Middle Class Americans Discover Outrage At Being Treated Like, Y'know, Them...

[jberryhill]

The Federal Irony Authority raised its alert level from "mild" to "shameless" this week, as millions of relatively well off Americans having enough disposable income or well paid jobs involving air travel, discovered that they may be treated in a manner similar to that which has been reserved for minorities in expensive cars for a very long time.

Ima Whitegal, 61, said, "They searched me at the airport and, I mean, look at me! Do I look like one of them?" Ms. Whitegal was subjected to a newly aggressive TSA search procedure at La Guardia Airport as she was returning from a 'Ground Zero Mosque' protest to her home in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, where she leads local opposition to a proposed mosque expansion there.

In incidents around the country, white middle class people are up in arms about the new procedures which require them to be touched in intimate areas by hourly wage employees of the TSA, many of whom are as Mr. W. Underbread put it, "Not the sort of people that I'm used to being around." Mr. Underbread continued, "I'm not a prudish person, and like anyone else, I shower with the boys at the country club after a round of golf, but it's not as if we let the staff in there. The TSA should really consider hiring more, you know, 'professional' types of people."

"I think it has a lot to do with Barack Obama," said Mr. Rich Guy after his encounter at Palm Beach Airport. "Since his election, government employees seem to have become more thuggish and unstrustworthy, almost as if the TSA was some kind of gang. I don't know how much they pay the TSA screeners, but some of the cars parked in their lot looked a little on the upscale side for what those sort of people should be making."

Margie Witlessman, a California entrepreneur said, "It's enough to make me quit flying altogether. I was going to fly to New York to pick up my winter wardrobe and have alterations done, but now I think I'll do that here, and send my housekeeper to pick up the clothes," adding, "well, after I get her some identity documents to use at the airport."

Local government officials are considering their options. In Oklahoma, Representative Ridem Cowboy said, "We've been looking into adopting Sharia Law, because we heard it would not permit this sort of thing."

[flamingdem]

1. I'd like to see Meg Whitless' face while she's being groped by a Latino TSA nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

30. People with that much money don't fly commerical airlines

[Lucy Goosey]

45. Shouldn't they still have to submit to the same security screenings?

[Dreamer Tatum]

2. what a bunch of bullshit nt

[jberryhill]

4. Insightful, Well-Reasoned, Succinct, and Articulate

I knew I should have gone for that degree in literary criticism.

[Celtic Raven]

15. Just so

Well played.

:evilgrin:

[Dreamer Tatum]

53. Your post deserves exactly that much criticism. nt

[Incitatus]

3. She flew from Tennessee to NY just to protest the mosque.

:silly: :dunce: :freak:

edit

OK, I just finished reading the whole story.

The first two paragraphs had me going, though.

[apocalypsehow]

5. Broad brush nonsense. Delighted to UnRec. n/t.

[Kalyke]

37. It's satire - it's SUPPOSED to be broad-brushed. That's what satire is!

Will rec to stave off your unrec.

[darkstar3]

41. It is poor satire.

Good satire is on point. This piece misses the mark by accusing the majority of people who object to these searches of being racists.

I don't doubt that such attitudes are in play in this debate. They do not, however, make up the majority. People, no matter their color, will generally object to having their private parts searched or even touched without damn good cause. "There was an underwear bomber" does not constitute that cause.

One further note: I know that personal experience doesn't equal evidence, but it's odd how people in this thread seem to think that the vast majority of TSA workers are minorities. I've flown many times in the past year, and more than half of the TSA employees that I have met have been white. Working at a center that runs TSA tests, I can also tell you that the majority of applicants here have been white. I also happen to know that TSA workers get paid just enough to put them in the lower portion of the middle class.

So, and again this is just based on one man's experience, what we have more than half the time are white, middle-class people searching white, middle-class people. The OP is off-point. The outrage is not based on race, or class/caste, but rather on the violation of the puritanical ideas that have been ingrained in our society for generations: There are certain things we don't touch.

[jberryhill]

54. "accusing the majority of people"

Really? The majority?

I can't find that in there.

I am aware that "the majority" of TSA screeners, none of whom have been asked their opinion about the policy, have been called "perverts", "child molesters", and some such.

To quote from another DU thread, TSA screeners are "lowlife scum who couldn't get a job elsewhere".

But my comment was not directed at "the majority" of anyone.

[pnwmom]

6. LOL. Yes, there's a big dollop of hypocrisy surrounding

this issue.

And no easy answers.

[jberryhill]

8. Where there are no easy answers, there are at least a lot of distractions

If an answer won't fit on a bumper sticker, it's a tough sell indeed.

I always find that blind rage is the best way to tackle a complex problem.

[hedgehog]

35. +1 - I agree improvements are needed, but the many of the

comments I've seen are loaded with class bias!

[Tx4obama]

7. LOL - I fell for it.

I even went to Google to search for the original link.
At that point I noticed the " Ima Whitegal " LOL :)

[jberryhill]

10. There is no "Federal Irony Authority" - The Nominated Head Is Being Held Up By The Senate

The administration is thinking of appointing an interim Hypocrisy Czar, though.

[DireStrike]

75. The Irony dept. Nominee was introduced to the President

by the chair of the Irony committee, who is refusing to allow a vote.

The Hypocrisy Czar has primed himself well for his position, with a lifelong campaign to eliminate the department of hypocrisy.

[Radical Activist]

9. When it happens to people with money it's news.

It's nothing new for poor people who get harassed by the cops.

[jberryhill]

11. It was your comment a while back which really made me think

About what we get excited about and why.

[Arctic Dave]

12. Reminds me of the Dave Chapelle joke.

[chidy]

20. well, there's at least one person here who gets it!

lol.

this is the funniest post i've read at DU in years. nice job, mang. and to all you who don't get it? no, really. it's very funny and clever but if you're um, "too white" you'll probably be offended.

let me put on my Serious PhD cap (i have one) for a minute: the Author of this post is trying to remind you that for decades now, brown and black people have been treated, and far worse even, than people are complaining that TSA is treating people (white people) right now. it's an ironic post meant to point out that to some degree, it would've been much more useful and better had middle class white folks with political power, stood up to authoritarian political rhetoric when something could've been done about it. like, say, during the Clinton years. "nice, decent" white liberals sat around and said little during his welfare "reform" and NAFTA, two incredibly important things that changed the nature of our society, but that some of us are only coming to understand today. similarly, TSA is but an extension of the perpetual security state, which since the inception of the "War on (some) Drugs" has assaulted and denied the rights of citizens in this country like the most abhorrent fascism of Nazi Germany.

the problem is: the people who've been suffering most from that "war?" not white, not suburban, not rich. but that's all changing, isn't it? the american middle and upper middle class is slowly learning: you're not really "rich" and what you have can and will be taken away from you.

as always, my focus is "class, not race." white people have suffered too, the poor ones. i understand that and never try to underestimate what it means. but because people who are white liberals continue to refuse to recognize it, we have the Tea Party. or rather:

"you loved me, as a loser;
now you're worried that I just might win.
you know the way to stop me,
but you don't have the discipline.
How many nights i've prayed for this,
to let my work begin?
you sentenced me to 20 years of boredom.
trying to change the System, from within.
I'm coming now, I'm coming to reward you.
First: we take Manhattan.
Then we take Berlin."

look it up.

[jberryhill]

29. Yes it is class, not race

One additional point is that the TSA discussion reeks of class disdain directed toward the TSA employees themselves.

Independent of the search issue, take a look at the way TSA employees are characterized as humans.

That's when I realized that, yes the searches are bad, but what makes it even WORSE is the breach of social order involved in having someone of a lower caste touch someone of a higher caste.

Constitution aside, it is a major breach of caste rules.

[LongTomH]

65. Class is the real issue!

And I think your post was an excellent example of irony!

[MellowDem]

82. "Too white"

eh, guess as long as racial steryotypes are against the majority they're ok. It's just a joke after all, right? Maybe I'm being "too minority" here and getting offended over nothing. :eyes:

Yes, blame the "white liberals", or maybe you should blame blacks for prop 8 while you're at it.

Personally, I blame those who would exploit and blame racial groups of people to sick em on each other when it is obvious where the fault lies, namely with the media and corporations and their huge influence on politics and everything else, including exploited workers voting against themselves.

White liberals, black rappers, evil hispanic druglord illegals, sorry, they ain't to blame. But that's the kind of shit Fox News is selling, so you're on board.

[lonestarnot]

33. And I love that Dave. He does a fine job, or used to.

[FLyellowdog]

13. I've heard this before about teachers...

"but some of the cars parked in their lot looked a little on the upscale side for what those sort of people should be making."

Apparently there's a rule or something about what kind of car one should drive based on their class in life. Who knew? One teacher friend's used 10 year old Jaguar set some heads to turning while another who had inherited an older Mercedes from her parents was frowned upon. Clear evidence that teachers don't need a pay raise.

I wish someone would publish a handbook or guide so we'll know what's right and what's wrong. Sort of like "Second Class Citizenry for Dummies." :mad:

[FLyellowdog]

14. True story...no joke.

[jberryhill]

16. I believe it

Teachers don't need cars, though.

I pay for buses to take all of the kids to school. Teachers should just ride one of those.

[FLyellowdog]

71. Sounds like a plan to me. :)

[demodonkey]

18. Yes, and teachers are degreed professionals.

Still it is not OK for a teacher to have 'too much' (they are paid by, and serve, taxpayers after all) but the sky's the limit for people with similar education in the medical, legal, financial fields (and other forms of 'public service'.)

-- Child of two teachers

[FLyellowdog]

69. Exactly.

[blindpig]

17. Spot on. n/t

k&r

[GoCubsGo]

19. Do you write for The Onion?

I was expecting a link at the bottom to their web site. Although, I suspect that there is far more truth to you post than anything in The Onion.

[Brewman_Jax]

21. Well done!

a good highlight of the racist caste system in the US, and also, ignoring racism doesn't make it go away. :thumbsup:

[NNN0LHI]

22. Do I look like one of them?

Actually yes you do.

Don

[Cal Carpenter]

23. Perfect

Well done.

I'd buy you a beer if I could (and if it weren't 8:45 am)

:toast:

[jberryhill]

26. Beer? Don't you get your urine test at work today?

As a professional, I take comfort in knowing that many of the people who serve me are required to pee in a cup in front of a monitor.

[CTyankee]

24. More truth than many would think in that piece.

I'm thinking of using some of those quotes against my favorite conservative, whom I love to torment. I think she'd probably nod approvingly for Ms. Whitegal, which I would slightly change to "Whiterly" or some such...oh, that would be fun to watch...

[jberryhill]

25. Feel free to copy, use, modify, whatever /nt

[CTyankee]

32. Thanks, I will put it to good use! nt

[wo ooo]

27. this TSA issue

has finally given white people a chance to pretend like they're being oppressed

[jberryhill]

28. This is different, though

A lot of poor people are criminals, and they all live on the taxes we pay (less mortgage deduction, qualified retirement plan payments, and untaxed benefits) so it's not fair to treat US like that.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Welcome to America, Suburanites!

nt

[durkermaker]

34. so not wanting to be strip searched and groped is really white racism

why is this demographic accused, and expected to apologise for 'racism' at ever turn?

you have no idea how much this attitude alienates people who really could fit into either party

[jberryhill]

44. No

It is often asked why there was so much effective protest against Vietnam, but not Iraq.

The draft was a HUGE difference. Other people's kids can fight in foreign wars, but you are not taking mine.

And, no, I don't want this TSA treatment either, and my reaction to it is not "white racism".

There is, however, an undeniable class component to several aspects of the discussion.

I should have more clearly emphasized class, not race.

Left and right did not unite in their reactions to the AZ "papers please" law. Left and right DO unite on this issue. Why?

[durkermaker]

61. AZ law vs TSA

there is no question that there are very large numbers of people in Arizona who are there illegally/undocumented. Because Mexico is the nearest country, they happen to be hispanic. And they're NOT being strip searched! I am a 5th generation citizen. but my car cannot be 'undocumented', I have to have registration

The super extreme majority of people boarding a plane have no intention whatrsoever of breaking any laws - hundreds of millions every year, with a small handfull of actual hijackers/terrorists every few years

so you are literally strip seaching millions of people for every person aprehended

do you see the issue of proportion here?

i'm not saying AZ should or shouldnt do it. I AM saying that the charge of 'subtle racism' in those who were silent about AZ but speaking up about TSA is unfounded, because it is a radically different level of intrusion relative to the actual probable cause

[jberryhill]

68. Good point

The only quibble is that "probable cause" is not relevant to the administrative search doctrine which, by its terms, defines the terms for mass suspicionless searches - e.g. sobriety checkpoints, non-border immigration checkpoints, courthouse security, etc.

[darkstar3]

36. Unrec

It is pure stupidity to suggest that the outrage over the TSA grope-athon is about race.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. I didn't read it as saying the outrage is about race

To me it is saying that some minorities have been regularly subjected to such frisking without cause for ages, and some other groups are just now getting a taste. My African American age and professional peers have all been face down on the dirt for walking home and such, espeically in our younger days. Gay people are dang used to cops trammpling civil liberties as well.
The part that has to do with race is the fact that for years some groups have sat by while other groups were subjected to the treatment they are now upset about getting themselves. Had they stood with harassed minorities in the past, we'd have a stronger position for all Americans today.

[darkstar3]

42. You have a point, in that minorities have been harassed.

The TSA issue, however, transcends racial boundaries. Everyone is affected, and everyone is outraged, even the people who are "used to this shit".

(That, BTW, is a direct quote from a minority co-worker of mine: "This pisses ME off, and I'm used to this shit.")

When the issue has clear constitutional ramifications, when the problem affects everyone regardless of color, and when children and victims of sexual abuse can be shamelessly groped in public, it is idiotic to suggest that the outrage being heard in the media is due in any way to race. The Ima Whitegal and W. Underbread characters most certainly make that suggestion.

And don't think for one second that everyone in a certain group stood by and watched as others were harassed...

[durkermaker]

43. As someone who's family has supported civil rights for all for decades

it really ticks me off to have the sins of 'white people' read to me, when something happens to me (TSA, H-1b etc)

I've never been the offending party, I've always opposed it, but if the people I thought I has trying to help think I have it coming, then maybe we've reached the point of every man for himself

[jberryhill]

49. Then don't take it personally, as it was clearly not intended as an observation of your attitudes

As noted, "class" is more to the point than race.

Whether the comment resonates with you or not, is not some sort of character flaw.

I have seen comments here at DU referring to TSA workers with language such as, to give one example, "lowlifes who could not get a job elsewhere".

As a commentary on the TSA search controversy, what do you see in that kind of thing? Is it relevant to the real issue at hand, or is it revealing of something else entirely?

[durkermaker]

57. RE "lowlifes who could not get a job elsewhere".

i've never accepted that attitude, becasue i did all kinds of those jobs on the way up, and knew i could be doing them again on the way down

truth be told, classism has disgusted me more than racism, because poor whites hant gotten any sympathy from anyone for decades, because of exactly the attitude you mentioned

my guess is, there are TSA workers who probably hate this more than anyone. Years ago in our area, some printing plant workers refused to work on a penthouse job the plant had landed, at the risk of their own jobs. People who put their priciples above their own economic survival are quite rare, and i admired it

[jberryhill]

46. If I may

My observation is not intended to address the totality of the TSA issue in all aspects.

It is just one slice of that pie.

You are correct that it "transcends racial boundaries". It does so because it does not have a class directed component. Really, to state that it "transcends racial boundaries" (and it is more about class) is to say "it affects the privileged too".

The other slice of the pie is the part which is based on unexamined attitudes toward people who make up the bulk of the TSA workforce.

And this is informed by a personal example. At the Philadelphia International Airport, there is a female muslim screener who wears a head covering.

The reactions and whispered comments about her by people going through her line are things you have to see and hear to believe.

[darkstar3]

52. I believe your example,

but understand one point that I may not have articulated before: Pointing at someone who may or may not be part of a minority group and saying "now you know how it feels, fucker!" doesn't do much.

[jberryhill]

55. Well I can't be doing that

As I would only be pointing at myself if I did.

I'm one of those old straight, fairly well off white guys everyone's been hearing so much about.

I hear surprising things from other old straight, fairly well off white guys from time to time, as my cohort seems to believe that I share their outlook on various things.

[LisaL]

38. Ludicrous.

[walldude]

47. Ima Whitegal?

Funny... sort of :eyes:

[seabeyond]

48. so if we are good, unbigoted, progressives, we allow the groping? naked scanners?

must be because we are middle class snobs that we reject groping and naked scanners.

do i really care why the middle class whites are pissed at groping. do i really care that men finally have to experience groping to be outraged.

i will take all the voices yelling about this.

[jberryhill]

50. No, that is not even what the observation is about /nt

[seabeyond]

51. good because what i have heard the argument is from people pro groping is because we dont want them

you know, the minimum wage tsa worker to cop a feel.

[jberryhill]

56. Well, if people would object on a basis other than "the minimum wage tsa worker to cop a feel"

Then perhaps others wouldn't find the objection somewhat off-putting.

[darkstar3]

58. As I recall, you and I had an argument in a previous thread

where you attempted to tell me that my fourth amendment objections to the TSA grope-fest were unfounded. So it seems to me that you're not listening to anyone aside from the hyperbolic reactionaries, and you're finding what you look for.

[jberryhill]

59. No, I did not say they were "unfounded"

What I said, and have consistently said, was that the seminal case under this species of the administrative search doctrine is Davis v. US.

Simply saying "it's a suspicionless search and thus violates the 4th Amendment" is a statement that goes nowhere, because there is a whole body of law addressing suspicionless searchs - such as sobriety checkpoints, an non-border immigration checkpoints.

Passengers have been being "searched" since metal detectors were first deployed in airports.

The actual argument to be had here is about the degree of intrusiveness. It's not about "grope fest", as you put it, "child porn", "sexual assault", or any of the other over-the-top characterizations which inflame, but do not inform, the discussion.

I mean, you say I'm only listening to "hyperbolic reactionaries" in the same breath that you call it a "grope-fest". Come on.

Has anyone asked the TSA workers about how they feel about being told to DO any of this stuff? They just obtained the right to organize. I suspect we are going to be hearing A LOT more about their opinion of their working conditions and duties. They may very well be our best allies.

There is no question that these procedures are going to court. No question whatsoever.

So, we get to court... The court is going to be interested in "reasonable" under the totality of the circumstances. The government is going to point out that an aircraft was most recently attempted to be attacked using a device secreted in someone's underwear. The judge knows that if he rules against the government, and someone carries out an undie bomb, that he is going down in history next to Justice Taney as America's most despised judge.

What I'm interested in is the counterargument to the government's case. 99.99999999999% of the discussion is not relevant to where the rubber is going to meet the road here, and that's disappointing.

[darkstar3]

63. Actually,

if you go back to that thread where we had this discussion before you will see that I addressed your point quite clearly and you attempted to dismiss my argument. Your dismissal, BTW, was specious and sarcastic. You have now confirmed that you are simply being contrary, and as such I intend to give you no more of my time here.

[ProudDad]

64. You mean those "courts" packed by

Ray-gun, bush I, bush II with right-wing judges?

With the Supremes ready to rule against Civil Rights at every opportunity?

Those "reasonable" courts???

[jberryhill]

70. No, I mean those courts with the US Marshall service running the checkpoints

Federal court checkpoints are, at this point, similar to airline security circa 1999.

The judges - of any stripe - know what their own security perimeter looks like, and if the federal courts deploy the scanners, then that will tell you more about how they would rule than anything else.

[ProudDad]

79. Good point...

Maybe they can see how this crap effects real USAmericans and corrupts our society...

[seabeyond]

73. it isnt about the tsa workers. they are not making the decisions. they take all the crap cause

they implement. but they did not make the rule.

this is about people being groped and not wanting any stranger to grope them.

[jberryhill]

77. "this is all about" a lot of things

To some people it is about the TSA workers. And if you don't appreciate that, then go back to any "all cops are bad" thread on DU.

It is possible to believe things like "Some police abuse power" and "Not all police are bad" at the same time.

Absolutely, the mainstream of the outrage is about being inappropriately touched. What's funny is that you have been repeatedly told I DONT LIKE THE POLICY.

Can you get that? I DON'T LIKE THE POLICY

Now, during the last presidential election, one couldn't help but notice that SOME McCain supporters do not like non-white people.

Does that mean every McCain supporter is a racist?

NO.

Is it worth commentary?

YES

Again, if your notion of a conversation of any kind is a contest of "I'm right, you're wrong", black/white, this/that, us/them, me/you... then what it is you are looking to "win"? Is there a cash prize of some kind that nobody told me about?

I tend to be more highly critical of the arguments of people with whom I agree. People with whom I disagree are not worth the time.

[seabeyond]

78. if these people had a white, upper middle class persons hand in their crotch, they would have issue

betcha.

[jberryhill]

80. Some, sure

But I am informed by my friends in the nursing profession that home care nursing agencies regularly - regularly - receive requests from patients and families that the agency not send one of "them" because the patient prefers not to have "them" give sponge baths because, well, you know.

There are 2 million passengers screened by TSA every day, some percentage of which are sent to enhanced security on (a) a statistical basis, or (b) based on behavioral factors (e.g. paid cash for one-way ticket).

There are all types.

I mean, it is sort of a silly proposition - "Whose hand do you want in your crotch?" - but even on DU there were indeed comments to the effect of "Well, if I could pick the screener..." A deleted comment even specified the ethnic origin, age range and gender of the stranger's hand they'd like in their crotch at the airport.

[seabeyond]

85. of course there is bigotry in this nation. what you and others are doing though, is presenting

the issue of objection of groping and naked scanner to bigotry. that is wrong. it is misleading. it is offensive

[jberryhill]

86. If you find my views offensive, please put me on your ignore list

I find your presumption that you are entitled to issue moral judgments against me to be offensive.

[seabeyond]

88. what i prefer to do is just what i did adn call out bullshit to a wrong. nt

[jberryhill]

89. A difference of perspective is not a moral issue

There are people who believe it is morally wrong not to share their take on things.

There may be millions of people in the world who don't see any particular thing the way I do, or the way you do. It's not a moral issue.

If you look at the thread, you'll find that some people thought it was funny, some people thought it was bullshit.

Take the challenge:

Sit down, write a couple of paragraphs, post it on DU. If every single person on the thread likes what you wrote, you win the grand prize.

My impression of the new civility rules leads me to believe that there are probably interesting, insightful people who, though I may not see things their way, are inhibited from posting anything to DU, because they will be judged, condemned, or whatever.

[Pithlet]

91. A difference of perspective certainly can be.

Look, post your views and people are going to express their views on it. The dangers of posting on a message board is indeed that some may strongly object to whatever it is you say. Particularly if it's "satire"

[jberryhill]

92. There's a line between "that sucks" and "you suck"

I actually liked the "that's bullshit" comment upthread.

[Pithlet]

93. Who's saying you suck?

If anyone makes a personal attack, alert on it. It's against DU rules.

[jberryhill]

94. As is "calling out" /nt

[Pithlet]

95. Huh? Are you implying I'm calling you out?

???

[jberryhill]

96. Jeez.... Did you ask "Who"?

What sort of an answer does the question "Who's saying you suck?" invite?

Normally, the way I use the word "who" is as the initial word of an interrogative statement directed toward identifying a person.

Perhaps there are other usages of the word "who" with which I am unfamiliar, and it is the usage of "who" which you intended in your question.

[Pithlet]

97. Oh, you meant about that.

I wasn't asking you to name names. I would have thought that would have been obvious, especially since I followed that up with the point that you would alert on anyone that might be personally attacking you. The point was no one is attacking you. They're disagreeing with the idea you're putting forth. You seem to be taking it very personally, though. You don't seem to like people disagreeing with you. You shouldn't do satire then.

[Pithlet]

98. Oh, you meant about that.

I wasn't asking you to name names. I would have thought that would have been obvious, especially since I followed that up with the point that you would alert on anyone that might be personally attacking you. The point was no one is attacking you. They're disagreeing with the idea you're putting forth. You seem to be taking it very personally, though. You don't seem to like people disagreeing with you. You shouldn't do satire then.

[Pithlet]

60. I think that's why the OP's attempt at satire fails.

I wonder if it's the pro security policy agenda. Because I think there are some valid points to be made about class and race in this issue. But I think the points can be made much better, and without the pro TSA policy bent. Because ultimately we are all being victimized and it needs to stop. And the OP reveals some biases of his own with that over the top attempt at satire.

[jberryhill]

66. "Your mileage may vary"

Send a PM for a full cash refund.

[Pithlet]

67. Yep. Pretty much the kind of reaction I thought I'd get.

:hi:

[seabeyond]

72. i think you and others have been told repeatedly that is not why people object to groping. reality

is, your op is about once again putting this reasoning on all of us that oppose groping. which is why i made my original post if that was your intent. which you assured me it was not, from your first response to my post.

[jberryhill]

76. People are not all the same

There is no "hive mind".

There are people who, for example, dislike or oppose President Obama based on perfectly reasonable differences of policy on issues that are important to them.

That's fine.

There are people who dislike or oppose President Obama because he is not white.

That's not fine.

I do not live in an all/nothing either/or black/white world, and do not think in absolutes. There are aspects of this issue worth exploring, and a discussion on an internet forum is not going to have anything to do with whether anyone is subjected to this procedure or not. See my sig line on that subject.

You think that if a bad egg in the bunch is pointed out, that it is a statement about all eggs in the bunch, every egg on the planet, and a personal attack on you.

I can't help that.

[ProudDad]

62. Mr. Rich Guy may have a point

That execrable traitor J. Napolitano has no conscience when it came to leaving us here in Arizona to the tender mercies of the neo-nazi republican right-wing legislature...

So why should she care about Civil Rights in her bogus new (higher paying) job...

Shit rolls downhill..

[durkermaker]

74. Richard Nixon taught us to be careful what you ask for

he thought 'what harm. could one sock it to me do'

And America socked it to him

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFEhmF-cSi8&feature=related

[MellowDem]

81. According to the polls...

over 80% of Americans support the procedures, and I can bet you that white support it the most as a group, which kinda takes the away the whole point of the irony here. The truth of the matter is that many Americans don't fly much anymore anyways. It's expensive. But it makes some of the more paranoid Fox News watchers who have never been across the county line that they're safer.

[jberryhill]

83. That 80% number is a little hard to believe

When was the last time 80% agreed on anything.

I gotta think that when DU and Flearepublic appear to be in overwhelming agreement on something, that's at least one indication it might be a widely shared opinion.

What I haven't seen is the percentage of passengers selected for the scanner/frisk option.

But if a poll result was 80%, then I'd be curious to know the internals and proposition polled.

[Pithlet]

84. The people I know that are like the people you're lampooning

almost to a one agree with the screenings and don't understand what all the fuss is about. It's another reason why I think your satire rings a bit false. It really does seem like just another attempt to dismiss those who have problems with it. I'll just add it to the list. Let's see. I've heard we're prudes. We're commie liberal scum who don't care about the safety of Americans (that one not so much here on DU). And now we're over-entitled white middle/upper class racist twits. I wonder if I've heard it all yet?

[jberryhill]

87. No, there is probably more

Which is the neat thing about a discussion board on which thousands and thousands of people can express their views, observations, and whatever pops into their head after their favorite relaxing drink or other substance.

What makes it unpleasant sometimes are those who think that "OMG someone on the planet has a perspective with which I don't agree" is a startling or alarming fact requiring the ugliest forms of personal condemnation.

:hi:

[Pithlet]

90. Oh yeah. I know how message boards work.

You mean it sucks having all these people disagreeing with you? Awww..