifer, stunned by the response…

    ‘Oh sure’, said BUBBA. ‘You see, the other day I wasn’t feeling so good, and
    I ran for the bathroom, but before I could THINK, BLINK, or TURN ON THE
    LIGHT, I had already crapped my pants.’

    BUBBA is now the new greeter at a Wal-Mart near you!

    You will probably think of this every time you enter a Wal-Mart from now on.

  26. Of course, it’s always good to “follow the money” to see if there is an ulterior motive.


    Does make you go hmmmmmm, doesn’t it?

    • Yes it does! Soros is everywhere. Glenn Beck is stuck to him like glue but he keeps popping up.

      Cyndi, You’re right about the eventual police state. Check this out from the article:

      One might wonder why one option over the other would matter so much to the Department of Homeland Security. The answer might possibly be found in DHS documents described as “conceptual discussions” about trial deployments of the full body scanners to non-aviation public locations, such as sports stadiums, schools and malls. It appears that it is the intent of DHS to eventually install naked body scanners in these venues. But first, the public must be “conditioned” to accept their use at airports.

      WTH? Like Bottom Line’s video said a couple weeks back: THIS IS NOT THE LAND I LEARNED ABOUT IN CLASS.


  27. It seems to me that we have created the TSA as a union, where no one can get fired no matter how incompetent. Give certain people authority and they WILL abuse it.

    In Amsterdam we were all interviewed by the security staff. In Heathrow the man giggled and said I didn’t have to take off my shoes.

    I don’t know if it is true, but I had heard that Muslim women in hijab couldn’t be searched other than the neck and ankles?

    Profile for safety.

  28. When up is down and war is peace and black is white.

    So here is a Muslim female, who wouldn’t/can’t be subjected to a pat down, patting down a Catholic nun.


  29. Howdy folks….just back from DFW Airport….for the last 2.5 hours, I used my authority (and a made up story) and called the TSA stud duck at DFW. Told him who I was and that I wanted to observe the TSA screening for possible use on the border. To make things better, I told him that if it worked out, that I would give hime some credit for allowing me to go through the process. He agreed and so I went out.

    Here is what I did. (1) I observed the screening procedures at the gates (2) I observed the Backscatter X-Ray and Millimeter Wave Screening that is in place on a trial basis, and (3) I wanted a pat down search to observe first hand the method. Here is what I just found.

    (1) All had to remove shoes. (2) Wheel chairs went through a seperate xray NOT the Backscatter/Wave process.(3) Random swipes of luggage handles, camera cases, carry on make up kits and briefcases were done checking for explosive residue. (4) ALL backpacks checked regardless of who carried them and that included diaper bags and baby carriages. (5) All computers checked through screening and if you did not want your camera or computer to go through xray, you were ushered to another line and required to take both apart. (6) All hats removed, including all religious garb. Did not see a Muslim try to go through but did see an Adventist in long dress that had to be scanned. She had the option of pat down or scan. I am told by the supervisor that all religious articles that cover the face and head will be removed or they will be denied access if they refuse scanning.

    The next thing that I did was go through a pat down search. What I found was that I had to stand with arms raised and the pat down was explained how it was to be done and they did it with the back of the hand. I was not grabbed in any manner but the back and side of the hand went about as far as it could go without hitting any sensitive parts. Male on male and female on female.

    I then got a look at the Backscatter X-Ray and there was where I was surprised. I did NOT expect the detail that I saw. There were no secrets and it was as if I was looking at HD. It is explicit and it is detailed. The other thing that really bothered me from one standpoint is that the scans can be isolated and stored for prosecution purposes. THey can also be downloaded to another computer or storage disc. Likewise, they can be pirated. I watched four people go through the screening on this machine. Two male and two female. There is nothing left to any imagination.

    I then asked the TSA rep how they picked who went through the screening process of pat down or xray. He said that right now, it is totally random. The only profiling that is done is one way tickets with or without baggage, backpacks, and one piece clothing that hang loose. He said that he wished they could profile more but right now they cannot. He also said that there were several security cameras manned by personnel that were specially trained to spot certain mannerisms throughout the airport and are identified and watched closely. If a specific mannerism was spotted…that person was profiled and searched. He also said that if anyone objected for religious reasons, they are immediately escorted to a “safe room” to avoid further confrontation in public and given their options of pat down or screening. If they refuse either, they are escorted from the premises without further searching bu they will not board the planes. The pat downs are witnessed and the xray is one person…can be either male or female and the passenger does not see the screener.

    Hope this helps some…was in a position for some on hands experience and had the time…so I went.

    • Interesting indeed Colonel.

      So much for personnal privacy! I wonder, does the xray person have cards numbered from 1 to 10 to rate what they see? 🙂

      Here’s a thought:

      9/11 = increased security
      Show bomber = taking off the shoes
      underwear bomber = body scans and pat downs
      suicide bomber packs his rectum with C4 and blows self up = ?

      Is it possible that body cavity searches will be next?
      Is all of this a violation of the 4th Amendment?

    • D13,

      Yes, the millimeter wave is incredibly detailed. I, too, have reviewed the images and – as on my blog exists an example, the caption “Please tell this woman she is naked on the Internet”….

      …no way, no how should you allow your wife and children through these machines…

      • Yes sir…this is one area that I am re-thinking my position on…have not made up my mind yet but the security of the images really bothers me. Even I was shocked at the detail….and it takes a lot to shock this old man.

        • Changing your mind on theose fried gonaaaaaaaa..cough cough..it won’t come out!

          • No, Anita, if someone wants a peek at the Gonads…I really dont give a rats patootie….screening does not bother me at all…The SECURITY of it bothers me.

      • I was informed that no children are screened like that at DFW.

      • Do airport body-scans have radiation risk?

        John Lott

        Some individuals will apparently get cancer from these scans, but the risk of any individual getting cancer is very small.

        Some scientists and two major airline pilots unions contend not enough is known about the effects of the small doses of X-ray radiation emitted by one of the two types of airport scanning machines.
        The Transportation Security Administration’s advanced imaging technology machines use two separate means of creating images of passengers — backscatter X-ray technology and millimeter-wave technology.
        At the end of October, 189 backscatter units and 152 millimeter-wave machines were in use in more than 65 airports. The total number of imaging machines is expected to near 1,000 by the end of 2011, according to the TSA. . . .
        “If you think of the entire population of, shall we say a billion people per year going through these scanners, it’s very likely that some number of those will develop cancer from the radiation from these scanners,” Brenner [director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University and a professor of radiation biophysics] said.
        Skin cancer would likely be the primary concern, he said. Each time the same person receives a backscatter scan, the small risk associated with the low dose of radiation is multiplied by the number of exposures.
        Brenner said the risk to an individual is “very small indeed” for a single scan. He said he is most concerned about frequent fliers, pilots and young people, because children are more sensitive to radiation.. . . .

        See also this:

        Some US scientists warned Friday that the full-body, graphic-image X-ray scanners now being used to screen passengers and airline crews at airports around the country may be unsafe.

        They say the risk is minimal, but statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays,” Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at Johns Hopkins University school of medicine, told AFP.

        “No exposure to X-ray is considered beneficial. We know X-rays are hazardous but we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner,” he said.

        The possible health dangers posed by the scanners add to passengers’ and airline crews’ concerns about the devices, which have been dubbed “naked” scanners because of the graphic image they give of a person’s body, genitalia and all. . . .

  30. So, those of you that feel security is a violation of your freedom: You’d be Ok with an occasional hijacking, bombing, or airplanes hitting another building – like the Sears Tower?

    How many per year is acceptable?

    After the X-Mas Underwear Bomber last December, it seems many of you were pointing out how the Obama administration was not keeping us safe. But now it’s too “safe” and not enough “freedom”?

    This guy was looking for a confrontation and his 15 minutes of “fame”, just like the ACORN Pimp idiot. Look for him on Fox News as “Joe the TSA Expert” or on some reality TV show…

    He’s just distracting you from the real issues – for his own personal gain…

    • Well heck if we’re going to stand for any action to prevent even one potential terrorist from getting on planes then you’d be in full support of profiling air travelers?

      It’s likely just as effective as these body searches.

    • So then to prevent even the possibility of one terrorist getting on a plane you’d fully support profiling to help keep air travel safer?

      It’s probably just as effective as body searches.

      • Plainlyspoken,
        I don’t know what the answer is, but the current MESSY system has worked for the last 9 years. I would not object to profiling, but that’s a tricky area. We all know who would be targeted, and that can lead to missing other threats…

        I am quite amazed there have only been the shoe and underwear bombers. It wouldn’t take much for 3-4 un-armed men to create chaos on a plane. Maybe not gain control of the plane, but create quite the incident.

        I travel 4-5 times a year for business (4 times in the last 3 months) and don’t like the security, but it’s just part of air travel. I’ve been thru the new machines twice – no big deal as far as I’m concerned.

        • I would like to point out that neither the underwear bomber or the shoe bomber went through TSA security screening to get on the planes they were on. So how should I conclude that the TSA felt a need to change the “pat-down” search style is going to improve things?

          I also would like to point out that the enhanced style of personal search being used by TSA leaves only strip search as a higher, non-physically invasive search (body cavity being the most physically invasive). This level of searches now being used randomly on the public is normally only conducted on criminal suspects once they are arrested and those incarcerated in jails/prisons.

          Also, other than those who opt out of the scanner, TSA can still randomly choose to pat search people even if they have been through some level of screening already.

          Per TSA website: “Additional screening occurs when an individual sets off the alarm on the metal detector, or if he or she is selected for the additional screening. This screening includes a hand-wand inspection in conjunction with a pat-down inspection that includes the torso.”

          One wonders how one is “selected” for additional screening?

          • Plainly,

            Some are selected based on the size and shape of their breasts….

          • I would like to point out that neither the underwear bomber or the shoe bomber went through TSA security screening to get on the planes they were on. So how should I conclude that the TSA felt a need to change the “pat-down” search style is going to improve things?

            Because it showed a new threat, whether domestic or international flight.

            One wonders how one is “selected” for additional screening?

