UPDATE II: TSA Blowback: Terrorism Begets Terrorism

Fascism, Government, Homeland Security, Terrorism

When you make a living by terrorizing and intimidating innocents, it is but a matter of time before one of your victims retaliates. This is not a normative statement, just a factual one.

It’s hard to know how else to frame the actions of Paul Anthony Ciancia, aged 23. Murder is wrong. Wrong! But can it be said that Ciancia’s shooting to death of a Transportation Security Administration agent at the Los Angeles International Airport, today, was without motive?

Chicago Tribune:

… a law enforcement official told The Times that a note was found on the gunman expressing “disappointment in the government” and noting that he had no interest in hurting “innocent people.” Ciancia also sent a sibling a text message last week suggesting that he was prepared to die, officials said.
It appears the gunman targeted Transportation Security Administration agents, who are not armed. Authorities said he approached several people cowering in the airport terminal, pointed his gun at them, asked if they “were TSA” and then moved on without pulling the trigger if the answer was no. A witness said the gunman cursed the TSA repeatedly as he moved through the terminal.
J. David Cox Sr., president of the union that represents 45,000 TSA flight screeners, called the shooting a “heinous act.” The gunman was not a TSA officer and “never had been,” according to the union, the American Federation of Government Employees.

From “‘It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp'”:

… As a mother—as a human being with a heart—it was particularly hard seeing children subjected to the cruelty of strangers. Watching footage of the kids down whose miniature trousers TSA goons have been reaching (including the heroic, iconic little Mandy Smith and her father in his reprehensible abdication)—I could not help but wonder: Where in all this has the FLOTUS been?

Never-ever could I condone such state sadism. Not against innocent adults. And most certainly not against children—not even against the president’s kids. Yes, it occurred to me, if only fleetingly, that the thought of Malia being mauled or Sasha scanned might make their mother speak up. The girls’ only flaw, however, is to have been born to a dreadful cur.

Make that two.

If Michelle Obama had experienced a gut reaction to the ordeal inflicted by her husband’s administration (begun under his predecessor) on travelers and their tots—she was not letting on. The First Lady, as you know, is in touch with her gut—and the gut of every kid in the country. The FLOTUS of the fat-based initiatives “cares” enough to decide what America’s bloated babes will ingest, but not enough to weigh-in when their bodies are being invaded by state workers.

WHERE ARE THE MEN in all this? This is no country for men. Emasculate them, feminize them, make them over in the image of woman—and they’ll sacrifice their own children to the state. Having been “liberated” from the natural instinct to protect their own, one can hardly blame men. Women most certainly don’t have a case against their compliant partners. The state as parent and protector: Is this not what most modern women have strived for?

It’s safe to say that the moms of the Fox News Blond Squad were with The FLOTUS. One of these interchangeable females implied that the interminable complainers at the terminals were no more than an insignificant group of noise-makers. Kirsten Powers, a liberal member of that squadron, expressed her satisfaction with the porn protocol. Her sympathies, she said, go out to TSA workers.

Yes, “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp.”

From “Congress: Call Off Your TSA Attack Dogs!”:

When the large African-American woman ? in the employ of the American taxpayer to torment the same subjects at the Miami International Airport ? summoned me with a crooked finger for a pat down, I thought of the film “Midnight Express.” And in particular, the scene where Billy Hayes’ far-from-delightful Turkish jailer schemes to enjoy some time alone with the young American. My tormentor wore the same sadistic, atavistic expression. Her giant digits were soon upon my chest and between my legs.

In front of me, a frail woman was struggling to stand upright as the same goons, brows furrowed, studied her walking stick for traces of semtex. Once I had reached the safety of a privately operated cafe, I watched the agents of the Transportation Security Administration lunge at a middle-aged man’s groin.

Most recently ? and to banshee yelps of, “We have an Opt Out!”, “Opt Out!” ? the TSA attack dogs swarmed a young woman by the name of Meg McLain, who had declined the ostensibly optional full-body scan. The TSA’s website describes its scanners as consisting of “two types of imaging technology, millimeter wave and backscatter.” With the aid of stimulus loot, this rogue agency has acquired an additional “450 advanced imaging technology units,” which, of course, are “safe for all passengers,” tiny and tall. “The technology meets national health and safety standards,” we are assured.

A cursory perusal of the literature on the cumulative effects of ionizing radiation confirms that there is no consensus about this modality’s safety. However, truth in the TSA universe is adjudicated by coercion ? by forcing a captive audience to choose between the Scylla of the scan and the Charybdis of the “enhanced pat down.”

Properly cornered, Ms. McLain was escorted to a cordoned-off area. “This girl here has all kinds of opinion on how we’re doing our job, y’all,” boomed one of McLain’s TSA masters. Heeding the call of the wild, this employee’s manager left, only to return with a dozen cops to backup the seven pack animals already snarling at the young woman. As the malicious, out-and-out assault on her person and property continued, Ms. McLain soon found herself cuffed, her belongings confiscated, and her ticket ripped to shreds in malicious spite. She knows not how close she came to being seriously hurt for her defiant speech. (Ask the grieving family of Carol Anne Gotbaum, who met her demise not in a Pakistani or Saudi airport, but in Phoenix’s Sky Harbor.) …

So many atrocities, so little time. Search under TSA, here and here.

UPDATED I (Nov. 3): Some sources on TSA terrorism:

* “Congress: Call Off Your TSA Attack Dogs!”

* “TSA: Home Grown Terrorism (& Cretinism)”

* “‘It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp'”

* “The TSA’s Trayvon Martin Revenge”

* “Boston (And America) Betrayed”

* “The Republic of Rub-a-Dub-Dub Genitalia”

* “Rational Profiling: Cabbies Do It Too”

* “WHOSE PROPERTY IS IT ANYWAY?”

UPDATE II (11/3): Paul Ciancia’s motive and purpose, via USA Today:

Investigators recovered a rambling note from the bag the shooter allegedly was carrying, which detailed an intent to “kill” TSA officers, said two federal law enforcement officials familiar with the message’s contents.

Bowdich said the handwritten note made it clear that the suspect intended to kill “multiple” TSA employees and to “instill fear into their traitorous minds.”

UPDATE II: President Pinocchio’s Growing Proboscis

Barack Obama, Democrats, Healthcare, Individual Rights

“President Pinocchio’s Growing Proboscis” is the current column, now on WND. An excerpt:

… Voluntarily, 14 million Americans had purchased and paid for their now-obsolete, outlawed health-care insurance. Stated differently, these individuals valued what the policy had to offer more than the money it cost them. They liked the product the president has proscribed.

And they don’t like what replaces it. George Schwab of North Carolina was “’perfectly happy” to continue paying Blue Cross Blue Shield a premium of $228 a month to insure himself and his wife.

President Obama wasn’t having any of it. By legislative fiat, he stopped what was a mutually beneficial arrangement between the two consenting parties.

On Oct. 30, Big Brother Obama claimed that Mr. Schwab and millions of happy customers like him were “underinsured.” So Obama ensured that for “underinsuring” themselves, these Americans would lose their insurance.

Mr. Schwab and his ilk are now without insurance.

From the president’s perspective, the 62-year-old man does not know what’s good for him. Fortunately for Mr. Schwab and other clueless clients like him, Big Brother does. To the rescue came Obama. Mr. Schwab had fallen prey to a “bad apple insurer,” grated the president. He is among “5 percent of Americans, who’ve got cut-rate plans that don’t offer real financial protection in the event of a serious illness or an accident.”

Foolish Mr. Schwab. He was content with a purchase Mr. Obama deemed “substandard.” Luckily for Mr. Schwab and a million other Americans, so far, the president removed their “substandard plan” before it could hurt them.

Better to be uninsured than to have “substandard” insurance.

Also on Oct. 30 did Mr. Obama vow to the Mr. Schwabs of America—roughly 14 million of them—that they would be “getting a better deal.” “Almost all the insurers,” cooed the president, “are encouraging people to join better plans with the same carrier and stronger benefits and stronger protections while others will be able to get better plans with new carriers through the marketplace …”

Desperate, Mr. Schwab went looking for the Promised Plan.

He discovered that Barack Obama’s command-and-control, nationalized “marketplace” would be charging him $948 a month for a plan that met the president’s requirements, one of which was that everybody must “contribute.” Everyone must “take some measure of responsibility,” preached Obama.

A monthly premium hike of more than 400 percent is to be Mr. Schwab’s “contribution” to the un-Affordable Care Act’s collective kitty. …

Read the complete column. “President Pinocchio’s Growing Proboscis” is now on WND.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION:

At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”

On my Facebook page.

By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column.

UPDATE I: MEGYN KELLY interviews MARC THIESSEN of the AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FELLOW, who explains why it was essential for Obama to finish off the individual market for health-care insurance: this relatively wealthy cohort must be funneled into his nationalized “markets” and made to fund it.

KELLY: … And tonight, we have dug up an IRS form from 2010 that shows that this administration knew that over 10 million Americans would not keep their plan, could not keep their doctor. And yet the president went out as recently as 2012 and said if you like your plan you could keep it. Meantime there is a regulation — an IRS regulation, it was pushed by HHS, Human Services, that said estimated that tens of millions would going to get dumped.

Marc Thiessen is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. And I mean, this is it. It is one thing to say — he said they were going to get to keep their plans, period. And now this regulation shows that months after ObamaCare was passed, July, it passed in March. July or before, I should say. Before, they knew. They were estimating internally in the administration ten million people are going to lose their insurance.

MARC THIESSEN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FELLOW: Yes. You’ve got the smoking gun right there in your hand. Look, they knew. When President Obama looked at the American people in the eye and said if you like your health insurance, you can keep your current plan, period, no matter what, that was a bald-faced lie.

And he intended — in fact, I think that they intended for these people to lose their health insurance. And the reason for that is — as you pointed out — it will be up to 14 million people. Why would they want those people to lose their health insurance? Because they need those people to move into the exchanges to subsidize the poor people.

The individual mandate is the most lucrative part — I’m sorry, the individual market is the most lucrative part of the segment of the health insurance industry because those people don’t use a lot of services and they are generally healthy. And so, those are the people that they need to move into the exchanges in order to subsidize ObamaCare.

So, while President Obama was going out there saying you won’t lose your health insurance, period, all along they were planning for those people to lose their health insurance — 14 million of them and move into the exchanges.

UPDATE II: Pat Buchanan quips in his latest column:

Obama’s assurances of keeping your insurance plan if you like it now enters presidential history alongside George H.W. Bush’s “Read my lips! No new taxes,” Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,” and George W. Bush’s tales of yellow cake in Niger and hidden arsenals of WMDs.

Priceless.

REP. PALLONE(Y)’S Health-Care Baloney

Democrats, Healthcare, Media, Morality, Politics

Lying is second nature to politicians, but there can be no doubt that Democrats have notched it up, becoming increasingly brazen about, well, lying. Small mercies, Fox News still provides a transcript here and there for those of us who prefer to speed READ, rather than waste time watching video clips. Read through this interview with Democrat Frank Pallone, a ghastly congressman from New Jersey. Watch him in the act, and your skin will crawl.

MEGYN KELLY, HOST: Joining me now, Democratic New Jersey Congressman, Frank Pallone. He’s a member of the Energy & Commerce Committee. He was one of the lawmakers questioning the Secretary today. Congressman, thank you for being here.

REP. FRANK PALLONE, D-N.J.: Thank you.

KELLY: We’re struggling to understand how Ms. Sebelius can say the president kept that promise. That specific one of if you like your healthcare you can keep it, period, I guarantee it, when we’ve seen 2 million Americans have policies cancelled so far. And the estimates are it will top 10 million.

REP. PALLONE: Well you can keep it as long as the insurance company agrees to continue to sell it. But the problem is a lot of insurance companies now have been caught because they’re selling lousy plans at a high price that are skeletal and don’t provide any benefits. So they are now cancelling those lousy plans. In which case many of them are just a scam and saying, look we’re not going to sell this anymore because nobody’s going to buy it. And therefore we’ll try to get, we’ll give you a better plan that has better benefits at a more affordable price.

So the president never said that he could stop the insurance companies from cancelling plans. This is a private market. This is a competitive market. They’re not going to sell something they can’t sell.

KELLY: Okay. But that’s only partially true. But what you’re saying is only partially true.

REP. PALLONE: What’s only partially true?

KELLY: There are some insurance companies who cancelled policies. And that’s what insurance companies–

REP. PALLONE: They cancelled the policies —

KELLY: Wait a minute, let me just, let me pose —

REP. PALLONE: They don’t have to sell them. It’s a private market.

KELLY: Let me pose the question. Then you respond. Some of the insurance companies said, all right, I’m going to cancel the policies because that happens on the insurance market.

REP. PALLONE: Right.

KELLY: But many, many other policies — in fact, according to the insurance companies the vast majority of these policies that are being cancelled are being cancelled because the regulations imposed on them by ObamaCare left them with no choice. The way the HHS —

REP. PALLONE: That is absolutely not true.

KELLY: The HHS regulations —

REP. PALLONE: They have a right to continue the policies —

KELLY: She admitted it. She admitted it today, sir.

REP. PALLONE: She did not admit that.

KELLY: She did too.

REP. PALLONE: That’s simply not true.

KELLY: She was asked about whether —

REP. PALLONE: The insurance companies can cancel the policies if they want to. They can offer policies at the same price for the same lousy benefits if they want to.

KELLY: If they change the policies in any marginal way then ObamaCare requires that they be cancelled and the people get kicked off.

REP. PALLONE: No, that’s not true.

KELLY: Yes. She was asked about this today by a $5 increase in the premium.

REP. PALLONE: It’s not true. ObamaCare —

KELLY: Let’s run the sound bite. Let’s run the sound bit, $5 change, $5 change and you’re kicked off. Watch.

REP. PALLONE: ObamaCare simply says that —

KELLY: Stand by.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. WILLIAM CASSIDY: If coinsurance went up by any amount, even by a dollar according to your regulations that would not qualify as a grandfathered clause? Just to have that out there for the record. I gather even by a dollar.

HHS SECRETARY KATHLEEN SEBELIUS: Dr. Cassidy, I want to start by the amount that you gave is not accurate. I was told $5, not a dollar.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KELLY: So she’s not saying, no, you’re wrong. They can’t cancel the people if the policy changes by five dollars. She’s saying, yes you’re right. If they up your premium by $5 it’s cancelled, ObamaCare kicks in, the person gets a cancellation notice and they’re wondering where to get their insurance.

REP. PALLONE: Look the bottom line is, they tell them where they can get the insurance. Look, the bottom line is, if you are selling a lousy policy at a price that’s too high, nobody is going to buy it. And so they’re cancelling these policies because they know people can’t, won’t buy them.

KELLY: OK.

REP. PALLONE: It’s a competitive marketplace.

Mainstream press, meantime, is every bit as allergic to the truth as the pols. WaPo’s Fact Checker is being lauded far and wide for doing what it’s supposed to do: award maximum “Pinocchio’s” to “Obama’s pledge that ‘no one will take away’ your health plan.” Sad. When mainstream media detect and report facts unflattering to O, it is considered a momentous event.

The president’s statements were sweeping and unequivocal — and made both before and after the bill became law. The White House now cites technicalities to avoid admitting that he went too far in his repeated pledge, which, after all, is one of the most famous statements of his presidency.
The president’s promise apparently came with a very large caveat: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan — if we deem it to be adequate.”

MORE.

The Stupid Party Greases The Skids For Sebelius’ Success

Government, Healthcare, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim

An MSNBC reporter is confident that Kathleen “Sebelius survived [the] Obamacare grilling” on Capitol Hill. But then the Obama lickspittles at the network also believe that “the insurance companies and not the law” are to blame for the loss of medical coverage by a million Americans, so far.

There will be foolish Americans aplenty (I’ve heard from a number of them) who’ll blame insurers for complying with Obama’s law and canceling policies that no longer comply with that law. (The idea that insurers would subject themselves to a massive, costly reorganization for no reason is insanely stupid, the very definition of a leftist ideologue.)

However, it would appear that the Health and Human Services Secretary skirted her deserved humiliation thanks to the Stupid Party.

When the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank gets something right it is usually by accident. Today is one of those accidents. Milbank has a point when he writes this:

Like the Scarecrow, whoever came up with House Republicans’ plan to deal with Kathleen Sebelius on Wednesday didn’t have a brain.

It was their big chance to flambé the secretary of Health and Human Services and the person who has overseen the disastrous launch of Obamacare. Instead, they wound up casting her as Judy Garland’s Dorothy.

“In ‘The Wizard of Oz,’ there is a great line,” Barton, one of the first Republican questioners, informed Sebelius, a former two-term governor of Kansas. “Dorothy at some point in the movie turns to her little dog, Toto, and says, ‘Toto, we’re not in Kansas anymore.’ Well, Madam Secretary, while you’re from Kansas, we’re not in Kansas anymore.”

Thus began several references, each more painful than the last, to Oz, Kansas, following the yellow brick road, pulling back the curtain, the wonderful things the Wizard does — and, for good measure, something about Chicken Little, although he did not appear in the 1939 classic.

GOPer on campus:

AmConservative-2006nov06