home

Wednesday Early Evening Open Thread

One of those days. More Thread.

< Wednesday Morning Open Thread | HAMP'd >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    My daughter is flying to Tulsa tomorrow, (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Anne on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:21:15 PM EST
    and is nervous about doing it on her own; she has to change planes in Dallas, and worried she somehow won't find the right gate and miss her flight, but she has 2 hours between flights so I think she should be okay.

    Her best friend's boyfriend of 6 years is proposing to her friend tomorrow evening, and he has invited my daughter, his soon-to-be-fiancee's sister, his brothers and a couple of their good friends from college to surprise her and celebrate with them after the big moment.  My daughter is beside herself with excitement, especially since my daughter and her boyfriend of almost-four years are planning to get engaged soon.

    Her friend's boyfriend has a whole couple days of activities planned - I think she's going to have the best time.

    Anyway, I warned her about the body scanners and the more-intrusive "pat-downs," so will be interested to hear what her experience is; she's a little nervous about it, so am hoping it isn't too traumatic.

    I wonder sometimes, with all the enhanced scanning and pat-downs, whether the same kind of scrutiny is being given to checked bags and cargo; I have the distinct feeling that all we ever seem to do is react to things, instead of acting, but what do I know?


    I sure hope that the girl says YES !! (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by honora on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:34:10 PM EST
    My daughter is a freshman at Georgia Tech and went through an enhanced screening (she guesses) in Atlanta last month.  She said that it was really bad, but today when I warned her about long lines and protests when she is coming home on Wednesday before Thanksgiving she said.  "Oh, everyone just needs to get over it."  I agree that the screening is kinda useless and over the top, but I want to fly places and I will put up with it.  I kinda think women not having the equal rights under the Constitution and the DNC destroying our democracy are bigger problems.  

    Parent
    Women, in my experience, are not (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 11:58:27 PM EST
    scrutinized as closely as men..  

    Parent
    My experience is the opposite (none / 0) (#21)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 12:21:24 AM EST
    My understanding is that airport cops (and customs officers) tend to suspect that weak-willed women will agree to carry something through the checkpoint for their boyfriends.

    Parent
    My experience=my personal (none / 0) (#22)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 12:35:04 AM EST
    observations.  And I have been in a lot of airports, both in the U.S. and outside the U.S.  Unless everyone is screened, it is the males who end up with their arms and legs stretched out, followed by wanding and very personal patdowns.  

    Parent
    Well, I have no statistics (none / 0) (#24)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 12:55:15 AM EST
    so it's just my opinion . . . .

    Parent
    Checked bags and cargo on passenger flights (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by ruffian on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:40:35 PM EST
    are scanned with the xray machines. It is the cargomon strictly cargo flights like UPS and fedex that is not always scanned.

    FWIW.

    Parent

    You just know those cargo bags (none / 0) (#7)
    by nycstray on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:31:44 PM EST
    aren't getting the screening they need. Isn't the excuse usually that they don't have the capacity to screen that much cargo?

    I  wonder if all the agents are down with the new "pat down" guidelines? The nice young woman that did mine at JFK (in the spring before the new enhanced BS) apologized as she did it. Can't see her checking with the new enhanced routine. Seems like it might be beyond her comfort level . . .

    Parent

    I would be happy if we could go through (none / 0) (#11)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:57:34 PM EST
    a background check process that would allow us to be exempt from all security.

    Parent
    Thanks for the update (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 07:30:14 AM EST
    I need the vicarious vacations these days. Sounds marvelous despite the armed guards. Hope I can get there someday.

    Parent
    Many Congratulations (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 07:50:09 AM EST
    Sounds like a wonderful trip.  Enjoy it to the fullest. Don't you mean though that I haven't really felt alive until I've seen five adult male lions feasting on a hippo :)?

    Parent
    I think there will begin to be ways for various (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 09:04:25 PM EST
    groups to get around it. Powerful people aren't going to put up with it.

    Parent
    I would guess that it's a waste of time (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 09:24:45 PM EST
    to screen at least 85% of travelers. Probably more.

    Parent
    Me too (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 10:35:44 PM EST
    Even if it had to be redone regularly like a security clearance does.