            Its suppose to be random, but since I’ve had the additional screening several times, I think I’m being profiled!! 😉

            • Todd,

              That they both got on planes with devices was not a failure of US security screening. It’s not realistic to base our procedures on what happens elsewhere – unless and/or until a defined weakness occurs in our screening process. TSA jumps to the conclusion that their procedures are inadequate to have stopped either person.

              It is like I posted above (#20), I can tell you how to get a bomb onto an aircraft even with these new levels of screening (lol..when my wife found out I posted that she said I’d probably end up on the watch lists now and would be getting a visit from the feds), you could carry it on without fear of detection. It would take anyone thinking for just a few minutes to figure out how. So these new screening levels add nothing to the overall security of airline flights.

              But hey, if it makes you feel better go ahead and believe you’re safer.

        • The fact that there have been few incidents may have nothing to do with airport security, and everything to do with the fact that the risk is simply not that high. You are surprised by how few incidents there have been because you think there is a kamikaze muslim around every corner. That is simply not the case.

    • Todd,

      Well, given you believe there is a massive exploit in air travel for terrorists, I have to ask:

      Why weren’t planes being flown into buildings 20 years ago??

      Kamikaze’s showed the effectiveness quite a bit in 1945.

      Therefore, the threat as you make it out simply is not pervasive nor that easy, and thus, the useless security “theater” is pointless.

      As you point out, causing “trouble” on a plane is easy, and no amount of sexual groping by TSA can prevent it.

      YET, if causing trouble on planes is that easy, why is there so little trouble on planes!????

      Your argument is baseless – you point to risk, but cannot show such a risk is even close to sufficient in its minute exercise to be worth the wholesale destruction of freedom

      • Why weren’t planes being flown into buildings 20 years ago??

        Because they hadn’t thought of that yet.

        Just because I can’t quantify the threat does not mean it does not exist. As usual, you have to stretch examples to extremes to support your ideology.

        • Yet you say that with a proper cost analysis the airlines would have even more extreme security measures because they would quantify the risk level as being very high and damaging. If you cannot quantify the threat level, how can you make the assumption that the airlines would come to a certain conclusion? I know they may be able to quantify what you cannot because they have more resources, but you are presuming to know the outcome, and then saying you cannot know the outcome.

        • Todd,

          Of course they thought of that! The Japanese showed them decades ago!

          Only the extremely stupid never thought of that!

          Sir, it is you who is extreme in your examples. There has been so few uses of civilian planes as weapons, yet it is you who places such an extreme association to them with terror and your fear.

          The odds you will be a victim of a terrorist is 3x that of you being hit by lightening.

          Yet, you will drive to work, with the odds of dying in a car accident 1/200. And you will not cringe in the fear you associate to an event that is so rare, the only case you point to is 10 years old.

  31. The biggest murder case in US history

    The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder

    • lol…you better include about 20 other presidents….Bush was not the worse by a looong shot.

    • Sadaam Hussein is not dead for no reason.

    • It’ll never happen. Never.

      But oh boy, would I love to be on that jury..

      • You would also have to go back to Clinton…, then Bush I…then Regan…especially Carter….more especially Johnson, Nixon…then Kennedy. The only one that gets a pass is Ford.

        • I’m pretty all dead Presidents would get a pass.. what are you going to do? Exhume their corpses and try them?

      • Why?

        • It’d be very interesting, if nothing else. There’s a ton of information that’s not available to the public which I’d love to find out about.

          For another thing, I would have time off from work.

          For yet another thing, I suppose I could write a book down the road..

    • So when will Obama’s trial begin? Saying, I just did what Bush did is not a defense.

      • Bill Clinton Bombs an Aspirin Factory

        The following are ten articles, in reverse chronological order, about the US cruise missile demolition of a pharmaceuticals factory in Sudan.

        from TPDL 2000-Aug-1, from the Associated Press 2000-Jul-31:

        Owner of Destroyed Plant To Sue

        WASHINGTON (AP) — The Sudanese owner of a pharmaceutical plant destroyed by U.S. cruise missiles is seeking $50 million in compensation on the ground that his Khartoum factory was targeted because of false charges that it had terrorist links.

        Salah Idris, who purchased the al-Shifa plant five months before the August 1998 bombing, will file a civil action suit in the U.S. Court of Claims in hopes of obtaining restitution.

        He has retained the Washington law firm of Jones, Day, Reavis and Pogue, which said in a statement that Idris will establish that al-Shifa was “engaged only in pharmaceutical processing and packaging,” with no connection to international terror.

        President Clinton ordered the attack, alleging that the plant had links to Osama bin Laden, exiled Saudi-born millionaire suspected in the bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania on Aug. 7, 1998.


  32. ANother thought, SUFA. I am a private pilot. I fly a Beechcraft Baron 58. Everytime I go to a municipal airport…..there are no scanners….no ID….no security. I get on my plane, pick up my clearance, and I am gone. Quite often, I can file to fly over any city and any MOA……

    Have any idea what a Baron loaded with 100 pounds of plastique can do to a building like the trade towers? It can make a much bigger BANG than an airliner hitting a building. The municipal airport that I fly out of controls up to 400 takeofss and landings per day and that is ONE municipal airport. A major advantage of C4 is that it can easily be molded into any desired shape. C4 can be pressed into gaps, cracks and voids in buildings, bridges, equipment or machinery. Similarly, it can easily be inserted into empty shaped charge cases of the type used by military engineers.

    C4 is very stable and insensitive to most physical shocks. Detonation can only be initiated by a combination of extreme heat and a shock wave, as when a detonator inserted into it is fired. It takes a simple detonation as a primer, electrical shock, or blasting cap. Placed correctly, a one pound block of c-4 can bring down a 4 story building. It is 1.75 times more powerful than TNT….you do the math.

    Now, take this information and the fact that it is perfectly legal to fly at 600 ft AGL (above ground level)…no radar can pick it up until too late….

    Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…….tell me how all of this security at PUBLIC airports is going to protect us from the private airports.

    • Not to mention you can rent private planes. The terrorist seem to have money, so a $1-200,000 rental, easily hi-jacked flying bomb.

    • It makes sense because you are misunderstanding the nature of the pat downs / body scans. They are not there to protect anyone or anything. They are there to give the appearance of protection.

      Got it?

      Oh, now move along people.. nothing to see here..

      • Always had it, my intrepid friend…..just that the futility is astounding. Let the airlines handle it….discontinue TSA.

      • Its more than the appearance of security. Its conditioning as you mentioned earlier, but will also come in handy for those capital controls that will be put in place soon. I’ve seen several reports of PMs being confiscated from travelers. One newsletter I get even went so far as to include a Dept of Commerce shippers export form for people to submit so they don’t have their coins taken. Welcome to the high tech new East Germany, commrades.

    • D13,

      As a private pilot, too, I completely concur with your post.

      And that is my point – it is not the “security” of the public that is being protected by the TSA – it is the profit of the airlines in selling their tickets to the highest (or lowest) bidder.

      Airline seats are like bananas. They rot over time.

      At the point the door closes on the plane, all the empty seats are fully rotten to a price of less than zero – that is, it costs money to carry them from point A to point B; their weight costs fuel.

      So the airlines have this “moving” price – they want to sell the seat at the highest price they can get, but they want to sell all their seats at any price they can get.

      So, they will sell seats cheap to some people, and sell the same seat to someone else at a far higher price.

      The ability of some people to buy the cheap seats, then resell the seats to others undermined this price-program of the airlines.

      So they introduced artificial “security” concerns to stop it.

      This is where we are today – the consequence of using violent force to fix an economic pricing problem.

  33. Next up on my cut Federal Spending list


    Following article about FDIC going after criminal bankers. Pay close attention to the closing paragraphs and compare to the headline and main storyline.


    • CAn I do it? Or does terminate have a different connotation for you…. 🙂

      • Come on JAC……can I ??? huh huh Can I? Can I?………….Puulleeeese???

        • D13


          Good morning sir. Hope all is well in the land of Texicans.

          First snow of the year on the ground here this AM.

        • D13

          Thought you might like a peek at some of the country where I spent a little time in the saddle, and a couple of the folks I knew in my younger days.


          • Yes…this next year is the first year we are going to allow trail rides on our place in the Arbuckles. We have an old fashioned chuck wagon and there are plenty of people that own horses and have no place to ride any longer. People will trailer their horses up to 1000 miles for a good trail ride. It will be a 2 1/2 day deal over some pretty rough terrain. They can just ride or help with cattle round up (not a real one) but moving cattle from one pasture to another. We will have a vet on station and a blacksmith because they will throw shoes in this terrain. We have one 32 acre lake and two other 15 acre stock tanks that are filled with hybrid bass and crappie. The camp grounds where they will camp are by two different Indian Campgrounds (from the Old Indian Nations). No digging allowed however. All artifacts are left on the ranch. We will clear off a nice place by a stair step waterfall where they can just chill out. Some stuff like that…. Hope your day goes well.

            • Hmmm, is this something you can sign up for? I’m in charge of our “Girl’s” Getaway next year. Now with us all being “city folk” we’d need a little help but we’re all fairly adventurous types. Then we could finish off with an anti-aging weekend with your good stuff? The only thing missing would be shopping……..

  34. We Don’t Need More Inflation, We Need to Put An End to Obama’s Job Killing Policies

    By John Lott

    Published November 16, 2010

    | FoxNews

    The current inflation rate of 2 percent is “too low.” That is at least if you believe Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. With the economy growing “too slowly to bring down unemployment,” Mr. Bernanke’s solution is to increase inflation.

    The Federal Reserve last week started printing up $600 billion to buy U.S. Treasury Bonds and another almost $300 billion to buy mortgages. The printing more dollars will reduce the value of the dollar just as doubling the number of apples will reduce the price of apples.

    A falling value of the dollar is what is called “inflation.” The problem is that this “stimulus” will only temporarily reduce unemployment and get the economy growing by tricking people into making mistakes that they will later regret, mistakes that will cost the country much more in the long run than will be gained by these temporary improvements. With unemployment stuck at least at 9.5 percent for a record 15 months, the desire “to do something” is understandable, but the only people who this policy will help are the politicians currently in office.

    You would think that all economists would have learned the lessons of the 1960s and 1970s: higher inflation rates only temporarily reduce unemployment. As the late Milton Friedman warned all the way back in his 1968 presidential address to the American Economic Association, the end result of those inflationary policies was just more inflation and unemployment. During the late 1970s, this phenomenon even had its own name: “stagflation.” Mr. Bernanke seems to ignore the economic suffering that occurred when President Reagan had the courage to finally wring the inflation out of the economy in the early 1980s.

    Unexpected increases in the inflation rate temporarily deceive workers into thinking that they are getting a better wage offer and lets companies hire workers at a lower real wage. Thus, unemployment is temporarily cut. Conversely, when the inflation is eventually wrung out of the economy, workers’ wage increases in dollar terms will turn out to be less than anticipated with resulting increases in unemployment. Double digit inflation rates during the late 1970s were brought under control, but the cost was an unemployment rate that reached 10.8 percent.

    Two percent inflation may seem “too low” to Mr. Bernanke (during the last three months inflation has actually averaged an annual rate of 2.8 percent), but inflation has real costs: it diverts businesses and people from making productive investments to making that protect them from inflation. Higher inflation rates are also much more difficult control.

    With the next election no more than two years away, few politicians other than Reagan have been willing to bear the short-run electoral costs of reducing inflation. Let the next president face the higher unemployment rate from reducing inflation, they seem to say.

    Besides only artificial short term gains on unemployment, the value of the dollar took a big hit on Mr. Bernanke’s announcement. More inflation means that the value of dollar is lower, and foreigners immediately reduced how much they were willing to pay for them. Higher inflation also means that interest rates will rise, lowering bond and stock prices. One cost of higher inflation is the threat that it poses to Americans’ investments.

    There might be another unstated explanation for increasing inflation — more inflation will devalue the awful levels of our government debt, including the debt held by foreign countries such as China. If China bought Treasury bonds paying 3 percent interest and we can raise the inflation rate to 4 percent, the U.S. government will effectively make the Chinese pay us 1 percent per year for borrowing our money.

    The economy is indeed growing “too slowly.” But the problem is due to the chaos created by the stimulus as well as the disincentives created by higher taxes and increased regulations. The solution isn’t more inflation. The solution is to end President Obama’s job destroying economic policies.


  35. This is nasty and really disgusting and it’s also off topic-so watch or don’t watch it but I did want to warn you. I thought hard before I posted it and I’m still not sure I should but I have decided to do so. First I want to say that I am so tired of the attack on the Tea Party while this type of thing is basically ignored. I also want to point out that the left and the anarchist side of the right, keep telling me I am wrong when I say we should have some decency laws. I watch this and I say you are all wrong.


    • VH,

      I saw this a few days ago and was afraid to post, as it is that offensive.
      We talk about the gap between the left and right, Democrat and Republican.
      The media bashes the right on religion, but will not report on the fringe left.
      Some of the protests for gay rights come from gays who practice public sex.

      I can see why they cannot understand where I stand on issues, I cannot understand them, why would they understand me? They look human, but act so alien…..


    • IDIOTS !! What the hell is wrong with people?

    • Well, that answers a 64K questions. Why SF is so prone to major earthquakes and is the big one getting close?

    • Unbelievable. If we could only just slice off a good chunk of land for them all to live on and give it a big shove into the ocean.

    • Bottom Line says:


      You don’t need a law telling you not to live in SF or anywhere where you may experience the suffrage of having to witness gay public acts of fellatio.


      Perhaps there needs to be a parody song titled “I left my VOMIT in San Fransisco”.

    • There does seem to be lack of diverse opinions responding so far, if only someone intimately familiar with California were available, just to translate, so to speak….thinking, thinking,,,

      HEY MATT!!!

      What’s up with these wacko’s????

      • To give Matt some credit, I’m not sure he could answer your question. He’s just alittle misguided, nowhere near the level of those in the pictures 🙂

  36. Federal V.I.P Penn – 11/13/02

    Last Thursday I was flying to LA on the Midnight flight. I went through security my usual sour stuff. I beeped, of course, and was shuttled to the “toss-em” line. A security guy came over. I assumed the position. I had a button up shirt on that was untucked. He reached around while he was behind me and grabbed around my front pocket. I guess he was going for my flashlight, but the area could have loosely been called “crotch.” I said, “You have to ask me before you touch me or it’s assault.”

    He said, “Once you cross that line, I can do whatever I want.”

    I said that wasn’t true. I say that I have the option of saying no and not flying. He said, “Are you going to let me search you, or do I just throw you out?”

    I said, “Finish up, and then call the police please.”

    When he was finished with my shoes, he said, “Okay, you can go.”

    I said, “I’d like to see your supervisor and I’d like LVPD to come here as well. I was assaulted by you.”

    He said, “You’re free to go, there’s no problem.”

    I said, “I have a problem, please send someone over.”

    They sent a guy over and I said that I’d like to register a complaint. I insisted on his name and badge number. I filled it out with my name. The supervisor, I think trying to intimidate me, asked for my license, and I gave it to him happily as he wrote down information. I kept saying, “Please get the police,” and they kept saying, “You’re free to go, we don’t need the police.” I insisted and they got a higher up, female, supervisor. I was polite, cold, and a little funny. “Anyone is welcome to grab my crotch, I don’t require dinner and a movie, just ask me. Is that asking too much? You wanna grab my crotch, please ask. Does that seem like a crazy person to you?” I had about 4 of them standing around. Finally Metro PD shows up. It’s really interesting. First of all, the cop is a BIG P&T fan and that ain’t hurting. Second, I get the vibe that he is WAY sick of these federal leather-sniffers. He has that vibe that real cops have toward renta-cops. This is working WAY to my advantage, so I play it.

