Newsstand - The TSA is in fact influencing the 2004 Presidential Elections

(Also, this effects those who are looking at replacing their commercial travel with charters.)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-logistics3feb03,1,2030939,print.story

Planes, Campaigns and Huge Logistical Pains

OKLAHOMA CITY — Already running behind schedule, a perturbed Wesley K. Clark stood, legs apart, arms outstretched in a small charter airline office Monday as a private security agent ran a metal detector over the retired four-star general.

"This stuff takes forever," the Democratic presidential hopeful grumbled. It didn't take forever, but by the time his entourage was screened, 45 precious minutes had passed with less than 24 hours to go before today's crucial balloting in seven states.

Clark arrived at his next event, in Albuquerque, late again.

(snip)

New screening regulations for charter flights are among the most campaign-confounding differences between this primary and that of 2000.

In 2003, the Transportation Security Administration mandated that people flying on private charter planes with 61 seats or more, or a takeoff weight of at least 100,000 pounds, be screened much the same as passengers flying on commercial jetliners.

In the early days of the primary season, candidates did not need such large aircraft. As the top contenders have taken on staff and reporters — some 100 journalists traveled with Sen. John F. Kerry one recent day — the rule has caused several candidates to arrive tardy at events.

The Dean campaign uses two planes that are smaller than those that trigger TSA screening.

To add to the headaches of clock-watching advance teams, many small airports where the charter planes land lack X-ray machines and other screening devices, so every suitcase, computer bag and pocket is searched by hand.

"This is the first time the new rules have intersected with a presidential campaign, and everyone's trying to cope — the candidates, the charter companies and the TSA," said one longtime charter company executive, who has worked with many campaigns and asked not to be identified. "Right now it's a mess."

(Say, does Air Force One require screening for its passengers?)

I hope the candidates see how stupid this nonsense is and disband the TSA, if it hasn't already been disbanded by January.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
I hope the candidates see how stupid this nonsense is and disband the TSA, if it hasn't already been disbanded by January.

</font>

Has anyone seen ex-President G.H.W. Bush fly commercially since the point-object obsession began?

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by GUWonder:
Has anyone seen ex-President G.H.W. Bush fly commercially since the point-object obsession began?</font>

Of course not. I'd love to see him get deshoed, felt up and have his personal belongings dug through every time he got on Air Force One.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

Spiff,

The question referred to ex-President Bush, who probably doesn't see Air Force One very often, if at all. He likely flies commercial, along with his lifetime Secret Service protection. Maybe they protect him from the TSA, too! A shoot-out between a couple of our crack air marshals and a (former) presidential protection detail would be interesting, wouldn't it? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Bruce

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
Spiff,

The question referred to ex-President Bush, who probably doesn't see Air Force One very often, if at all. He likely flies commercial, along with his lifetime Secret Service protection. Maybe they protect him from the TSA, too! A shoot-out between a couple of our crack air marshals and a (former) presidential protection detail would be interesting, wouldn't it? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Bruce</font>

I'd love to see either one of them deshoed, felt up, and have their belongings dug through every time they boarded any aircraft.

I think it would be fun to watch Bush II's reaction if he had to watch Bush I get harassed by the fools he supports.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
Spiff,

The question referred to ex-President Bush, who probably doesn't see Air Force One very often, if at all. He likely flies commercial, along with his lifetime Secret Service protection. Maybe they protect him from the TSA, too! A shoot-out between a couple of our crack air marshals and a (former) presidential protection detail would be interesting, wouldn't it? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Bruce</font>

The ex-President Bush used to fly commercially a lot. I was just wondering if he gets the "Gore" treatment.

In your interesting hypothetical, the Secret Service detail would be at a momentary disadvantage. The air marshalls would be sitting "behind" and thus have the element of surprise. That being said, why are Sky Marshalls sitting in first class so often then? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

I love it!
The more it happens and the worse it gets, the more likely this rediculous facade will disappear when Bush leaves office. And, oh yes, he will. Maybe in 2004, maybe in 2008. But the GOP candidates in 2008 will have to fly commercial and/or charter flights subject to TSA, so just stick in there; it will end soon.

Hi all,

I'm not sure what makes anyone think that the TSA is going away, no matter who is elected in November? Neither Bush, Kerry, Edwards, Dean, or Lieberman, would dismantle or significantly change the TSA.

Like many of you, I agree that the TSA is having a minimal effect on air security.

Let's imagine this scenario: The president (whoever it is in 2005) proposes and succeeds in dismantling the TSA's pointy-object search. Sometime thereafter, a catastrophic airline attack happens in the US.

Can you imagine the public outcry and backlash the president would suffer?!?! It would be politically devastating. The masses, in knee-jerk fashion, would be decrying the dismantling of the TSA as the cause of the attack.

If the politicians keep the sense of security in place, they will never be in the situation outlined above.

Vote for the candidate of your choice, but (unfortunately) don't expect any sweeping changes with the TSA. Kerry, Lieberman, and Edwards voted FOR the TSA and its federalized workforce. Bush signed it into law. Don't remember? Click here:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?K2C362E47

Later,
Tim in Hollywood

[This message has been edited by Tim in Hollywood (edited Feb 05, 2004).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Tim in Hollywood:
Hi all,

I'm not sure what makes anyone think that the TSA is going away, no matter who is elected in November? Neither Bush, Kerry, Edwards, Dean, or Lieberman, would dismantle or significantly change the TSA.

Like many of you, I agree that the TSA is having a minimal effect on air security.

Let's imagine this scenario: The president (whoever it is in 2005) proposes and succeeds in dismantling the TSA's pointy-object search. Sometime thereafter, a catastrophic airline attack happens in the US.

Can you imagine the public outcry and backlash the president would suffer?!?! It would be politically devastating. The masses, in knee-jerk fashion, would be decrying the dismantling of the TSA as the cause of the attack.

If the politicians keep the sense of security in place, they will never be in the situation outlined above.

Vote for the candidate of your choice, but (unfortunately) don't expect any sweeping changes with the TSA. Kerry, Lieberman, and Edwards voted FOR the TSA and its federalized workforce. Bush signed it into law. Don't remember? Click here:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?K2C362E47
</font>

Your point is well made and very true. The above persons also voted in favor of the so-called USA PATRIOT Act. Only one great Senator even attempted to stand true to America and to himself by first attempting to stall that act and then pushed the sunset provisions along that Pres. Bush speaks out against and that Ashcroft despises. His name is Senator Russ Feingold. Out of the persons running in the 2004 Democratic Presidential Primary only one voiced his concern about this Act publicly in 2001. His name is Wesley Clark.

It will take a man of real chracter to drop the political baloney; however, power is seductive, and once in office few surrender it willingly until compelled by life's challenges. CYA rules the day and for that reaston, the TSA is here to stay and the USA PATRIOT Act will spawn progeny before it goes to the grave of bad laws.

I expect that nothing will change until excesses become apparent and personally impact at least 20% of the population.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HeHateY:
(Also, this effects those who are looking at replacing their commercial travel with charters.)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-logistics3feb03,1,2030939,print .story (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-logistics3feb03,1,2030939,print.story)

Planes, Campaigns and Huge Logistical Pains

{snip}

</font>

Anyone remember Mel Carnahan or Paul Wellstone? If I were on the campaign trail for the Democratic Party these days, I'd be pulling a John Madden. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/eek.gif

[This message has been edited by eric_packer (edited Feb 05, 2004).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Tim in Hollywood:
Let's imagine this scenario:The president (whoever it is in 2005) proposes and succeeds in dismantling the TSA's pointy-object search. Sometime thereafter, a catastrophic airline attack happens in the US.

Can you imagine the public outcry and backlash the president would suffer?</font>

What really worries me is even with current systems in place, something like this happens.

I believe that the TSA will be shown to be ineffectual - only because they didn't have enough power. I expect rather then be disbanded, we'll see even more security piled on. End of elite security lines. Secondary screening at the gates again. Mandatory inspection of all checked bagggage. Passengers required to remain seated 30 minutes prior to arrival at every US destination (not just DCA). Closing of the First Class lavatory to First Class passengers, much less Economy - everyone has to go to the back. The nightmare list can go on...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by HeHateY:
[B....In 2003, the Transportation Security Administration mandated that people flying on private charter planes with 61 seats or more, or a takeoff weight of at least 100,000 pounds, be screened much the same as passengers flying on commercial jetliners....[/B]</font>

Does this rule not point out the foolishness, lack of good mgmt, rational thinking in the whole TSA world?

If your plane carries only 60 people, it is not a security risk. But, at 61 seats, hold on. You could be apt to bring down civilization and we MUST HARASS you.

Will it ever end?

Nope. Not unless someone with really big ones stands up and tells the American people the facts.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
I think it would be fun to watch Bush II's reaction if he had to watch Bush I get harassed by the fools he supports.</font>

Well, let's just say when Bush Jr. got the chicken pox vaccine, they CERTAINLY wiped an alcohol swap on one of his voo-doo economic cheeks.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Vote for the candidate of your choice, but (unfortunately) don't expect any sweeping changes with the TSA. Kerry, Lieberman, and Edwards voted FOR the TSA and its federalized workforce. Bush signed it into law</font>

I have Kerry on record saying he will stop the colour coding alert system.

Kerry does know about people's locks being broken and searches without permission nor people/owners present. I believe he will stop that and allow the 4th Amendment to hold. He will certainly KNOW.

[This message has been edited by Cygnus X-1 (edited Feb 05, 2004).]

I don't think *security* will change much no matter who the next president is. A large percent of the voting public has been frightened into believing the TSA is actually making them safer by searching for pointy objects. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

At the beginning of World War II, New York City instituted rent control in order to ensure that landlords, seeing a wartime rise in demand for apartments, would not engage in war profiteering.

The intent was to keep rent control for the duration of the war.

Guess what? It has been more than two weeks since World War II ended, but the apartments that were rent controlled in 1942 remain so.

Democrats like Abe Beame, liberal Republicans like John Lindsay, and more conservative Republicans like Rudi Giuliani have all been mayor of New York since then but none got rid of this world war relic.

The TSA is here to stay, no matter who is in office. Get used to it.

Mayor Quimby: Are those morons getting dumber or just louder?

Assistant: [checks his clipboard] Dumber, sir.

-The Simpsons

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry