FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate-687/)
-   -   The Upcoming Elections and the TSA (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/852123-upcoming-elections-tsa.html)

GMill Aug 4, 2008 10:05 pm

The Upcoming Elections and the TSA
 
Have either of the candidates for President or the political parties staked out a position on the TSA?

flyinbob Aug 4, 2008 10:11 pm

No, and they won't, except to say how much they "support those working hard to protect our citizens"! No one wants to appear soft on "terrorism".

AArlington Aug 5, 2008 6:26 am


Originally Posted by flyinbob (Post 10150454)
No, and they won't, except to say how much they "support those working hard to protect our citizens"! No one wants to appear soft on "terrorism".

Agree. The Republican candidate won't do anything - he wants to appear tough on terra (or, terror for you educated types). The Democrat - he may speak out against profiling, but would never speak out against a large government organization -- that's bread and butter for his party. In the end, it is us citizen/passengers who lose.

bzbdewd Aug 5, 2008 6:29 am

It's going to be SSDD no matter who gets elected.

doober Aug 5, 2008 7:06 am

A year ago, Obama said this in a speech entitled "The War We Need to Win":


Too often this Administration's approach to homeland security has been to scatter money around and avoid hard choices, or to scare Americans without telling them what to be scared of, or what to do. A Department set up to make Americans feel safer didn't even show up when bodies drifted through the streets in New Orleans. That's not acceptable.

My Administration will take an approach to homeland security guided by risk....
That gives me a bit of hope.

Global_Hi_Flyer Aug 5, 2008 7:46 am


Originally Posted by bzbdewd (Post 10151654)
It's going to be SSDD no matter who gets elected.

+1, IMHO. There is no difference in the candidates on such matters. O's administration may push the envelope to a lesser degree, but both of them have to embrace a message of why they're different - even if they aren't.


Originally Posted by doober (Post 10151801)
A year ago, Obama said this in a speech entitled "The War We Need to Win":

That gives me a bit of hope.

A year ago, O said a lot of things that are now different. Latest example: he'd oppose offshore drilling, but now says he'll support it if needed to get an energy bill through.

IMHO, both parties have trashed the Constitution and infringed on our freedoms to further the party platform. Take the discussion in the customs/laptop seizure thread: conservatives hate porn and child porn because it's, well, porn. Liberals hate porn and child porn because it exploits women and children. And both sides support taking (almost) any necessary step to stop it.

bseller Aug 5, 2008 9:18 am


Originally Posted by doober (Post 10151801)
A year ago, Obama said this in a speech entitled "The War We Need to Win":
That gives me a bit of hope.

Perhaps you haven't heard that anything Obama said a year ago has been changed in the interim.
Rev. Wright: GONE
Immediate Pullout: GONE
16 month timeframe: GONE
Offshore Drilling: MAYBE


If you retain any hope of Obama doing anything different w/r/t TSA/DHS (other than seeking TSA Unionization :mad:) -
You are either delusional or simply OTT optimistic, IMO.

Dave

Cargojon Aug 5, 2008 11:41 am

TSA Unionization - that should be fun. :rolleyes:

Then it can be like the US Postal Service - the only way to get rid of a bad employee is to promote them. (I say this as a former USPS worker and former APWU member.)

Obama love = shiny object syndrome

doober Aug 5, 2008 11:51 am


Originally Posted by bseller (Post 10152576)
Perhaps you haven't heard that anything Obama said a year ago has been changed in the interim.
Rev. Wright: GONE
Immediate Pullout: GONE
16 month timeframe: GONE
Offshore Drilling: MAYBE


If you retain any hope of Obama doing anything different w/r/t TSA/DHS (other than seeking TSA Unionization :mad:) -
You are either delusional or simply OTT optimistic, IMO.

Dave

The eternal optimist.....anything else is just too depressing to contemplate. :)

Global_Hi_Flyer Aug 5, 2008 12:17 pm


Originally Posted by Cargojon (Post 10153464)
TSA Unionization - that should be fun. :rolleyes:

Then it can be like the US Postal Service - the only way to get rid of a bad employee is to promote them. (I say this as a former USPS worker and former APWU member.)

Or like the police union...


The police union is coming to the defense of that officer. President Pat Lynch of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association said Officer Patrick Pogan "took action" when he observed the rider creating a "hazardous situation for the public."
Link


In the case, Federal authorities charged that top officials of the Transit Police Benevolent Association took kickbacks and engaged in several other schemes before it merged with the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, which represents city police officers.

Federal prosecutors charged that before the merger, lawyers for the P.B.A., including Mr. Lysaght, paid bribes to the transit union officials to keep the union's legal work.
link

There are more, you get the idea.

On the other hand, if the TSA were so inclined, they could simply let there be a union, who could act as a virtual mouthpiece defending misconduct by screeners. TSA could build a whole PR campaign around it...

FliesWay2Much Aug 5, 2008 12:25 pm

I know I've said this before in other threads, but, in the grand scheme of things, the TSA as a broken agency isn't high on either candidate's list. When you put the TSA in the context of the bigger DHS, there are two DHS-related issues far more important than airport security theater:
1. Immigration (CBP, DHS HQ)
2. FEMA
The Obama speech quoted above leads me to believe he will fix FEMA. The best way to fix FEMA is to remove it from DHS. (On a related note, the new president should do the same thing with the Coast Guard -- DHS has destroyed its mission as well.).

In the grand scheme of things in DHS and on anyone's must-fix list, the TSA is in the "comic relief" category. The best thing that could happen to it is that the new president views the TSA as a bill-payer.

So, this means that we will have to take back our airports and our Constitution-free zones in the transportation world through the other two branches of government, which haven't been too much of a help lately.

SJCFlyerLG Aug 5, 2008 12:43 pm


Originally Posted by FliesWay2Much (Post 10153775)
I know I've said this before in other threads, but, in the grand scheme of things, the TSA as a broken agency isn't high on either candidate's list. When you put the TSA in the context of the bigger DHS, there are two DHS-related issues far more important than airport security theater:
1. Immigration (CBP, DHS HQ)
2. FEMA
The Obama speech quoted above leads me to believe he will fix FEMA. The best way to fix FEMA is to remove it from DHS. (On a related note, the new president should do the same thing with the Coast Guard -- DHS has destroyed its mission as well.).

In the grand scheme of things in DHS and on anyone's must-fix list, the TSA is in the "comic relief" category. The best thing that could happen to it is that the new president views the TSA as a bill-payer.

So, this means that we will have to take back our airports and our Constitution-free zones in the transportation world through the other two branches of government, which haven't been too much of a help lately.

Word to that. As many of us have observed, the majority of the traveling public support "the mission" of the TSA, and they endure the idiocy becuase, well, "if it makes us safer...". Until a majority of rank and file travelers start to harp on the uselessness of the TSA, nothing much is going to change. In the scheme of things, FEMA and the Border Patrol are much higher-profile agencies. The TSA will continue to waste money and madden travelers. I support Obama, but I have no illusions that there will be substantive changes in the TSA. OTOH, we will be rid of Skeletor and his incompetent cronies. ON the bright side, I suspect either candidate will shy away from the pure political atmosphere for the management positions (remember "Brownie"?) to install basically competent people.

Cholula Aug 5, 2008 1:06 pm

Folks, we've had to remove a few posts where members were electioneering for their candidates.

This thread is not about who you want to win the US Presidential race or who is the better candidate. It's about the positions that the various candidates have regarding TSA/DHS.

Please keep political commentary out of the thread or we'll have to move it to OMNI.

Thanks.


__________________________
Cholula
Travel Safety/Security Forum Moderator

KRSW Aug 5, 2008 1:12 pm

I'll just come out and say it -- I've never been a single-issue voter, but any candidate which will disband the TSA gets my vote. I'm all for REAL security, not this "feel good" crap that interferes with getting real security in place.

sbm12 Aug 5, 2008 2:06 pm


Originally Posted by flyinbob (Post 10150454)
No, and they won't, except to say how much they "support those working hard to protect our citizens"! No one wants to appear soft on "terrorism".

Sad, but true.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:49 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.