    The supervisor says to the cop, ‘He’s free to go. We have no problem, you don’t have to be here.” Which shows me that the Feds are afraid of local. This is really cool. She says, “We have no trouble and he doesn’t want to miss his flight.”

    I say, “I can take an early morning flight or a private jet. ” The cop says, “If I have a citizen who is saying he was assaulted, you can’t just send me away.”

    I tell the cop the story, in a very funny way. The cop, the voice of sanity says, “What’s wrong with you people? You can’t just grab a guy’s crank without his permission.” I tell him that my genitals weren’t grabbed and the cop says, “I don’t care, you can’t do that to people. That’s assault and battery in my book.”

    The supervisor says that they’ll take care of the security guy. The cop says, “I’m not leaving until Penn tells me to. Now do you want to fill out all the paper work and show up in court, because I’ll be right there beside you.”

    The supervisor says it’s an internal matter, and they’ll take care of it. “If you want to pursue this, we’re going to have to go through the electronic evidence.”

    I say, “You mean videotape? Yeah, go get it.”

    She says, “Well, it’ll take a long time, and you don’t want to miss your flight. We have no problem with you, you’re free to go.”

    The cop says, “Your guy grabbed his crank. That ain’t right.”

    So, I fill out all the paper work and insist on a number to call to register a complaint. She says that I filled out a complaint, and I say, “I want more, give me another number. ” She gives me a number that I find out later has been disconnected. I leave. I have a card with the name and number on it and the bad 800 number for the FAA.

    My flight is way delayed, so I go to Burger King with Glenn – and all the feds are now off duty and at BK and sneering at us.

    The next day the woman in charge of public relations calls me to “do anything to make my McCarran experience more enjoyable.” I was a little under the weather with allergies and busy, so I didn’t call back until yesterday.

    It took some phone tag, but I finally got the woman on the phone. I was very cool and sweet. I explained the problem. “Do you allow your crotch to be grabbed without being asked?” I didn’t exaggerate, I said that there was nothing sexual, I wasn’t hurt, and it wasn’t my genitals. I just said it was wrong. She said “Well, your feedback is really important because most people are afraid of us.” She said, “I’d love to meet you so we could clear this up, and everyone wants to meet a celebrity.” She said she had watched the videotape and there was no sound, but she saw him reach around. She said she couldn’t tell me what was being done to him but . . . and I stopped her and said, she shouldn’t do anything wrong.

    I said that I had talked to two lawyers and they said it was really a weird case because no one knows if he can be charged with assault and battery while working in that job. But I told her, that some of my lawyer friends really wanted to find out. She said, “Well, we’re very new to this job . . .” and I said, “Yeah, so we need these test cases to find out where you stand.”

    She said, “Well, you know a LOT about this.” I said, “Well, it’s not really the right word, but freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I’ll spend to find out how to get people more of it.”

    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.

    I tell her that I’m still thinking about pressing charges, and I don’t just care about me, it’s freedom in general. I say the only thing that was good about it, was that while they were dealing with me, maybe they weren’t beating up people in wheelchairs. It was amazing. All she was trying to do was make me happy. She said she’d burned a CD ROM of my video and it was being sent all around and they were going to change their training. She said, “We’re federal employees, we’re working for you, you pay us and we want customer satisfaction. It doesn’t matter what the law is, we have to make you very happy so your flying experience is a pleasurable one, and most people don’t give us this kind of intelligent feedback.”

    So, that was it. I’m flying on Sunday, I have no idea what will happen. How crazy is this? Do I really have some sort of mysterious VIP status to shut me up? Should I press charges? She said she was going to talk to the cop. I said he didn’t see anything. She said, “Well, he may be able to see the forest for the trees, because he was right there.” I quoted his “crank” comment and she laughed and then knew that was a very bad sign. I said, “He’ll tell you I was polite, cold, angry, and funny” – that’s more than should be expected of me. I still don’t know what I’m going to do, but my advice to everyone is complain all you can and call the cops. I think it might make a little difference. Maybe you can become a VIP too.



  37. The Smart Way to Solve Global Warming

    November 12, 2010 – 14:57 ET
    A note from Stu – A couple of years ago I wrote a column in Fusion magazine about global warming and spoke of its effects on polar bears. In the column, I praised “Bjorn Lomborg’s irreplaceable book Cool It (something that you should own if you care about this topic at all. It’s that good.)”

    Luckily, starting today, you don’t have to do all that pesky reading stuff. In theaters starting this weekend is Cool It, a new documentary about Lomborg and his too-sensible-to-be-included-in-the-debate ideas. Honestly, Lomborg is one of the only truly interesting characters in the entire global warming discussion right now. Why? He doesn’t fall for the catastrophe, and yet he also doesn’t argue the science at all. This is incredibly frustrating to the left (and to many on the right as well). Bjorn takes the science that the U.N. reports at face value, and then shows how the “solutions” we’ve been pitched by Al Gore and the like, still make no sense whatsoever.

    I was able to see a preview of the movie and it is well worth your time. Just the 10 minute period where he picks apart four global warming claims (such as sea-level rise, and malaria) are worth double the price of admission. The following is an op-ed from Bjorn Lomborg, exclusive to glennbeck.com.

    By Bjorn Lomborg

    See the trailer: Cool It

    Why is it that after nearly 20 years of campaigning for drastic cuts in carbon emissions, Al Gore and his fellow climate activists have basically gotten nowhere?

    The answer isn’t that global warming is a hoax. Even though it’s not the end of the world, as many activists claim, climate change is real and we need to do something about it. But that something isn’t the draconian program of carbon cuts that Gore & Co. have been pushing. The fact is that Gore’s “solution” is more expensive than the problem it’s meant to solve—which is to say that it’s no solution at all.

    In a 2009 paper for the Copenhagen Consensus Center, the think tank that I head, climate economist Richard Tol determined that in order to cut carbon emissions enough to keep global warming in check, we would have to tax carbon-emitting fuels by as much as $4,000 per ton of carbon dioxide—or $35 per gallon of gas—by the end of the century. You can imagine what this would do to the economy. According to the leading economic energy models, by 2100 a tax like this would be reducing global economic output by the equivalent of $40 trillion a year.

    Now making climate predictions is an inexact science, but the best estimates are that if we don’t do anything about global warming, by 2100 it will be doing roughly $3 trillion a year in damage to the world.

    In other words, under the approach Gore suggests, we’d be spending $40 trillion a year in order to prevent $3 trillion a year in environmental damage.

    Clearly, this doesn’t make sense. But neither does it make sense to allow climate change to continue unchecked. The question is whether we can find a cure that isn’t worse than the disease.

    I think we can. What if, instead of trying to make carbon-emitting fuels too expensive to use, we devoted ourselves to making green energy cheaper?

    Right now, solar panels are so expensive—about 10 times as much as fossil fuels in terms of cost per unit of energy output—that only rich people can afford to install them (and usually only if they get tax breaks). But think where we’d be if we could make solar cells ten times cheaper—in other words, cheaper than fossil fuels. We wouldn’t have to force (or subsidize) anyone to stop burning coal and oil. Everyone would shift to the cheaper and cleaner alternatives.

    This is why I—along with a panel of leading economists (including three Nobel laureates) convened by the Copenhagen Consensus Center—have urged policymakers to significantly increase the amount of money we invest in green energy R&D. As the Breakthrough Institute has pointed out, we didn’t promote the invention of computers by taxing slide rules or restricting the supply of typewriters. We did it by investing massively in R&D.

    In fact, devoting just 0.2 percent of global economic output – roughly $100 billion a year – to green energy R&D would produce the kind of game-changing breakthroughs needed to fuel a carbon-free future. Not only would this be a much less expensive fix than trying to cut carbon emissions, it would also reduce global warming far more quickly.

    This, in a nutshell, is the message of the new documentary about me and my work that opens nationwide on Friday, Nov. 12. The film is called “Cool It” and, yes, the title is meant to be clever. The idea is simple: instead of claiming that the sky is falling—and using that as an excuse to subsidize inefficient technologies and make fossil fuels too expensive to use—we should just calm down and fund the basic research that will make green energy too cheap and easy to resist.


    • V.H

      AGW is proven to be false and a big fat lie. IMHO, it is wholly irrational to think that humans can change earth’s climate in one way or another. Climate changes have occured forever, and will contiune to do so despite us.

      Global Warming/Climate Change = Theft by fear. Nothing more, nothing less 🙂

  38. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced new funding to the Palestinian Authority and held talks with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit on Wednesday, a day before her scheduled meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in New York.

    Clinton said that she and her Egyptian counterpart discussed several issues here in Washington, ranging from Israeli-Palestinian issues to the international tribunal investigating the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

    “It is important that we do everything we can at a particularly sensitive time in the region to try to redouble our efforts to achieve a two-state solution [to Israeli-Palestinian tensions], to help stabilize the situation in Sudan, and to work to ensure that the people of Lebanon can have accountability in the search for justice,” said Hillary Clinton.

    Clinton said that the issue at the top of the agenda was the need for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks toward a two-state solution.

    The U.S. Secretary of State has echoed President Barack Obama’s criticism of Israel’s announcement this week that it is moving ahead with plans to build 1,300 new housing units in East Jerusalem.

    Egypt’s Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit told reporters at the State Department that Egyptian officials believe the United States is making a serious effort to bring both parties to the negotiating table and that Israel needs to show it is serious about peace.

    “I have to tell you that we are concerned,” said Aboul Gheit. “We are concerned because we feel that Israel is not doing what is required on the Israeli side to do.”

    U.S.-brokered peace talks stalled last month when Israel did not extend a freeze on most West Bank settlement activity. The Palestinians say they will not return to the talks without an extension of the freeze.

    Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat has said that in the absence of peace talks, the Palestinians might seek support in the United Nations for a declaration of independence.

    Clinton said the United States believes that both sides should refrain from unilateral actions that could jeopardize the peace process.

    Earlier, Clinton announced that the United States has transferred $150 million in new aid to the Palestinian Authority to help close its budget gap.

    “This new funding will help the Palestinian Authority pay down its debt, continue to deliver services and security to its people, and keep the progress going,” she said. “It will support our work together to expand Palestinians’ access to schools, clinics and clean drinking water in both the West Bank and Gaza [Strip].”

    The secretary of state said the funds bring U.S. direct budget assistance to the Palestinian Authority to $225 million this year. Overall support and investment to the Palestinians is nearly $600 million for the year.


  39. Came across this. Have only skimmed parts of it over. Maybe we could pull bits and pieces at a time and get it straightened out. Judging by the title that shouldn’t be a problem:

    The Power of the President
    Recommendations to Advance Progressive Change

    Click to access executive_orders.pdf

    • Anita

      This was a great find. Thanks for sharing with everyone.

      Time for the EPA to be:


      • JAC the Terminator! That’s three for you this week. Keep going. You have plenty more to terminate.

    • What I skimmed was interesting. I’m wondering which way Obama will jump? When the WH mentioned compromise on the Bush tax cuts, Pelosi got clarification that it would only be for the middle class. And she still has some clout…(I think this confirms most Democrats who lost were moderates, and the hardcore left dominates their party. 2012 will be bloody)

      Pelosi easily elected minority leader

      The House Democrats have elected Nancy Pelosi minority leader in the 112th Congress by a vote of 150 to 43. Pelosi defeated Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina,

    • Got to the part about “engaging hunters and anglers” and realized that these idiots have no clue what they are saying. My growing dislike for progressives continues. 👿

    • Notice the recommendation to use “Executive Orders” and searched how many times this term was used. Let’s go around Congress to get the Progressive Agenda through.

  40. Low-tax states will gain seats, high-tax states will lose them
    By: Barbara Hollingsworth
    Local Opinion Editor
    11/17/10 10:00 AM EST

    Migration from high-tax states to states with lower taxes and less government spending will dramatically alter the composition of future Congresses, according to a study by Americans for Tax Reform

    Eight states are projected to gain at least one congressional seat under reapportionment following the 2010 Census: Texas (four seats), Florida (two seats), Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington (one seat each). Their average top state personal income tax rate: 2.8 percent.

    By contrast, New York and Ohio are likely to lose two seats each, while Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania will be down one apiece. The average top state personal income tax rate in these loser states: 6.05 percent.

    The state and local tax burden is nearly a third lower in states with growing populations, ATR found. As a result, per capita government spending is also lower: $4,008 for states gaining congressional seats, $5,117 for states losing them.

    And, as ATR notes, “in eight of ten losers, workers can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment. In 7 of the 8 gainers, workers are given a choice whether to join or contribute financially to a union.”

    Imagine that: Americans are fleeing high tax, union-dominated states and settling in states with lower taxes, right-to-work laws and lower government spending. Nothing sends a message like voting with your feet.

    Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/low-tax-states-will-gain-seats-high-tax-states-will-lose-them-108681159.html#ixzz15ZhR5XOf

    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      Maine collects income taxes from its residents utilizing four tax brackets.

      For single taxpayers, they are:
      2 percent on the first $4,850 of taxable income
      4.5 percent on taxable income between $4,851 and $9,700
      7 percent on taxable income between $9,701 and $19,450 and
      8.5 percent on taxable income of $19,451 and above

      For married taxpayers filing joint returns, they are:
      2 percent on the first $9,750 of taxable income
      4.5 percent on taxable income between $9,751 and $19,450
      7 percent on taxable income between $19,451 and $38,900 and
      8.5 percent on taxable income of $38,901 and above.

      Also a 5% sales tax rate, (and various R.E. tax rates which includes revenue sharing from the state).

      U.S. census bureau estimates Maine’s population declined from 2008 – 2009.

      The State budget continues to be cut and Republicans will control both state houses and the Governorship in 2011, so if you are looking for a free ride, you may be wise to look elsewhere. Maybe try Massachusetts as they already have universal healthcare in full swing.

  41. OK, might not be PC, respectful, blah, blah, but sure as hell is funny…..

    Coochy Coochy Coo!


  42. This one is far to easy. So much so I shouldn’t count it, but it is late and I am tired.


    Department of Education


  43. US Weapon:

    Sorry for your loss.

    I was out of town most of the week. Yesterday, I went through security at Spokane airport. I chose the side that I thought would get me out of a full body scan. However, they pointed me through the scan and I refused. I said I would go through the magnetic screen but not the full body scan. A TSA agent then came up to me and read me a prepared statement about getting a full pat down and body frisk. He then asked me if I wanted to go through the full body scan or take the frisk. I again answered that I would go through the magnetic reader but not the full body scan. I was then asked to wait while they got another agent to frisk me. He asked me if I had any sensitive body parts and if I wanted a private screening. I asked him what he was going to do and he said he had to run up both of my legs with an open hand until he felt resistence. I elected for him to do the search in public. He did not squeeze me genitals but he was in the area.

    I will continue to refuse a full body scan at any airport that has them. I couldn’t believe the number of sheeple that gladly went through them including young attractive teen-agers.

%d bloggers like this: