Guess Who Gets To Go Through Airport Security Again Tomorrow?

This girl! (Backstory)

I plan on asking every cab driver in whose cab I ride whether they did any of these things in the backseat:

- Changed a diaper
- Used hand lotion/body cream/anti-fungal cream
- Sat in the back after playing golf
- Got mud in their floorboards
- Ate bacon/hot dog/cured meat
- Drank water

See, “nitrates” in all these things will trigger the TSA’s Official Terrorist Alarm whilst I undergo their security screening and I don’t want to be held responsible for some terrorist cab driver’s water-swilling, hand-lotioning ways. I once accidentally took a bullet in my carry-on for a cross-country trip but look out, hand lotion.

This guy got a finger wagging from the TSA for showing the insipid weakness of their Backscatter machines. I thought the machines were perfect? To hear the TSA explain it, they don’t douse your body with a questionable amount of radiation, they pelt your body with cupcakes and sugar. Who doesn’t love cupcakes and sugar? Terrorists, that’s who. I kid you not, in Dallas I had a TSA agent shout at me that “radio waves aren’t radiation.”

Scientists spoke out against the Backscatters, but luckily the CEO knows the President well enough to fly around with him. I’m sure that helps in bypassing pesky health certifications.

“But, but you’re already exposed to radiation while flying!” Well then by all means, SIGN ME UP FOR MORE. Why stop at body scanners? Do you have any uranium I can handle?

I forgot to tell you the reason for the fun: I’m headed to Las Vegas to speak at Right Online. I’m looking forward to the event and it will mark the second time I’ve heard Sarah Palin speak in person.

A Date With The TSA *UPDATED: TSA’s Own Rules

While leaving the Providence, Rhode Island gathering for the Franklin Center where the first annual Breitbart Awards were held, we were detained by the TSA and my husband was subjected to intrusive screenings based on the claim that he was covered in “nitrates.”

We fly frequently and when told to walk through the hotly debate Backscatter machines, we opt out for patdowns. I walked through the metal detector but Chris was directed to the bodyscanner, at which point he opted out.

He was subjected to the standard pat-down: back of the hands, check your waistband, run hands up and down the inside of the leg stopping at the groin. When the agent went to check his gloves he claimed that something on his gloves “set off the alarm” at which point informed us that Chris would be subjected to another pat-down and his luggage searched.

They directed us over to the side of the security area and searched his luggage; they also swabbed everything in it. It was at this point they began talking about “nitrates,” a reason often in the news because of the propensity for false-positive results in such tests. They asked him if he fired a gun or handled gas today. We explained to them that we had not been to a range in a few weeks and did not go in the clothes he was wearing or take with us our carry-on luggage. They zipped up his luggage and directed us to a private room.

He was not given the choice as to whether or not he wanted a private or public screening for the second, more invasive pat-down.

At this point we were becoming annoyed as we’d been detained for around 25 minutes minutes already (the entire screening process took about 45 minutes) and were concerned that we would miss our flight. I flipped on my camera after we had been escorted into the private room and kept it vertical, rather than horizontal, to look less confrontational.

The TSA agent informed us, as he snapped on his blue latex gloves, that he would be performing another pat-down, this time using the front of his hands, and he would be touching Chris’s “groin.” It was at this point I began asking questions. He became aggravated and asked for me to turn off my camera. I asked once more about photos and video for clarification, and he stated that the reason I could not film them touching my husband’s genitals through his shorts was due to “security reasons.” The other agent in the room spoke into his shoulder walkie about security. I complied and turned off my phone. When I asked for the agent’s name a second time, he informed me that if I would like, he would call security. The agent demanded that I put my phone away entirely and get it out of my hands and would not start the intrusive screening procedure until I had done so.

He performed the pat-down which began as routine, except that he used the front of his hands. He then bent down and specifically targeted Chris’s crotch. Using the front of his hands, he pressed against his genitals and swept his hands across the crotch three times across, and then pressed at the top of his genitals and wiped his hands down three times.

Make no mistake: outside of the airport this would be considered molestation.

They claimed that the alarm went off again after this second intrusive pat-down and that it was, again, due to “nitrates.” They were going to have to hold us further and were not sure whether we would make our flight. I informed them that I planned to speak out publicly about it, which aggravated them, but I wanted them to know that this process was unacceptable.

They called over a supervisor and huddled together to discuss the situation. They were considering not allowing him to board, from the muted discussion I heard. It was at this point, per the supervisor from my understanding, that they agreed to release him, having found nothing on his person and no reason to suspect him. As mentioned before, the entire screening process took around 45 minutes.

We ran to our gate and fortunately made it as the last group boarded.

One of the agents suggested that perhaps he got whatever tipped off the alarm from the cab — but I was also in the cab, I reminded them. For the sake of the argument, had we been terrorists, their screening would have failed as their metal detectors would not have detected any explosive materials on me, and their bodyscanners do not detect such materials; if either of us had ill intent one of us would have been allowed on the flight. The TSA’s policy of nonsensical random screenings, which look for items rather than behavior, can be easily exploited, which is why our country has a bloodier history with sky-terror than, say, Israel, which focuses on behavior in their security protocol.

The citizenry should not have to put up with such a violation of their civil rights, airline customers should not suffer the harassment of being felt up or molested to fly the skies, and the government should not forces private airline companies to subject their customers such intrusions. Airlines should have the right to privatize their security and the federal government needs more intelligent means of thwarting sky-terrorism than fondling citizens.

More from Twitchy here.

*UPDATE: Jimi971 notes this:

TSA does not prohibit the public, passengers or press from photographing, videotaping or filming at security checkpoints, as long as the screening process is not interfered with or slowed down. We do ask you to not film or take pictures of the monitors. While the TSA does not prohibit photographs at screening locations, local laws, state statutes, or local ordinances might.

 

Taking photographs may also prompt airport police or a TSA official to ask what your purpose is. It is recommended that you use the Talk To TSA program on tsa.gov to contact the Customer Support Manager at the airport to determine its specific policy. Or, if you are a member of the press, you should contact the TSA Office of Public Affairs.

I’m curious to know what Rhode Island’s regulations are concerning the taping of TSA agents performing intrusive screenings.

Silly Women, Politics Are For Men

So this happened today.

If one doesn’t intend to promote the idea that women can’t have “astute” observations without taking lead from their male colleagues, one should better articulate their written opinion.

That said, as I noted on Twitter, if I had participated in a Secret Romney Meeting, so? Media Matters colludes weekly with the White House via conference calls. Progressives are opposed to that in which they themselves engage? Of course, that doesn’t merit articles at Mediaite, apparently, but the suggestion that I’m able to teleport from a live radio show (with webcam!) to DC for a meeting all at once somehow does.

Former OFA Worker in Village Voice: “Decay of White Brain”

Here is a formula:

Poorly write a too-long, not-smart-enough-to-be-snarky racist piece on the “white brain.”

Because your business is worried that it might not get enough traffic on its own, hire a PR/social media firm to send out emails like the one below baiting bloggers into giving an otherwise undeserving piece written for shock’s sake (you remember what I said about shock as art) some attention.

Good morning!

Wanted to pass along this week’s Village Voice cover story from Steven Thrasher – it’s an interesting take on the decay of the white brain and attempt to determine if it can be cured.

Although, you cannot help but chuckle at the “Sources of White Stress” diagram in the piece, which supplements the various examples of white baby boomers behaving “insane.” Thrasher attributes this to the “stingy” reaction from these boomers who fully understand that their tax dollars are going to education, healthcare and welfare for the “coming browns” (40% of our nations population under 18, whites will be a minority by 2023).

The URL to the piece follows below  - would be interesting to see your reaction. Let me know if you have any questions or would like additional information on this week’s Village Voice.

Thanks,
Marissa

Village Voice
White America Has Lost Its Mind
The White Brain, Beset with Worries, Finally Goes Haywire in Spectacular Fashion
By: Steven Thrasher
September 29, 2010
http://www.villagevoice.com/2010-09-29/news/white-america-has-lost-its-mind/


Marissa Arnold
LaunchSquad
marissa@launchsquad.com
www.launchsquad.com

I’ll be your Huckleberry.

Just imagine for a moment if someone had written “Sources of Black Stress” and portrayed people like Al Sharpton or John Lewis in this manner.

I couldn’t even read through the entire article. I’ve read critiques of conservative America before and have even chuckled, as Marissa said, with those, but that’s because the author could write well enough to accurately convey sarcasm without offense. Unfortunately, that’s not what we have here with a publication whose online life must thrive for the print side to make financial sense. I wonder if that’s why dinosaur publications must go to such extreme lengths to attract eyeballs – and they depend upon the blogosphere to push them with reaction.

The article is a frosh attempt to characterize the entire conservative movement as being solely Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and a few other white people. Thrasher insists that it’s an all-white movement. As a former OFA worker, Thrasher is doing his party proud by following the cardinal rule of soc-prog politics: ignore the black conservatives. Deneen Borelli calls this “plantation politics.” Why is the media so terrified acknowledging the existence of black conservatives? Pretty soon, they’ll have people standing in front of the polls … oh, wait.

Thrasher also tries to identify racism:

After the 2008 election, when former House majority leader Tom DeLay suggested that instead of a formal inauguration,Barack Obama should “have a nice little chicken dinner, and we’ll save the $125 million.”

Right. Because saying “chicken” is racist. Does Thrasher think that only black people eat chicken and because of that, immediately assumes this is racist? Because I ADORE chicken. DeLay is from Texas, after all, and in certain parts of the hemisphere, that’s considered a pretty damn good meal, race aside.

While Thrasher projects, he ignores:

- The Kenneth Gladney beating

- The NAACP presser wherein Gladney was ridiculed and called slurs in public

- White liberal/progressive/socialists mocking and name-calling black Republicans, on tape, at the 8/28 event in DC

- Bill Clinton’s remark on Obama: “A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

- Harry Reid: Obama — a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

- Obama: Blacks are a ‘Mongrel’ People

- The revered former KKK grand cyclops/dragon/something Democrat Roberty Byrd a few years before his death:

But because they said “sorry” after they were caught and trashed in the public, that totally absolved them of any racist feelings in their hearts. Repentance? In faith, it’s motivated by wanting to do better as a person, not a formality one must begrudgingly endure so as to bypass a PR disaster.

Thrasher wants to shock with an intentionally non-amusing piece:

White people, after all, had managed to invent a spiffy new form of self-government so that all white men (and, eventually, women) could have a say in how white people were taxed and governed. White minds had also nearly universally occupied just about every branch of that government and, for more than two centuries, had kept sole possession of the leadership of its executive branch (whose parsonage, after all, is called the White House).

[...]

White people have simply gone sheer f*cking insane.

Thrasher cites Acorn, the group which plead guilty to massive voter fraud in St. Louis.

It doesn’t take a genius to see how this may be validated then:

November 2009, Public Policy Polling found that more than a quarter of Americans (and an outright majority of Republican voters) believed that ACORN had stolen the election for Obama.

OMGWTF! You mean Americans distrust a group which plead GUILTY to VOTER FRAUD? Nooooo!

More tired conspiracy theories. Thrasher makes the birthers and truthers look sane:

Months later, O’Keefe was arrested by the FBI in a bizarre prank at Senator Mary Landrieu‘s office, in which he was either attempting to plant a wiretap or, in his explanation on Breitbart’s website, just trying to find out whether her phone system worked to help her constituents reach her. (Yeah, that was a good one.)

Perhaps he never read the police report wherein O’Keefe was never picked up for “wiretapping.” For someone to complain about white people and puppets so much, Thrasher does a helluva job in letting the liberal white patriarchy pull the strings of the talking points. Everyone on the same page!

More:

This summer, Breitbart picked out another black target with another selectively edited video, this one of a USDA employee named Shirley Sherrod. His editing so mischaracterized Sherrod’s words

Thrasher honestly has no clue what he’s talking about, a very important prerequisite if you’re going to write a blabbering piece airing out your hatred of conservatives and your refusal to acknowledge black conservative America.

Breitbart never edited the Sherrod tape. He released what he had, an excerpt of it. As I wrote in July (full original Sherrod tape and Breitbart excerpt both embedded):

As I said on King last night, apparently, I’m one of few who’s actually read the original post, watched the original video, and watched the entire 45-minute-15-second video in its entirety. Some points.

- People need to get out a dictionary and look up “exculpatory.”

- The original post and video was to highlight the applause of discrimination towards a white farmer. It was given in context.

- The original video was not “doctored” nor “out of context,” and the irony is that those making such statements are actually taking the context away from its original presentation. Sherrod was building to a lesson in her speech – but went on later in her speech to talk about how people who support HCR are racist, essentially. It’s at 23:53 in. Look, I did your homework for you.

“I Haven’t seen such mean-spirited people as I’ve seen lately over this issue of health care. Some of this racism we thought was buried didn’t it surface?” Now we endured eight years of the Bushes and we didn’t do the stuff that these Republicans are doing because you have a black president.”

Um … soooo people who wanted to make their own medical decisions over their own bodies were doing it because they were racist?

While I’m continuing to do your homework and critical thinking for you, check this at 25:00 in:

“I couldn’t say 45-years ago, I couldn’t stand here and say what I will say to you tonight … God helped me to see that it’s not just about black people, it’s about poor people.”

Why can’t it just be about PEOPLE? PEOPLE, PERIOD?

It’s easier to get a paycheck for writing a diary entry on how badly you hate conservatives when you don’t research the very topics about which you’re writing.

Cute, Thrasher:

We’ve had rat-fuckers like Breitbart and O’Keefe around forever

Why isn’t he calling the people who are trying to bilk billions of dollars from the public via the fraudulent and corrupted Pigford case (the reason that the White House acted so quickly to toss Sherrod under the bus; the didn’t want the public to find out that she was connected to a massive case of fraud which could implicate the president as it was he, as a senator, who ushered Pigford back to Washington) ratf*ckers? Here’s a challenge for you Thrasher: be worthy of the journalist title which you claim and write a five-page diatribe on that.

My interest trailed off when he decided that Mark Williams was the tea party head  (which, if that’s the game he’s playing, I’ll go ahead and assume that Jeremiah Wright is the head of all progressives) that, and I was tired of being screeched at by an angry former OFA worker whose knowledge of the issues he tackled was limited to whatever Kos had posted about them.

And dinosaur media wonders why America has given them a vote of no confidence.

Libs Quiet on Conservative Assaults

I’ve been watching Media Matters fake concern over the Reid-supporting chick punched at a townhall forum this week.

Suddenly Eric Boehlert is a defender of women. Except when those women are conservative, because hey, Kelly Owens and Allee Bautsch TOTALLY had it coming, right?

Because Media Matters likes to portray itself to its three readers as being objective and high enough to serve as a faux-journalism critique, I expected to find tons on the on-video, cop-witnessed (as per police report) assault of Kelly Owens by the SEIU crowd. So I did a little search in the Media Matters’ archives:

What? That bastion of media purity, the calvary to the rightwing media, the Soros-funded “media” outlet didn’t have anything about the assault of conservative Kelly Owens?

OK, so I imagine that they’re hurriedly drafting a post now to remedy that glaring oversight, since, afterall, they’re such huge defenders of women all of a sudden.

I figured that Media Matters/Eric Boehlert/George Soros would also have written about the severe beating of Allee Bautsch, too, right?

That’s ‘No for $200,’ Alex. Oh, wait, sorry, MMfA did mention Bautsch’s name in an attack on Jim Hoft. So, that’s something, right?

So why, after all this time, nothing on MMfA on either Owens or Bautsch? Why the silence? Why the double-standard?

We’ve had:

tea partiers attacked in Florida:

an Obamacare supporter bite the fingers off a man;

SEIU and lefty crowd beating Kenneth Gladney;

- I received threats concerning my children just last week from a leftist and have since involved the police and the cyber crimes division and, along with my station who is involved, am pursuing maximum criminal charges against the perpetrator

- leftists threatened Andrew Breitbart in Nevada

- leftists spit on people, call Breitbart and conservatives at Right Nation gay slurs

- leftists assault a videographer at a public event

- a lefty congressman assaults two college kids

- the assault of Nathan Tabor and his wife

- More lefty assaults, lefty screeching and intimidation, threats of assault, advocating violence, hateful rallies.

Meanwhile, the tea parties repudiate any such things.

Violence in lieu of discourse is wrong, period. Party, ideology is irrelevant.

Why are only the conservatives saying this, though?

Maybe Media Matters can do a story on it.

Surprise: Liberal Group Releases List of Republicans It Hates

CREW, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, not to be confused with the infinitely more awesome crue, released a list of the Mostly Republicans We HateCrooked Candidates” for 2010. They’ve been getting play on a couple networks and former Democrat activist and CREW head Melanie Sloane has been insisting at every opportunity that her group is “non-partisan.”

Right.

Non-partisan in that seemingly every person listed as a title-holder on the group’s website is a democrat and that members have worked with SEIU, Tom Harkin, Al Gore’s climate protection initiative, and even Joe Biden (Sloane), which I think is important to mention considering the majority of CREW’s criticism is, momentarily, directed entirely at Christine O’Donnell who is vying for Biden’s old seat. The group is also funded by far left umbrella Democracy Alliance, an outfit founded by two former Clinton operatives who publicly lists George Soros as a major donor.

But hey. NON-PARTISAN.

Their list of crooked candidates lists two from Missouri (but oddly, not a whisper about Russ Carnahan who is now at the center of a controversy being that he voted ‘yes’ on the stimulus and his brother’s windfarm received $90 million dollars in stimulus money) and of course, Christine O’Donnell. They make hay over the allegation from a disgruntled O’Donnell staffer but their website makes no mention of the below, among others:

  • The Pigford scandal which could cost Americans billions if passed by congress in invetted USDA claims
  • The story of Eleanor Holmes Norton who was caught on tape violating FEC law by calling lobbyists and shaking them down for cash in voicemail
  • Geithner, save for this, the most critical of the words written him (previously as reference only) on the website – note the difference in aggression when compared to O’Donnell
  • An in-depth look of stimulus waste (it seems they focus mainly on lobbyists)
  • An examination of non-elected health panels and the new process by which the FDA will regulate medicine under health control
  • The ridiculous disparity between their address to Democrat candidates and their over-the-top, torches and pitchforks approach to Republican candidates. To wit: a letter CREW sent “expressing concerns” over the Dodd-Frank act in the Consumer Protection Act:

Today, CREW and 10 other government transparency advocates sent a letter to Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) outlining concerns with provisions in the recently passed Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

Chris Dodd, one of the causes of the Fannie/Freddie disaster and they “express concerns.” Did they send a Hallmark card apologizing afterwards? Meanwhile their homepage is the equivalent of the graffiti on a girl’s bathroom stall wall, subject: O’Donnell. They pay a penance of going after fish-in-a-bucket target Charlie Rangel but a handful of obvious easy criticisms does not make a group non-partisan; consistency and lack of ties to a well-known progressive sugar daddy does.

The Mullet: Worse Than Witchcraft

Hi America! Due to the inane rumblings concerning what a teenager did in her youth, a teenager who in turn upset the establishment apple cart in Delaware, I figured it was time to put some things into perspective.

First, let me reintroduce you to the mullet.

mul·let: n. 1. pl. mullet or mul·lets

  1. A hairstyle that is formed by cutting the hair short on the the top and sides and allowing it to grow longer in back.
  2. See also Camaro crash helmet, Kentucky Waterfall, the Missouri Compromise.

Often defined as “business in the front, party in the back,” the mullet is the staple coiffure of mostly adult men who will never, ever get a date for who they themselves cannot pay. While the hairstyle was indigenous to the redneckius vir and was thought to have grown unpopular after the 80s, it has seen a recent revival in pop culture thanks to individuals like Bill Maher:

Maher’s hairstyle, despite the clever combing, is clearly a case of Kentucky Waterfall.

Look, we’re all guilty of inane, youthful behavior, some of us continue certain aspects of it (see the above mullet) well into our adulthood. We’ve all had stupid hairstyles, said stupid things, I even campaigned for the Non-Accusatory Knuckle-Pointer Clinton before I could vote and I and millions of other Americans used to tight-roll our jeans. One time my girlfriends and I even got – are you ready for this? – an ouija board out of a game closet during a slumber party at a friend’s house. OMGBBQGASP!!1! If any one of us were required to run for office while teenagers not a single one of us would have passed inspection. We had not the benefit of maturity.

So why is it now that Christine O’Donnell’s teenage admissions from 14 years ago are more relevant today than her positions on policy today? Answer: the left is trying to spin any candidate with tea party backing as “extreme” or as a “kook” and this is the only way they can since the majority of Americans identify with the grassroots more so than with the Democrat congress:

57% of Likely Voters Describe Democratic Congressional Agenda As Extreme

Independent Voters Favor GOP in 2010 Election Tracking

Most Say Tea Party Has Better Understanding of Issues than Congress

So O’Donnell “dabbled in witchcraft.” I thought the left was supposed to be tolerant? Do they not believe in grace for all, as the right believes? Wait – these are the same people who were calling conservatives “homos” outside of Right Nation this past weekend, so that point may be moot.

I wish the left would have made as much of a fuss about the Pigford scandal as they do over what a candidate said as a teenager. Notice how Bill Clinton can advise them on policy, yet nothing is said of his lurid past.

Let this stand as an example of tolerance and grace, but pay attention from what side it originates.

Can we get back to policy now?