Category Archives: Regulation

UPDATE VI: Miserable, AWOL, Mama Obama (Pimps Puncture Urostomy Bag/Remove Prosthetic Breast )

America, Barack Obama, Constitution, Criminal Injustice, Family, Fascism, Feminism, Gender, Homeland Security, Regulation, Terrorism

MAUL MALIA; SCAN SASHA. NO, DON’T. Having seen the children down whose miniature trousers TSA goons have been reaching; having witnessed heroic little Mandy Smith’s ordeal (and her father’s reprehensible abdication); being in possession of a keen sense of justice and rights—I could never-ever condone such futile, en masse, state sadism and fascism. Not ever. Not against innocent adults. And most certainly not against children, not even the president’s kids, who seem sweet, and whose only flaw is to have been born to a miserable excuse for a human being.

Make that two.

The First Lady has seemingly not experienced a visceral reaction against what is being done by her husband’s administration (begun under his predecessor) to the American people. She has, at least, failed to give voice to a gut reaction to this mass contagion; this moronity, if indeed one was experienced.

This is the same FLOTUS of the “Fat-Based Initiatives”; the woman who so cares for America’s bloated kids. In this post I asked, “Why no white butterballs?” Even Michael Savage hasn’t dared to ponder what would Michelle say if more kids who looked like hers were being mauled by malevolent state workers.

As a mother—as a human being with a heart—I cannot stand to see kids being subjected to the cruelty of strangers. What a miserable excuse for a mother is this woman, Michelle Obama.

SAVAGING THE SAVAGES:

MORE PUTRID, PUSHOVER PARENTS

UPDATE I (Nov. 22): WHERE ARE THE MEN? This is no country for men, any men. You emasculate them, feminize them, make them over in the image of woman, and they’ll offer up their own children as sacrifice. Liberal men have been “liberated” from the natural instinct to protect their own. You can’t blame them. Women most certainly can’t blame men. This is what modern women have worked for; the state as parent and protector.

UPDATE II: RADIATION REALISM. Every doctor I’ve known has tried to persuade me that his particular brand of diagnostic radiation was just dandy for my health. When quizzed about the cumulative effects from the radiation prescribed by his colleagues to keep me in good shape, the medical man would become less cocksure. A cursory perusal of the literature on the additive effects of any radiation confirms that it is anything but safe. The issue here is that no innocent human being should be made to choose between “the Scylla of the scan and the Charybdis of the ‘enhanced pat down,'” even if the first boosts his health (as if). It’s a matter of choice. I have always chosen skepticism when it comes to invasive modalities when used liberally on healthy people.

Now comes a scholarly study, first reported in the The Daily Mail, according to which “full-body airport scanners are just as likely to kill you as a terrorist’s bomb blowing your plane out of the sky”:

Peter Rez, from Arizona State University, said the probability of dying from radiation from a body scanner and that of being killed in a terror attack are both about one in 30 million.
He said: ‘The thing that worries me the most, is not what happens if the machine works as advertised, but what happens if it doesn’t.
A potential malfunction could increase the radiation dose, he said.
Rez has studied the radiation doses of backscatter scanners using the images produced by the machines. He discovered that the radiation dose was often higher than the manufacturers claimed.
Rez suggested that the statistical coincidence means that there is really no case to be made for deploying any kind of body-scanning machine – the risk is identical.
But he added: ‘They’re both incredibly unlikely events. These are still a factor of 10 lower than the probability of dying in any one year from being struck by lightning in the United States.’
Critics say the low level beam used delivers a small dose of radiation to the body but because the beam concentrates on the skin – one of the most radiation-sensitive organs of the human body – that dose may be up to 20 times higher than first estimated.
A number of scientists have already written to to the Food and Drug Administration to complain that the safety aspects have not been properly addressed before the nationwide rollout of the scanners.

UPDATE III: TSA THEME SONG, again. I still think that “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp” best captures the TSA’s mission, conduct, and the mien of its mindless supporters. Do you disagree?

UPDATE IV: I’ve been remiss, and so have you for not pointing this out to me: even if you choose what to you is a lesser evil, the photons as opposed to the fondle (as Myron puts it), your TSA dominatrix could still pull you over for a once-over. It’s not like your decision between “the Scylla of the scan and the Charybdis of the ‘enhanced pat down'” is honored:

After “electing to go through the airport’s new full-body scanner,” “a bladder cancer survivor from Michigan who wears a urostomy bag that collects his urine,” “was pulled to the side to be patted down by a TSA agent.”

CBS:

The 61-year-old retired special education teacher said he asked to be examined more discreetly.
Sawyer told WLNS correspondent Jessica Maki that after being taken to a private area, he alerted the TSA agents about his urostomy bag and the danger of its lid being undone, but they didn’t listen.
And when the pat-down began, Sawyer says the agent was so rough, the cap on the urostomy bag came off, spilling urine on him.
“No apology, no recognition – Is that urine? – no nothing, no offer to help me,” Sawyer said. “And I had to face the fact that I had to walk through the airport with urine.”

Do the hos who support this—other than the Fox blond squad, and polls point toward a majority in favor—detect a critical mass in the incidence of abuse travelers have experienced?

[Myron, do not expose Anna to this. Traveling for a wedding is not an emergency. Take a stand.]

Writes Thomas DiLorenzo at LRC.COM: “We’re All German Jews Now.”

When you hear the usual suspects on Fox wax about the land of the free we’re so blessed to live in; switch off. America is a fascistic state by any other name.

UPDATE V: REMOVING A PROSTHETIC BREAST. CBS: “A flight attendant and cancer survivor said she was forced to remove and show her prosthetic breast to a TSA agent during a security pat-down.”

However, what I’ve termed “sectional interests” have piped up again. Instead of arguing for the rights of all customers who purchase an airline ticket constrained by a state-monopolized system—cancer survivors are engaged in special pleading. Ditto airline pilots, flight attendants, etc.

UPDATE VI: As to Myron’s suggestion about special permits; I’ve been trying to make the point that special interests-based rights to pass without pain are bad for everyone and wrong. No one other than the suspicious should be searched. Why do you think Israeli security gives out special permits to those with cancer, the elderly, the pilots, the pretty… They don’t. See “TSA: Home Grown Terrorism (& Cretinism).” They do not molest people as we are doing; they question them politely.

“Victims” Of Greed … Their Own

Business, Criminal Injustice, Debt, Economy, Regulation, Socialism

Now here’s a victims’ fund we can all get behind: delinquent borrowers being foreclosed upon by wicked bank executives. The WSJ:

‘Fund in works for victims of foreclosure mess,” announced the Washington Post’s front page yesterday. Sorry to report that the Post was not referring to taxpayers who have already spent hundreds of billions of dollars cleaning up this mess.

So who exactly are the victims in this story? The Post describes “homeowners who were wronged,” but the writers are also not referring to the roughly 90% of mortgage borrowers who are paying on time. As for the proposed compensation fund, the Post compares it to those set up for victims of the Gulf oil spill, the shootings at Virginia Tech and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Readers may begin to suspect that one of these funds is not like the others. For starters, we’re not aware of any delinquent borrowers being killed by bank executives. In fact it’s not easy to find any injury at all. The Post doesn’t name anyone who’s been harmed, and neither did Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd as he opened Tuesday’s Banking Committee hearing on the problems in the mortgage servicing industry. Don’t expect any further clarification at Thursday’s House Financial Services headline hunt.

Readers will recall that the foreclosure mini-scandal began in September with revelations that “robo-signers” at mortgage firms were signing foreclosure documents that they had not personally reviewed. Instead, they had improperly relied on the work of colleagues.

“[I]f a settlement transfers more wealth from investors and taxpayers (who now stand behind most mortgages) to delinquent borrowers, the least the attorneys general could do is stop calling them victims.”

MORE.

Oh, come on: is that the best you can do? How about Moochers? Looters? You’re right; that’s too mild too.

Debt Commission Dross

Debt, Economy, Military, Politics, Regulation, Ron Paul, Taxation, The State, War, Welfare

As has been said over these pixelated pages, “government commissions are where accountability goes to die.” You get my meaning. For example: Some major cost-cutting measures suggested by Obama’s deficit commission’s preliminary report only kick-in in 2050 and 2075.

Like his father, Rand Paul promises to be a beacon for liberty. Intuitively, Rand cleaves to free-market principles. Here are some salient points Rand has made in response to some silly questions, concerning the deficit commission’s preliminary report, fielded from Face The Nation moderator Bob Schieffer:

“… if you’re serious about the budget, you have to look at the entire budget–military and domestic, if you want to make a dent in the debt.

“…I don’t think I want to raise taxes right now. I think government
is too big and so I think we need to cut spending. The way I see it is, is that you want the private sector to have more money. I want to expand the private sector because we have a– a serious recession so I want to leave more money in the private sector. I want to shrink the ineffective sector of the economy which is the government.”

“… I want to be on the side of reducing spending. So I think really the compromise is where you find the reductions in spending. But I don’t think the compromise is in raising taxes. I mean here, you have to put things in perspective. We now consume at the federal level twenty-five percent of the Gross Domestic Product. [Actually, it is more like 40%, as a lot of spending is off budget] Historically, we were at twenty percent. So we’ve taken five percent away from the private sector. And the private sector is the engine that creates all these jobs. I want to send that five percent back to the private sector.”

“…you should shrink the federal work force and you should make their pay more comparable. Right now the total compensation for government workers versus private workers is almost two to one.”

“…make the tax cuts permanent.”

MORE

UPDATE II: Not So Pale-Lin

Aesthetics, China, Debt, Federal Reserve Bank, Inflation, Political Economy, Regulation, Sarah Palin

“He’s backwards,” said Sarah Palin about Barack Hussein Obama’s lack of economic smarts. She spoke on the occasion of Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Fox Business show, Freedom Watch, going daily. Palin has an unadorned way of looking at things. She spoke forcefully and fairly knowledgeably about monetary policy tonight.

Less welcome was what Palin adorned on the occasion. Palin, a natural beauty with a glowing skin, had squeezed herself into the sort of Little Black Dress Ann Coulter wears to every event. Worse still was the orange, bottled tan with which Palin’s arms, shoulders, and alarmingly large bosom had been sprayed. The difference between the pallor of Palin’s face and the bright orange of her decolletage was plain to see on the TV. Less so in the online clip. Oy vey.

Palin does not need to heed TV’s repulsive stylists; most of them have acquired their “talents” making-up Kim kardashian’s private parts for public viewing. Palin should tell the image consultants to back off. There is no need to repeat the make-over failures of the McCain campaign.

It’s good to see Mrs. Palin coming to grips with monetary policy. A mature, natural beauty like Palin has no need to adopt the trashy TV look.

UPDATED I: I don’t understand the question below. Was Palin fundamentally wrong about monetary policy tonight? Did she recommend bad policies? Why do you care where she got the ideas she was promoting vis-a-vis the Fed? If she’s reading Ron Paul’s End The Fed, or Tom Woods’ Meltdown—why do you care? Speaking to—and against—current monetary policy makes Palin and Bachmann better than almost any other pol around.

UPDATE II (Nov. 16): Let me correct the above statement: “Speaking to—and against—current monetary policy makes Palin and Bachmann better than almost any other AMERICAN, most of whom draw a blank at the causes of inflation and the devaluation of the country’s coin—except to hoot obscenities at the Chinese, as a primate would scream at a someone with a coveted banana.