    Parent
    Exactly (none / 0) (#17)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 11:02:53 PM EST
    I would not be happy boarding a plane, (none / 0) (#23)
    by oculus on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 12:35:50 AM EST
    having been personally screened each and every time, if others were somehow exempt.  

    Parent
    I'll tell you what (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 12:56:15 AM EST
    I feel pretty comfortable saying that is it a waste of time to screen you--ever. Likewise for me and everyone else I know.

    Parent
    Getting a security clearance (none / 0) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 07:09:07 AM EST
    is personally invasive.  If you could obtain something like that to make getting on the plane easier, the pain and intrusion would have occurred beforehand.  When you get a security clearance, they go through your whole personal life.  Even your neighbors and friends are interviewed along with your family members, your bank accounts...everything.  Some people because of who they are related to probably would not be able to obtain one, so it isn't likely to happen.  Smacks of discrimination.  But hey, so does the no fly list :)

    Parent
    That seems so strange to me (none / 0) (#27)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 01:25:14 AM EST
    I'd FAR rather have my physical person groped by some TSA person than have the gummint pry into my life through a background check.  The groping is one time and quickly over.  A background check puts you into a database forever.  NO THANKS.


    Parent
    Depends on the extent (none / 0) (#35)
    by brodie on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:06:47 AM EST
    of the background check.  Looking into relevant things like prior arrests and convictions I'm fine with, but I'm not sure what beyond that would be relevant.

    As for the groping, no thanks.  And I've heard anecdotal evidence from some women interviewed in the media that they feel almost "violated" with the new search.  So I'm not sure if it's quite as simple for some as a one-and-done situation -- the psychological effects can linger for a long time.

    I'd take the x-ray scan for now given this double-bind dilemma.  But that's only because I don't fly often.  If I were flying monthly, no way would I accept that much x-raying.  

    Nor would I accept the grope -- that's for my SO, and my female physician during the annual probe-n-grope.  So, it would be choo-choo train or car for me.

    Parent

    Almost violated (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by sj on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:26:22 AM EST
    Someone who says they feel almost violated really does feel violated but is trying to emotionally downplay it.

    So that's some serious stuff.

    Parent

    I feel for those women, but really (2.00 / 1) (#76)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 11:39:09 PM EST
    they need to get a grip, IMO.  It's certainly unpleasant, but being even slightly traumatized by it is an indicator of a serious psychological imbalance that needs treatment.  That's not snark, btw.  I'm serious.

    As for me personally, I have zero problem with the scanner and would choose that in preference to the groping.  But I fly rarely.  If I had to fly frequently for my job, I'd probably go for the groping.

    Parent

    You would... (none / 0) (#41)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:43:25 AM EST
    those that might fail such a check, yet are not currently wanted for anything, would have their inalienable right to travel violated.

    That can't be tolerated.

    Parent

    Changing planes in Dallas can be a challenge (none / 0) (#13)
    by ruffian on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 09:20:46 PM EST
    It always seems like I have to walk miles there, but two hours should be enough time. Sounds like a great trip though. She'll forget all the airport hassles when she is with her friends.

    Parent
    perhaps this will get his attention (5.00 / 4) (#44)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:41:42 AM EST
    George Soros Tells Progressive Donors Obama Might Not Be The Best Investment

    Soros told those in attendance that he is "used to fighting losing battles but doesn't like to lose without fighting."

    "We have just lost this election, we need to draw a line," he said, according to several Democratic sources. "And if this president can't do what we need, it is time to start looking somewhere else."

    in other humorous news, remember Obamas Fight the Smears website?

    It was launched to great fanfare as a one-stop shop to counter the scurrilous slurs circulating among opponents and your misguided relatives.

    We don't know how effective it was in practice, but we liked the symbolism: A candidate who wasn't going to sit back and let smear merchants define the terms of debate. A campaign that would aggressively rebut the wild charges against it.

    The website hasn't been updated since November 2008. Because, as everybody knows, smears against Obama, Democrats, and their policies completely stopped the moment he was elected.



    does make one wonder (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:52:38 AM EST
    which "smears" they were worried about and why doenst it?

    Parent
    I was wrong about Joshua's not sciencey (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 04:20:56 PM EST
    enough science fair project. He received an honorable mention.  If I had remembered to remind him to put his process down clearly on his story board he probably would have placed.  He had a report in a binder on the side that clearly outlined his processes but it wasn't as clear on his story board, only his results.  When I was there I couldn't help but pull one of the judges aside and tell her that I as a parent complained that he was doing something not sciencey enough.  She said he applied good solid testing methods and data collecting, and his project had never been seen by any of them before in earlier years.  It was an orginal science fair idea so that scored big points with them.  I always wanted to make a potato battery, there were two of those and they got ignored :(  I still want to make a potato battery.

    dude, indeed (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 07:58:07 AM EST
    Well he's 7 years old now and it took a couple of years for his parents to really understand what happened, but when Colton Burpo was four years he was having surgery in the hospital for a burst appendix. While he was in surgery he apparently had some sort of out of body experience and could see what his parents were doing. He witnessed that his dad was praying and his mom on her cellphone. Both parents say they have no clue how he knew that, but that it's absolutely true. And the story just gets more interesting from there.

    Apparently during the same surgery Colton went to Heaven where he recounts how he met his grandfather who he had never known, who he later recognized in photos. The interesting thing is that he didn't recognize photos of his grandfather as an old man with glasses, which is how everyone knew him, but rather as a young man. Colton's father literally had go find a photo of `Pop' as a young man before Colton was able to recognize him. Now that's pretty wild.

    But I must say what really surprised me was that Colton's father recounts how Colton, still 4 years old, told his mother "you had a baby die in your tummy didn't you", which completely shocked them both because they had never told him about their miscarriage. They asked him how he knew and he said that he met his sister in Heaven and she told him what happened.

    Dude.

    if they are making this up or coaching the kid it is beyond reprehensible.  if they are not . . .

    not sure how to finish that.


    Fool me once.... (none / 0) (#85)
    by observed on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 08:32:35 AM EST
    When I was Nero in a past life, I heard similar stories of a "heaven" for the dead.
    Since this contradicts the obvious, universally accepted and oft-observed phenomenon of reincarnation, it is obviously a fairy tale.

    Parent
    "One of those days"-- (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 06:16:27 PM EST
    for sure. Two trips to family law court. Whatever I knew about this subject vanished long ago. Very helpful staff.

    Sounds like a Mega day (none / 0) (#4)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 07:47:52 PM EST
    Very emotionally draining. Alcohol helps! (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by oculus on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 11:56:04 PM EST
    I'm wondering if weeping while being naked-scanned (none / 0) (#2)
    by ruffian on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 06:22:21 PM EST
    at the airport would get me kicked off a flight.

    Well, you can (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Zorba on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 07:56:50 PM EST
    always choose to be groped (pardon me, physically searched) instead of going through the back-scatter scanner.  I've been through the "naked" scanners- if they want to see my naked, old image, they're certainly not going to get any titillation out of it.  Having said that, I do consider it intrusive and a violation of my Constitutional, Fourth Amendment rights.
    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.

    Because we may choose to travel by airplane, as opposed to car, train, bus, walking, bicycling, or crawling on our hands and knees, should not mean that we give up all our rights against "unreasonable search and seizures."
     

    Parent
    The groping would be worse I guess (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by ruffian on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 08:37:14 PM EST
    Just as upsetting, and more time consuming.

    Lewis Black on The Daily Show made a good point about how easily we agreed to all of the other measures to fight the 'war on terror' - Patriot Act, two wars, torture, etc....and now when it comes to scanning grandma people are up on arms. I guess it has to come close to home for people to realize what we are giving up. In my defense I'm just as mad at all those other things.

    Parent

    I have no choice at (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by the capstan on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 09:58:14 PM EST
    my local airport.  To be scanned, I'd have to drive to Atlanta. (That's not an attractive option when you are learning to live with occular myasthenia--ghost or duplex images). Is it true that they do not 'pat down' absolutely every traveler?  I can't imagine having the groin and buttock check at my advanced age--but I saw the video of the 3-year-old batting away the hands.  (And how is this going to affect what we tell the little ones about not letting people touch their bodies?)  

    Parent
    In Japan, at the gate, females were patting (none / 0) (#18)
    by oculus on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 11:55:29 PM EST
    down (including the groin) male passengers.  I did not see anyone protesting.  

    Parent
    I think the Japanese (none / 0) (#26)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 01:19:34 AM EST
    have always been vastly more sensible about sexuality than we have.  "Don't touch my junk" is probably an incomprehensible idea to them.  There's sex and there's non-sex, and this is non-sex.

    Parent
    I disagree. (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by vml68 on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 08:38:08 AM EST
    Most Asians,the Japanese included tend to be quite conservative in their views on sexuality. In most countries, and I am not just talking about Islamic countries, physical contact between men and women in public is frowned upon. Even among relatives, the concept of hugging and kissing is not common. It is changing quite a bit due to what is considered the "westernization/americanization" of younger generations but older attitudes are still quite prevalent.

    The only reason  

    "Don't touch my junk" is probably an incomprehensible idea to them
    is because we are also taught to respect and never question authority. We make good "sheeple"... :-)!

    Parent
    Well I think Americans (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by brodie on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 08:54:27 AM EST
    have a longer and stronger tradition of civil liberties including privacy, the right not to be subjected to unreasonable searches, and body integrity generally.  And we have a longer and stronger tradition with our free speech and legal system to protect and enforce those rights and expectations.  When we think something is wrong, we tend to speak out and try to get the law changed.

    The Japanese have less of a tradition of course in civil liberties generally, and are much more inclined to be obedient to authority and not protest.  But they might also have a longer tradition of male-female non-sexual interaction -- doctors-patients of the opposite sex, communal public baths in the buff, etc, which would make a female security person thoroughly patting down a male mostly a non or minor issue.

    Parent

    True on both counts (none / 0) (#77)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 11:42:47 PM EST
    I think.  The fact that the U.S. has become a hyper-sexualized society is a big part of the (to me) hysterical overreaction to this from some quarters.  If you don't see absolutely everything in sexual terms, like the Japanese, you're less likely to be irrationally traumatized by being patted down-- with your clothes on, I have to add.

    Parent
    It's not just women who (none / 0) (#86)
    by brodie on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 08:37:37 AM EST
    would be among those many who'd feel in some way violated.  

    I'm a guy and I strongly suspect I would have reacted very similarly to the fellow who videod his search experience.  For me it's a matter of maintaining bodily integrity, personal space.  I don't like people who get too close physically during regular conversation (typical American; other cultures have a tradition of less distance).  I don't like people who have a habit of putting their paws on my shoulder or lapel as they converse -- what we fondly refer to as the Johnson Treatment.  So, if that bothers me, imagine my reaction if some stranger tries to give me a Johnson Plus Treatment.

    This is a very stupid, unnecessarily invasive and probably ineffective policy by TSA.  I suspect as more learn about the gritty details in the media or first hand at the airport, some of the early ridiculously pro-policy surveys will begin to turn, and by not too long from now, have flipped overwhelmingly against.  And unfortunately the Obama admin and Dems will pay a price politically as word about this spreads and people from both sides of the aisle strongly object.

    Parent

    Yes, but you wouldn't (none / 0) (#92)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 02:12:59 PM EST
    be "traumatized."  Of course it's unpleasant.  It's clear from the expressions on the TSA gropers that they find it uncomfortable and unpleasant, too.

    Parent
    I don't know about that G... (none / 0) (#49)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 11:09:52 AM EST
    you think a pair of bloomers would be non-sex but those Japanese horndogs buy used ones out of vending machines fer christs sake.  

    They rival the Germans for being the freakiest of freaks, and making the typically non-sexual sexual.

    All that being said, only four types of people have touched me where these TSA gropers are groping...my parents when I was a kid,  physicians, police, or lovers.  

    Parent

    question (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:05:09 AM EST
    how does the TSA get away with spending 25 million dollars of stimulus money on these stupid scanners they everyone says doesnt even work?

    is the TSA being run by voyeurs

    Parent

    Friends in high places. (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by MO Blue on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:44:27 AM EST
    Comments by Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) who blasted the new full-body scanners on the House floor today, particularly the involvement of former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

    "There is no evidence these new body scanners make us more secure. But there is evidence that former Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff made money hawking these full body scanners," Poe said.

    He went on to explain that Chertoff, who served under President George W. Bush, had given interviews promoting the scanners while he was "getting paid" to sell them.

    For once there is bipartisan outrage.

