Free Markets, Free People

TSA symptomatic of government’s growing fascism

You know, for the most part I’m not one to throw around inflammatory words if I can help it.  I think their use normally marginalizes the person using them as most folks tend to immediately turn off whatever that person has to say thinking them to be an extremist.

But frankly, I just don’t know how else to describe what I see going on out there.  Listening to current and former TSA officials say things like “hey, no one likes 4th Amendment violations, but we’re going to have to do it”, just sends a chill down my spine.  Talk about the banality of evil.

That’s not the only example.   Take cell phones for instance.  Your benevolent, freedom loving government is considering requiring technology in future cars that will allow them to disable cell phones.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said using a cell phone while driving is so dangerous that devices may soon be installed in cars to forcibly stop drivers — and potentially anyone else in the vehicle — from using them.

“There’s a lot of technology out there now that can disable phones and we’re looking at that,” said LaHood on MSNBC. LaHood said the cellphone scramblers were one way, and also stressed the importance of “personal responsibility.”

[…]

“I think it will be done,” said LaHood. “I think the technology is there and I think you’re going to see the technology become adaptable in automobiles to disable these cell phones. We need to do a lot more if were going to save lives.”

Emphasis mine – but it highlights the rationalization used by government drones to restrict your freedoms and violate your rights.  It is the new “for the children”, the latest of excuses used to limit your freedom. 

The TSA and the nonsense spouted by LaHood are only the most visible examples of this growing phenomenon. Government, under the rationalization that it had to save us from financial failure, has intruded upon and taken over vast areas of the economy – health care, car companies, financial institutions.

It’s even trying to further expand its intrusion into the food production industry with a bill now being debated in the Senate (and which has 7 GOP senate cosponsors). The bill would place restrictions on even hobbiest farmers. It would also expand the powers of the FDA and place some power in the hands of Homeland Security.

That’s not the only attack going on in that area.

And the usual suspects are all for this sort of thing.  Oh, of course, you’ll hear them claim publicly about how important our freedoms are and how we should work to preserve them, but when blatant examples of right’s violations surface, they side with security over rights.

They’re also not at all concerned anymore with what they used to decry when it was the opposition holding the presidency.  Remember the outrage on the left about the so-called “imperial executive”, George W. Bush?  Remember the promises of reversing that if Barack Obama won the presidency?

Apparently that’s not that big of a deal anymore:

Former President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff John Podesta, now the head of the Center for American Progress, called on President Obama to push forward with his agenda using federal agencies and executive branch power Tuesday, even though Democrats were dealt a blow in the recent midterm elections. Podesta said the American people want the president to move forward with his agenda.

“I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill,” Podesta said. “While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”

“Forward” toward what, Mr. Podesta?  Creeping fascism?  Heck, it’s not even creeping anymore.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." – Ben Franklin

We’re rapidly approaching deserving neither. Freedom means risk. Security, in the hands of government, means oppression in its name. If you can’t see that growing more and more everyday, you’re simply blind. Time to say "stop this madness" and "hands off my freedoms" with a bit of emphasis and mean it.

~McQ

[ad] Empty ad slot (#1)!

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

27 Responses to TSA symptomatic of government’s growing fascism

  • The frightening thing is that if another airline-based terror attack succeeds, or if there is a sudden increase in media coverage of auto accidents where cellphone use was ‘involved’ it will provide sufficient impetus for this type of intrusion to become law.  Would the PATRIOT Act or the NSA programs that Bush was criticized for have had any chance of passage prior to 9/11/01?  It’s disturbing to see so many who were panicked by those laws and programs to suddenly come to the ‘understanding’ that we need to be saved from ourselves.

    • Why is it that the TSA feels they can violate a travelers 4th amendment rights, but profiling is out of bounds ?

  • The Left never really had an issue with Bush’s so called “imperialism,” their problem was that he wasn’t their guy.

  • http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2010/11/17/next-step-the-war-on-irish-coffee/
    Along the same lines.
    I have said for some time…here, there, everywhere…we have to resist by simple disobedience.
    We have to say NO.

  • Along with diminishing the rights of citizens goes the enhancement of the rights of government. Want to find out what happens when a government employee violates as rule/regulation/law? Sorry, that is a confidential personnel matter. Want to sue? Good luck with that.

  • Human beings are risk averse. After 9/11 it was natural to go overboard on airline security, and especially to do CYA policies as the terrorists innovated. I think now people started to be more rational and do the math.
    Enough time spent waiting in lines to be searched, and the total amount of wasted time equals a thousand deaths, lost productivity, and aggravation. The risk of edged weapons being used against hardened cockpit doors (a very sensible idea) and alert passengers is low. Explosive risk is higher, but checking the bags is probably enough for that, or using chemical sniffers. Probably profiling ala Israel would be the best.

    • Couple of things…the Israelis don’t profile.  NTTAWWT.  Profiling is something we all do each day if we interact with another being…they don’t even need to be a human being.  If you meet a dog, you perform a “profiling” function.  What the Israelis do is a lot more than profile.
      Ann Coulter points out that responses to threats have not been merely ineffectual…they are downright irrational.    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=40058
      I point out that we are LESS safe  as a result of the Nappy Jan PC policy decisions.
      http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/2010/11/crash-madness-of-homeland-security.html

      • “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Ben Franklin

        The second part of that is: “The best way to be safe is to never be secure”. (i.e., don’t get the security blanket mentality that comes from “…the government is on it!”.)

  • Here’s another little vignette of ANOTHER Collectivist thug telling us what he is ready to try to impose on us.
    http://hindenblog1.blogspot.com/2010/11/crash-screw-you-sen-rockefeller.html

  • I know there are lawyers who read and comment here.  Is the scanner or the pat down a violation of the 4th?  I’m asking because if there is a solid enough case there, I’m going to refuse both next time I fly.

    • Here’s the problem: the legal argument can be made (IS being made) that you have no right to fly.  You DO have a right to travel (implicit in the Constitution, and one of the things the Constitution was written to redress).  But long ago, your right to travel by a particular mode was denied (hence, driver’s licenses).
      So, the thinking is that you WAIVE various rights by choosing to fly commercial.  Of course, you can CHARTER an airliner…which you could drive into a skyscraper…and NOBODY would try to stop you or inspect you.
      None of us (pretty much) took much umbrage at having our luggage scanned or searched.  Same arguments on both ends.

      • I have no right to fly?  I have no right to enter into a voluntary contract with a 3rd party to transport me somewhere?  By this logic I could be searched before getting in my car, before entering in the grocery store, etc..
        I don’t understand that this right doesn’t exist.  I don’t understand lawyers who could make such arguments and live with themselves.

        • We may enter into a contract with a COMMON CARRIER (a special class of private business since the Constitution was written), but you are said to WAIVE certain rights in the process.
          As to your grocery store example…ever hear of a sobriety check-point?
          Sorry, I didn’t create these concepts.  I’m just reporting.

          • I know you didn’t.  I didn’t know common carriers are a special class.  Ugh.  I want my own country.

          • I noticed when you get into the little line (or big line…heh) near the TSA station (yesterday) they tell you point blank you’re walking into the ‘we’re free to frisk you zone’.
             
            To avoid it, just don’t walk into it.
            Nice eh?  (just be willing to screw the money you spent on the flight).
             

  • Cellphones? Ha, how about banning radios and all other audio equipment? And those gloveboxes, have you ever seen some loony driving along while riffling through the glovebox for something? Well ok maybe not but it could happen so those need to be eliminated as well. And cupholders! And don’t get me started on passengers! They cause distractions as well so he should ban all vehicles that can carry more than the driver. Now that’s safety!! Or we could just ban LaHood…hmmm now there’s an idea.

    • Next thing you know, they will be banning farting in your auto … lest there be “fart holes” in the seats

  • Trying to outlaw irresponsible activity is .. irresponsible .. and should be outlawed.

  • You know, for the most part I’m not one to throw around inflammatory words if I can help it.

     
    You know, you don’t.  One of the many reasons I’ve been coming here for years.  And you know, believe it or not, for the most part I’m not one to throw around inflammatory words if I can help it (uhh… that might depend on one’s definition of “inflammatory”)
    But this Ray LaHood guy needs to be drawn and quartered.
     
    Ray LaHood:  Professional Douchebag.
     
    Cheers.

  • Of course the left are not really opposed to fascist tactics, heck Mussolini was one of Europe’s foremost leftists after all, and he was spoken of admiringly by left wing leaders in the USA, including FDR, until he hooked up with Hitler.

    Human history is the history of the struggle of the individual versus the state. The state, unfortunately is needed to protect the rights, lives and property of the individual. But the kind of people  most attracted to government are the type most desirous of replacing the priorities of the individual with their own.

    This applies unfortunately to so called conservatives half of the time. but it applies to left wingers ALL of the time. We will not be safe utill these current clowns are kicked out .

  • Considering the majority of attempts (if not all) including Fort Hood have Yemen ties, I say the proper thing to do is bitch slap Yemen.
     
    Pure defense never works.  Eventually a hole is found and your enemy will score a hit.

  • What really chaps my hide is the people who are saying “Don’t want a scan or a grope? Just don’t fly then.”  Yeah, what we really need is to step back in time to before the era of affordable commercial flight.  That’s where us security-averse troglodytes belong anyway, right?
    Buncha hypocrites.  If righties had proposed fighting child p0rn by having every internet-connected computer hard drive subject to search algorithms looking for the stuff, and if their objections had been met with “Don’t want your drive searched? Don’t connect to the internet!” they’d all be up in arms.

  • At the risk of echoing Billy, you’re quite correct that the TSA and it’s actions  are symptomatic of government in general.  Even with this, I wonder how many people are really getting the message, here.