Question of the Day: “Why is it that liberals are so keen on those enhanced pat-downs?”

Posted by: ST on November 23, 2010 at 6:30 pm

Asked by Pundette, who noted that Gloria Allred, Whoopi Goldberg, Michael Kinsley and Senator Claire McCaskill are all on board with the TSA’s “Grope Granny, the Kids, the Nuns, Those with Bladder Control Issues and Prosthetic Breasts As a Result of Cancer -Anyone but Those Who Fit the Terrorist Profile” screening policy.

McCaskill even went so far as to call the Grope-down procedure “love pats“?!

Funny – when I think of someone putting their hands all over me who I don’t know and who I don’t wish to touch me, I don’t consider what that person is doing to me as giving me a “love pat.” What that’s more commonly known as is sexual assault, Senator. Why not subject myself to the scanner? I’d rather not have images, no matter vague, of my body “examined” by someone who I don’t want to see me that way, nor do I want the images saved “for future reference.”

Look, I know the TSA has a job to do in trying to keep the bad guys with destructive weapons off the planes but there has simply GOT to be a better way than what they’re doing now. Oh wait – there is. It’s called profiling.

In the meantime, guess who all is exempt from these airport security “love pats”? Yep, you guessed it (via MM):

WASHINGTON (AP) — Cabinet secretaries, top congressional leaders and an exclusive group of senior U.S. officials are exempt from toughened new airport screening procedures when they fly commercially with government-approved federal security details.

Aviation security officials would not name those who can skip the controversial screening, but other officials said those VIPs range from top officials like Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and FBI Director Robert Mueller to congressional leaders like incoming House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who avoided security before a recent flight from Washington’s Reagan National Airport.

The heightened new security procedures by the Transportation Security Administration, which involve either a scan by a full-body detector or an intimate personal pat-down, have spurred passenger outrage in the lead-up to the Thanksgiving holiday airport crush.

But while passengers have no choice but to submit to either the detector or what some complain is an intrusive pat-down, some senior government officials can opt out if they fly accompanied by government security guards approved by the TSA.

“Government officials traveling with federal law enforcement security details are screened at airports under a specialized screening protocol, which includes identity verification,” TSA spokesman Nicholas Kimball said. This allows the officials to skip the airport security checkpoints.”

Don’t they know what they’re missing out on? Love pats, baby, love pats. /sarc 8-|

RSS feed for comments on this post.


19 Responses to “Question of the Day: “Why is it that liberals are so keen on those enhanced pat-downs?””


  1. arcman46 says:

    Profiling makes sense. That’s why they will probably never do it. It also flies in the face of Political Correctness. Therefore the support for these searches.

  2. Old Goat says:

    I bet the various liberal stars that you named who seem to be totally on board with the breaking of the 4th amendment rights don’t have to worry much about pat downs. Given their celebrity status and private planes for many of their trips, they wouldn’t have to be subjected to it like the pee-ons do.

    When you don’t have to go through it the impact changes. Just like their “free speech” stuff, they hate it unless they face complaints of their own comments, then they hold it up as a banner.

  3. daMello says:

    “Why is it that liberals are so keen on those enhanced pat-downs?”

    Answer is simple enough: Because the rest of America opposes such intrusions and embarrassments when other means could be employed. Their attitude is pure spite.

  4. letoiledunord says:

    Has anyone asked Pistole the Pinhead why the the full body groping only became a necessary safety measure when the scanners came on line? The idiot with explosive material in his underpants pulled that stunt last December. Why didn’t they start doing full pat downs that same day and every single day since on every single passenger? Why aren’t they doing full body pat downs at every security checkpoint that doesn’t currently have the scanners in place? To claim this is about anyone’s safety is an insult to any rational person.

  5. Old Goat says:

    Just going through the Drudge Report headlines and saw that Big Sis is talking about scanners going to subways, boats and so on… I think the way to answer this is simple. Follow the money.

    Just like the “green” companies, where lo and behold you find the likes of Gore and billions of dollars in research grants. I am smelling a rat with these scanners having ties to some democrat donors or congress members who will grow rich from increased scanner sales, despite the infringement of our rights.

    The Goracle became a huge “climate change/global warming” advocate and made billions. The Obama administration is pushing these scanners, telling us its all about making us safe. See a pattern?

    The pat downs are just to make people feel uncomfortable enough to go through the scanners, and that will generate the need for more of them, placed all over, including courthouses and anywhere else they can put them. Then we will hear about some Dem congress member(s) who have increased their wealth through being involved in the companies that make these scanners.

    Keep it simple. Look for the motivation, and follow the money. Gotta pay back for all those ballot stuffing work, why not have it come from the tax payers?

  6. Ellie Light says:

    The reason the leftwingnuts love such a fascist measure is that they hate people. Its all about control. What better way to demonstrate to the people that they have no rights other than those the Left deigns to toss them after the proles have offered up their tribute.

  7. Carlos says:

    Old Goat has it right. No jackass in history has ever done anything without either a power motive or a money motive.

    Which, of course, is not to say the other commenters were wrong; it’s just that when all the smoke and mirrors are removed, that’s basic motivation for any jackass move, never safety, never for the good of the country, never for altruistic reasons.

    Just like ObamaCare: if it’s so wonderful, why doesn’t Congress sign up? Or why are they allowing at least 111 exceptions to the rules for next year, mostly as political pay-off?

    Good for thee, not for me. Jackass philosophy to a “T”.

  8. gus says:

    This is a tap in. Liberals are FOR IT, because Conservatives are against it. Libtards are emotionally disturbed. They are FOR MUZZTARDS because Muzztards are against America. They are for abortion because MORAL PEOPLE are against it. They are for AFFIRMATIVE ACTION because it favors a co-dependant group that they need for voter base. They are against BORDER SECURITY for the same reason.
    The Party of J.F.K. is dead.

  9. Susan says:

    What a bunch of sheep Americans are. They mock the British for making a fuss about a royal wedding but we have royalty right here in the good ol’ USA. US royalty consists of the pols who don’t live under the same laws they make that the rest of us must live.

  10. Joe Schmo says:

    I don’t look forward to the “love pats”, but I plan on choosing that “evil” of the two in order to make a point/protest. If enough people do the same thing, the system will grind to a halt, and Gore, or whichever left-wingnut is investing in these porn/cancer producing machines, will be forced to remove them.

  11. Mike says:

    Hey, if Senator Claire McCaskill enjoys same-sex “love pats”, that’s her business. I would prefer my “love pats” to be administered by someone of the opposite sex. Preferably by someone I know.

  12. Paul says:

    I don’t mind reasonable methods used to enhance safety on travel by plane. That is common sense. However, the intimate search of my person is another matter.The government gets enough of citizens hard earned money as it iw without touching the family jewels ! Who can fathom the minds of Liberals anyway ?

  13. Chris M. says:

    Sometimes I wonder if these new assaults on the American public are not just Obama’s way of letting us know what he thinks of the results of the recent election.

  14. Old Goat says:

    Chris M., kind of like that SNL skit with the Chinese and Obama?! lol.

    What we are seeing with the airport security issues is just another form of what we see from each and every action of the liberal mindset.

    If they go so far, and it is accepted, they look to push to go further. Their creed is no boundary is truly a “do not cross” line. Its just the next goal in their unending idea that every boundary needs to be crossed, regardless if it is a good idea or not.

    When you contrast it to the conservative approach, you still might have boundaries crossed, but it is much slower and with more thought (hopefully) into what these actions will bring about.

    Take the stimulus deal. Putting money into the economy isn’t a horrible idea, provided it is looked at where it is going and the long term results that can be seen from doing it. The liberals pushed it to include tunnels for turtles. A real long term goal there!

    If the Fed pumped some money into infrastructure type projects, rather than pork for the few with deep pockets, its more acceptable.

  15. Yax K'uk' Mo' says:

    Saw this today:
    Tipping inquiry

  16. Neo says:

    … and damn, this was inevitable … TSAstroturf: The Washington Lobbyists and Koch-Funded Libertarians Behind the TSA Scandal I’m sure S T will be collecting her check from the Koch Brothers any day now. LOL

  17. Carlos says:

    Old Goat, taking other peoples’ money and putting it into the economy is a terrible idea because it adds layers of bureaucratic voodooism. If the government has that much extra cash, why not give it back to the ones who earned it and let them put it into the economy?

    That way you don’t have layers of bureaucratic welfarists taking their vigorish off the top, you don’t have a vast majority of congresscritters getting their quid pro quos accomplished, and the mom-and-pop stores in every town in America can rest easier.

    Oh, and taxes will go down and employment will go up.

  18. puffpiece says:

    As long as the groping only happens to the “little people” liberals think it’s a fine idea. And the belief that this will keep us safe from having a plane blown up is ridiculous. We have to hope the terrorists stay as stupid as the underwear bomber. Or bureaucrats start getting smarter and start profiling. Along with instituting good intelligent work and better screening techniques.