    "[T]he populace is giving up more rights in the name of alleged security. These body scanners are a violation of the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures ... There must be a better way to have security at airports than taking pornographic photographs of our citizens, including children, and then giving apparent kickbacks to political hacks." link



    Parent
    question #2 (none / 0) (#37)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:12:16 AM EST
    when everyone finally agrees they are worthless what do we do with them?  sell them to high schools?


    Parent
    start a new TV show (none / 0) (#39)
    by jeffinalabama on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:24:43 AM EST
    "Dropping electronics from tall buildings."

    Parent
    I'd pay ten bucks... (none / 0) (#46)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:50:04 AM EST
    for ten minutes with one of 'em and a sledgehammer...Vonnegut's "Player Piano" style baby!

    As good or better than a game of Grand Theft Auto has police state rage therapy.

    Parent

    Watching A Few Good Men again... (none / 0) (#3)
    by Buckeye on Wed Nov 17, 2010 at 06:41:34 PM EST
    Great movie.

    President Obama... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:51:58 AM EST
    as Col. Jessup.

    "Mr. Pres, did you sign off on Wall St's continued fleecing of the nation?"

    "You're damn right I did!"

    Parent

    this has been circulating (none / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:10:43 AM EST
    its pretty good.  I would add a couple.

    and after all that you didnt get mad that while the country circles the drain the republican leaders stand up and say making Obama a one term president is their number one agenda item.

    Message to the Tea Party - What took you so long to get angry?

    You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President.

    You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate Energy policy and push us to invade Iraq .

    You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.

    You didn't get mad . . . .




    That is good. Wouldn't it be nice if (none / 0) (#42)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:10:18 AM EST
    real civil rights groups got half the attention?

    Parent
    All the folks who were saying that (none / 0) (#50)
    by Harry Saxon on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 11:13:14 AM EST
    Tom Delay was the victim of a political conspiracy, from TPMMuckraker(dot)com:

    The defense has argued repeatedly that DeLay was not involved in the PAC's day-to-day operations and, as such, did not know about the swap until after the fact.

    But yesterday, DeLay's lawyer seemed to prove otherwise. According to the Houston Chronicle, his lawyer introduced scheduling calendars in an attempt to show that DeLay only had meetings with the PAC's director, Jim Ellis, weeks after the swap happened.

    But he missed something: DeLay and Ellis attended the same meeting just hours after Ellis had taken out a blank check from the PAC to give to the RNC for the swap. Prosecutors, however, pointed that out. From the Chronicle:

    "I just missed that one," DeGuerin said sheepishly afterward, noting he only had obtained the calendar on Sunday. "The (Sept. 11) meeting was with a bunch of other people."



    Click Me


    Parent
    Thinking about buying Richard Wolffe's book (none / 0) (#38)
    by lilburro on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 09:22:57 AM EST
    all the tidbits I've read are interesting.  Here's a review.  

    For example, Wolffe reports that during the negotiations over the health-care bill, "Speaker Pelosi was so volcanic that much of the White House strategy was shaped in terms of how to deal with her."

    What does it have in it that I don't already know though?  Obama's not a diehard partisan?  The public plan a priority?  Etc etc?

    Somehow escaped all (none / 0) (#43)
    by KeysDan on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 10:30:49 AM EST
    the "advanced security" measures during my travels the past ten days, just the usual stuff.  Even though Germany and France, particularly Paris, was supposedly on high alert, passage through airports in Frankfurt, Dusseldorf,  DeGaulle and Miami were uneventful---albeit, uneven. For example, shoes on in Germany and France, pocket contents emptied in Frankfurt (including passports and paper money), shoes on in Miami, pocket contents OK other than metallic items, customs a breeze.

    At the Atlanta airport, a couple of months ago, I told the TSA agent that I would opt for the "personal check" rather than go through the x-ray machine.  The agent, with some umbrage, informed me that it was not x-ray, and besides he would have to get his supervisor for the check.  The check was non-sensical and non-sensual, but still, I think I will stick with the x-ray machine.

    My husband who was (none / 0) (#51)
    by vml68 on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 11:58:17 AM EST
    in transit through Frankfurt airport a few weeks ago minding his own business told me that he was approached by German police with a "Sir, this is the German police, please come with us". He said he had fleeting visions of rendition. I laughed when he told me that but as a "brown boy", I am sure he must have felt a moment of panic.

    Parent
    what happened next? (none / 0) (#61)
    by DFLer on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:43:37 PM EST
    They asked him the usual questions (none / 0) (#90)
    by vml68 on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 11:56:03 AM EST
    where he had been, where he was going, looked at his passport and went through his carry-on. He said they were extremely polite.

    Parent
    picture (none / 0) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 01:05:06 PM EST
    Sack's view (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by DFLer on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:47:09 PM EST
    Pie can fly, but not my shampoo? (none / 0) (#53)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 01:15:13 PM EST

    "Travelers should know that while pies are permitted through the security checkpoint," numerous other foods, including "creamy dips and spreads," gravy and gift baskets with salsa and jams are not, according to the Transportation Security Administration. A more complete list of foods prohibited from passing through checkpoints can be found on the travel tips section of the agency's website, www.tsa.gov.

    I am sooo glad I am not going anywhere next week.

    Parent

    Jams aren't allowed?! (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 02:09:45 PM EST
    I realize my raspberry jam can make yer taste buds explode, but an airplane?

    what's up with the salsa also?

    cruises are beginning to look pretty good :)

    Parent

    A friend bought 2 jars of jam at inn in (none / 0) (#78)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 12:46:58 AM EST
    Northern CA.  Could not get them through security at Oakland airport.  She was pissed.  Another lady couldn't get her diabetic mother's applesauce through security.

    Parent
    Well, take this for what it's worth (none / 0) (#57)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 02:52:08 PM EST
    Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-Crazytown) fears tampon bombs.

    I mean, I guess in theory, if someone is crazy enough to put explosives in his underwear, someone else might be crazy enough to do it with a tampon.

    It's the logistics of checking this that gets me.....

    Parent

    The suicide bomber that (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by ruffian on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:51:31 PM EST
    attempted to kill a Saudi official last year had the explosive in is stomach, not his underwear, as has been reported. So all of this backscatter tech to look under clothes is obsolete already. Time to just admit we can only do so much.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#68)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 04:07:32 PM EST
    Not to be crass, but where is a tampon located when in use?

    Parent
    would (none / 0) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 04:26:11 PM EST
    depend on the usage.  from a review of The Final Destination

    Survivors get their comeuppance in the order they would have died in the carnage. But the stupid ones generally go first. So here you can place your bets on: Nick, his girlfriend, their two friends (she's okay but he's a total jock), a racist redneck, a nice security guard (Mykelti `Bubba from Forrest Gump' Williamson), a mechanic, a cowboy, and a mom who puts tampons in her kids' ears.


    Parent
    maybe Louie (none / 0) (#58)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:17:16 PM EST
    would volunteer for that duty

    Parent
    Which one? (none / 0) (#60)
    by jbindc on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:29:29 PM EST
    Searching for them or being searched?

    Parent
    he would (none / 0) (#62)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:45:33 PM EST
    probably be down for either

    Parent
    You said it... (none / 0) (#55)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 02:06:22 PM EST
    TSA dude is rocking the pedophile glasses and everything...classic.

    Parent
    Best. Bristol. DWTS. Conspiracy theory. EVAH! (none / 0) (#54)
    by Ellie on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 01:38:53 PM EST
    Fun discussion anyway, but do hold out till the end of the clip.

    (I don't watch DWTS other than fragments clinging around the edges of other crapola I record.)

    CUT SPENDING CUT SPENDING (none / 0) (#59)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:21:27 PM EST
    CUT SPENDING

    except for, you know, 95% of the budget.  isnt there something that has to do with poor people or mexicans that we can cut?

    Deficit Proposal Draws Mixed Review


    Roughly 70% were uncomfortable with making cuts to programs such as Medicare, Social Security and defense in order to reduce the deficit, with 27% saying they were comfortable.

    And nearly 60% said they were uncomfortable with raising tax revenue through such measures as boosting the gasoline tax, limiting deductions on many home mortgages and altering corporate taxation.



    village CW (none / 0) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:50:44 PM EST
    JOE SCARBOROUGH: She's not going to run.  It's The Art of War.  The reason she's saying this is cause she knows she can't win.   She knows she's got to keep her name out in the press.  She knows her poll numbers are dropping. She knows that she was humiliated in her home state of Alaska. She knows that Christine O'Donnell did not work out well. And so--I hate to say it--it's about money.

    vs an actual poll conducted of Hot Air readers.
    which is not the most right wing site on the web by a long shot.  several interesting numbers in that poll but the one that relates here is that Palin is second only to Christie with with 29 and 23% respectively and third is Romney with 6%

    oops (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:51:20 PM EST
    29 and 23% respectively that is.

    Parent
    damn (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 03:51:54 PM EST
    you know what I mean, right?

    Parent
    Scanners Kept Many Illegal (none / 0) (#71)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 04:39:42 PM EST
    or Dangerous Items Off Planes This Year

    Airport passenger screening measures have become a touchy issue in the U.S. in the past week, but in the past year the controversial measures have detected more than 130 prohibited, illegal or dangerous items that otherwise would have made it onto airplanes, the Transportation Security Administration says.

    would love to know more about these dangerous items.  what was the nature of these dangerous items?  
    nail clippers?  assault rifles?  what?

    pot, jack daniel's and other things (none / 0) (#72)
    by nycstray on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 05:22:35 PM EST
    i think they did get some personal knives, the kind you generally see attached to a dudes belt.

    you will prob find more "prohibited" items vs illegal/dangerous ;). and really, with all of the air travelers in one year, they only found 130 items?

    Parent

    To quote Casanova (none / 0) (#74)
    by sj on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 05:33:20 PM EST
    "eh-saack-ly...'

    Parent
    Dollars to donuts (none / 0) (#73)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 05:30:23 PM EST
    the lion's share falls only in the illegal/prohibited category, and not at all dangerous.

    It just dawned on me now that our bring your stash from home on domestic flights days are probably over...my junk was my spot!  

    Parent

    With all due respect (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by Rojas on Thu Nov 18, 2010 at 06:09:28 PM EST
    I didn't need to know that.

    Parent
    Probably many tiny Swiss army knives. (none / 0) (#79)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 12:51:17 AM EST
    I have forfeited a bunch of those.

    Parent
    I used to carry one all the time. (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 07:24:59 AM EST
    a pretty delux one.  once in an airport someplace I was using it to do something I dont even remember what. I used to fly a lot also when I was in the merchant marines.   anyway, I have my boy scout knife out and some woman across the room, a large room, almost screams 'hes got a knife'.
    everyone turns and looks at me, this is in the 70s, there is a moment of silence I start laughing and then everyone starts laughing.

    it was a golden moment.  that would now probably get me a cavity search.


    Parent

    You should have seen my younger brother (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 09:56:45 AM EST
    at Orlando airport the day after the shoe bomber apprehension.  On my brother's arrival, his bike repair tool was confiscated.  He was pissed, as it did not look exactly like anything on the chart of vorboten items.  So, before his plane departed, he was eyeballing that chart again.  I had to leave so was curious whether he actually made his flight.  He did. Very stubborn fellow.

    Parent
    Pepper spray, mace, tasers? (none / 0) (#87)
    by jbindc on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 09:35:35 AM EST
    Me too (none / 0) (#91)
    by ruffian on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 12:01:47 PM EST
    Drove me crazy for 2 yrs until I remembered to stop carrying them on.

    Parent
    this morning coming to work (none / 0) (#81)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 07:30:42 AM EST
    very early
    Im driving along listening to a remix of this and top a hill and there is the sun hanging there like a giant orange pumpkin or the biggest and brightest full moon ever.  I usually curse the sun because I have to drive right into it both coming and going from work.

    but this morning it was stirring and inspirational.

    this looks great (none / 0) (#82)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 07:42:32 AM EST
    I knew that (none / 0) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 08:03:32 AM EST
    CHICAGO - More than 45 million Americans, or 20 percent of U.S. adults, had some form of mental illness last year, and 11 million had a serious illness, U.S. government researchers reported on Thursday.

    Young adults aged 18 to 25 had the highest level of mental illness at 30 percent, while those aged 50 and older had the lowest, with 13.7 percent, said the report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration or SAMHSA.



    losing (none / 0) (#89)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 19, 2010 at 10:16:27 AM EST
    graciously

    It's not over yet in Alaska, or so Joe Miller argued  in federal court last night.  He filed a motion to an existing lawsuit to issue a temporary injunction against the state to stop it from certifying Lisa Murkowski as the winner in the Senate race, claiming that the state started counting the write-in ballots a week early, which left him unprepared to challenge ballots: