Excellent Column . . .

...critical of the TSA from the NY Times' Roger Cohen:

Lavrenti Beria, Stalin’s notorious secret police chief, once said, “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”

The T.S.A. seems to operate on the basis of an adapted maxim: “Show me the security check and I’ll find you the excuse.” Anyone who has watched T.S.A. agents spending 10 minutes patting down 80-year-old grandmothers, or seen dismayed youths being ordered back into the scanner booth by agents connected wirelessly to other invisible agents gazing at images of these people in a state of near-nakedness, has to ask: What form of group madness is it that forsakes judgment and discernment for process run amok?

I don’t doubt the patriotism of the Americans involved in keeping the country safe, nor do I discount the threat, but I am sure of this: The unfettered growth of the Department of Homeland Security and the T.S.A. represent a greater long-term threat to the prosperity, character and wellbeing of the United States than a few madmen in the valleys of Waziristan or the voids of Yemen.

America is a nation of openness, boldness and risk-taking. Close this nation, cow it, constrict it and you unravel its magic.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Max||

    "America is a nation of openness, boldness and risk-taking."

    Right. That's why America's incarceration rate is second only to China's.

  • PIRS||

    Hi Max! Are you actually being critical of a nation that has a black man as President?

    RACIST!!!

  • hmm||

    That's a valid point. Lets stop the drug war and stop jailing black youth and the cycle. Should I send the letter to get this rolling or do you want to?

  • ||

    Exactly, moron. So we need to end the drug war immediately, right? Right? You do understand that libertarians are for that, right?

    Normally I wouldn't respond to you, Edward, because you are an insect beneath my notice, but your incredible hypocrisy here, and my boredom while watching Superman II have driven me to comment.

  • GILMORE||

    Gene Hackman had better days

  • ||

    Lex Luthor crawls for no one. Even Zod.

  • Zod||

    Lay down on your backs before Zod! Now, using your lower abdominals, raise your legs and hold on a five-count before Zod!

  • Robert||

    The best Luthor was Lyle Talbot in "Atom Man vs. Superman". Unfortunately everyone else's acting in that one stank compared to their performance in the previous serial.

  • ||

    Oh this is priceless. Mr Highbrow Film Critic watching Superman II.

    There was more pathos and emotional heft in the 5 minute scene of Steve Buscemi having tea time with the little girl than in the entirety of SM2.

  • ||

    You watch Boardwalk Empire, Mr. Highbrow Authoritarian? You actually might have a little taste. Color me astonished. Though I'm surprised you shell out the cash for HBO.

  • ||

    Comcast actually gave me HBO for free for six months, and even forgot to cut it off at the end of that period. Luckily, as a believer in property rights, I called them to rectify that error.

  • ||

    So it took a free sample for you to realize the quality of HBO programming? That makes more sense, as there was no way you'd realize it on your own. Just wait until Game of Thrones airs. Is there any chance you've read that?

  • SIV||

    Comcast actually gave me HBO for free for six months, and even forgot to cut it off at the end of that period. Luckily, as a believer in property rights, I called them to rectify that error.
    Boot licker.

  • Troll||

    Or perhaps 'rectalicker'.

  • ||

    Ah, so honesty and respect for property rights are once again seen as a negative. Good to see the "stay out of my room" brand of libertrianism still holds sway here.

  • ||

    I assume you don't get that SIV is joking, right? Or are you just looking to whine? And have you read Game of Thrones or not?

  • ||

    I cannot answer that question as it pertains to an ongoing investigation.

  • kf||

    The scene of Steve Buscemi having tea time with the little girl is from Con Air. Unless Boardwalk Empire copied it.

  • ||

    My mistake...Buscemi has tea with his mistress and her kids in BE. I have actively purged Con Air from my memory.

  • ||

    I watch it for free here:

    http://stagevu.com/channel/128025

    WARNING!!!

    This site is a fucking nightmare so keep your security setting set on kill....

    or use a Mac.

  • ||

    Macs have web browsers?

  • Max||

    Maybe, just as a preliminary, we should stop with the ultra-nationalist we're-the-greatest-nation-on-earth crap. I mean, fuck, you can't see news coverage of Macy's Thanksgiving day parade that doesn't feature some asshole saying "Only in America!" You libertoid dimwits are an odd mixture of rebels on drugs and utterly conventional banal fucks on everything else. I imagine it's an IQ thing.

  • ||

    You're stupider than normal today, Edward. That's quite an accomplishment. Accusing the commenters here of being "rah rah Americuh" is so dumb that it indicates that you are either congenitally retarded or utterly mendacious. Which do you prefer?

  • Max||

    Your lips must get sore even when you think. I was commenting on the general culture, not on the zombies who jerk each other off here, idiot. Don't you freedom-loving market worshipers care about the general culture? I thought the whole point of your pathertic little cult was evangelizing the heathens.

  • Max has made his last post||

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • Shorter Max||

    Capitalism sucks, and Obama's gonna take our economy down to everyone else's level where we belong.

  • ||

    I'm trying to make sense of what you wrote, but I'm failing. I'd blame myself, except that I get to blame you because you're an impotent sniveling moron, so that works out well.

  • PIRS||

    Max, what is your definition of "heathen"?

    This could be interesting.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Usually, only right-wing authoritarians use the term "heathen". Perhaps Max has a hidden Team Red streak he's not letting out of the box...

  • PIRS||

    Mr. FIFY, true, and he thinks we want to "evangelize" these so called "Heathens". Evangelize usually refers to religion and the term "Heathen" [in modern times] usually refers to people of minority faiths or non-western faiths. If anything, WE are the ones who are in the "minority".

  • Mini Max||

    Evangelize usually refers to religion

    Clearly not the case in this instance, fool.

  • ||

    Max, what is your definition of "heathen"?

    I think he used heathen correctly but confused "evangelizing" with organizing or converting.

    He ether meant we wanted to change the heathens or to recruit them or both...I don't know which.

    Anyway I can't bitch about it as I tend to stretch the meaning of words myself

  • ||

    >freedom-loving market worshipers

    Teddy,

    It doesn't follow that because we decline to worship the kleptocrats as you do, that we worship anything else. The market is not something to worship, it's a consequence of people interacting voluntarily.

    -jcr

  • Max has made his last post||

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • PIRS||

    That post was originally made on June, 24, 2010 and yet he is still here ....

  • Shorter Max||

    America sucks, and Obama's gonna take us down to everyone else's level where we belong.

  • Wonkette||

    Sounds good to us, Shorter Max!

  • CPUSA.org||

    Obama's nowhere near as good at what Max wants, as Kim Jong Il. Frankly, we are disappointed in this right-wing excuse for a Democratic president.

  • ||

    You know who never had giant cartoon character balloons in their parades?

  • ||

    Then why are you here? Go backup to dailykos for your circle jerk. Thanks.

  • Mr Whipple||

    You're not watching the Michigan/Ohio State game? Damn, you are unAmerican.

  • ||

    I got my fill watching Dallas choke against the Saints. It's not that I wanted Dallas to win, but my coworker likes the Saints, so I wanted them to lose so I could bust his balls. Thanks, Cowboys!

  • alan||

    I know that feeling. I have started to root for the Pats because almost everyone I know hates them.

  • ||

    Anyone else notice that Zod had the power of telekinesis?

    What the fuck?!? As if the people of krypton needed one more special power.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqBO0Cluv_o

  • The Mossy Spaniard||

    We're #1 in the world, Max. However, you had a halfway decent point for once.

  • Max||

    Number one in what? Certainly not healcare outcomes. How about adolescent science and math skills? Nope. Modesty? I don't think so.

  • Max has made his last post||

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • The Mossy Spaniard||

    I was correcting you on your prison population stats. You got derailed by ad hominems and references to fellating a Texas congressman and responded in error.

  • Max has made his last post||

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • DADIODADDY||

    finally...

  • Max has made his last post has||

    Max has made his last post|11.27.10 @ 1:42PM|#

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • ||

    OK, we get it. I don't think continuing to post this will have the effect you want.

  • ||

    "Right. That's why America's incarceration rate is second only to China's."

    Wow Max, you're becoming more libertarian by the second!

  • dunnder||

    I discount the "threat" of terrorism. You're statistically more likely to die from drowning in your bathtub.

    http://www.americanthinker.com.....htubs.html

  • Robert||

    And what goes better in bathtubs than (see my link)...?

  • Robert||

    America is a nation of openness, boldness and risk-taking.

    Right. That's why America's incarceration rate is second only to China's.


    True. Criminals tend to be greater risk takers than the avg. person.

  • PIRS||

    The New York Times is being critical of Lavrenti Beria? Is this is the same New York Times that cheerily wrote about the pastimes of Communists?

    Well, it is not often I can say this; so I will say it now "Good job New York Times! Good job being the paper you once were!"

  • ||

    Maybe the regular editorial staff are off for Thanksgiving.

  • Robert||

    He was a crappy army gen'l too.

  • Wind Rider||

    Uh, the paper they "once were" had Walter Duranty on their payroll cheerleading for Stalin. . .

  • The Mossy Spaniard||

    "I don't doubt the patriotism of the Americans involved in keeping the country safe..."

    Nor do I. Patriotism is a nasty bug.

  • Some other guy||

    Well it's about time Reason weighed in on this issue.

  • hmm||

    At least it's not mosquerbating and is actually an issue.

  • ||

    The main thing I got from the article is this: Roger Cohen is just another tentacle of the Kochtopus.

  • GILMORE||

    This reminds me of some disturbing japanese cartoon animation I saw once...

  • Mr Whipple||

    That would make him a Kochtopussy?

  • GILMORE||

    " What form of group madness is it that forsakes judgment and discernment for process run amok?

    NOW you ask.

    I mean, Christ. It takes a few decades of overweening government to make people scratch their beards and state the obvious.

    That said, yes, excellent article. In the NYT? Color me semi-impressed. However, of course they ran it on the one day no one reads the paper and is out gorging themselves on super-sales-day.

  • ||

    In the NYT? Color me semi-impressed.

    The NYT did employ Henry Hazlitt once upon a time. It hasn't all been evil little shits like Duranty and Krugman.

    -jcr

  • GILMORE||

    From the comments:


    William J Haboush
    New York City
    November 26th, 2010
    8:59 am
    I am an American and a frequent flier. I find your views hopelessly silly. I am glowingly proud of my fellow Americans for keeping their cool and their dignity through this while those with irrational body fears descend into sn unseemly froth over the screeners. Here are the main points.

    First, after entirely well placed objections by the medical profession over concerns about radiation exposure extensive studies have resulted in a medical consensus that the exposure level is quite safe for everyone except possibly TSA workers subjected to repeated second hand exposure.

    Second we mostly have realized that if someone in a remote location sees a somewhat schematic representation of our body surface with no way of directly connecting the image to the person that our privacy has not really been intruded upon. Now I do know that some people might make a big thing of it but I am happy to say that most of my countrymen were proven sufficiently sophisticated and rational to accept the procedure. After years of hearing how "Europeans" are more understanding and tolerant about nudity sex etc. it is my own fellow Americans who allowed reason to prevail in this case.

    Finally we are Americans. We believe that we are citizens of a republic based on equality. That means if one person has to go through this then everyone must. We know that we cannot allow anyone to be shielded from this by high position, great wealth or privilege. We are citizens and we know that none of us can be above this. You say we are fearful. I don't lose sleep about the risk. We are not fearful; we are proudly cooperative. Why do you think I should just let you sail over it?

    ""Finally we are Americans. We believe that we are citizens of a republic based on equality. That means if one person has to go through this then everyone must.""

    Excuse me while I puke on whats left of the constitution.

    Dear god, educated people say things like this. I really have to stop reading the comments at the NYT. "We are proudly cooperative". Yes, you have done your part as an American by submitting to something debasing, stupid and expensive which does nothing to stop terrorism. Congratulations! Its really the thought that counts. Next - We need to involuntarily have your children be drafted into our next foolish military endeavor... Now dont complain! We are a Nation of complient cooperators. Shut up and do as you are told, and you are a Patriot.

    God, I need a drink. Where's the Four Loko?...

  • hmm||

    That was chalked full of stupid, layered in idiocy, and topped with a the fruit of the retard.

  • ||

    Sorta like a tuducken of stupidity.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Excellent lol

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    We need to involuntarily have your children be drafted into our next foolish military endeavor...

    Which is about to begin in Korea.

  • hmm||

    Na, Korea is just a rerun of the last dicktatorial shift.

  • GILMORE||

    Uh, not so much =

    Many in the FP crowd point out that NK's belligerence does nothing but make the soft power of American diplomacy more relevant. (it makes the chinese look like they can't reign in their 'friends') I think the idea of Americans actually engaging NK pretty farfetched compared to the already-existing stupid wars we're in.

  • ||

    I think the idea of Americans actually engaging NK pretty farfetched compared to the already-existing stupid wars we're in.

    At first I thought this made sense....then I recalled Obama's tendency to copy and paste Bush's foreign policy.

  • GILMORE||

    Har,

    here's why they're right:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11.....=1&hp;

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Keep your eyes peeled. China may be the ones to spank the bad little children of North Korea. Remember, they consider the Asian continent to be their sphere of influence and don't want any more Americans in their backyard than there already are.

  • Ebeneezer Scrooge||

    Somehow, I don't believe North Korea has done anything that China hasn't approved of.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I think North Korea is a Chinese puppet. This "China scolding the North Koreans" act is something they put on for the rest of us.

  • ||

    Finally we are Americans. We believe that we are citizens of a republic based on equality. That means if one person has to go through this then everyone must. We know that we cannot allow anyone to be shielded from this by high position, great wealth or privilege.

    I guess all the news stories about how Obama, Hillary, John Boner, and Pelosi don't have to go through the scans were subversive misinformation.

  • [State] Border Patrol||

    Show me your papers when crossing a state border checkpoint!

  • GILMORE||

    ""I guess all the news stories about how Obama, Hillary, John Boner, and Pelosi don't have to go through the scans were subversive misinformation.""

    Because every American is a terrorist until 'scanned'?

  • Rhywun||

    I love the whole "let's keep a stiff upper lip, chaps!" tone. As if this is all some sort of temporary arrangement we have to soldier through together, like food rations or blackouts.

  • Invisible Finger||

    Dear god, educated people say things like this.

    Educated people bury their heads in the sand just like stupid people. Perhaps even more so since they're so cognizant of the double-standards on which their livelihoods are based.

  • Russ 2000||

    We believe that we are citizens of a republic based on equality.

    WTF? The republic was based on liberty, not equality.

    As I continue to observe, the stupidest people on the planet are doctors.

  • Times Proofer||

    Roger, this quote looks like you may be a little critical of Stalin?

    Yeah?

    Are you sure you can't hang one on Pinochet? He must be up to something.

    He's dead.

    Are you sure? I know I skimmed something about him in the Times just yesterday. What about Franco?

    He's dead.

    When did that happen? About how artist in Spain finally feel free to express themselves.

    He's dead. Pinochet is dead. Beria is dead, but I'm quoting him.

    Fine. Suit yourself. Don't blame me if you don't get an invite to the Christmas party. I'm only trying to save you from yourself.

  • Times Proofer||

    Fucking tiny comment box.

    When did that happen? About how artist in Spain finally feel free to express themselves.

    We had something in the paper yesterday about how artist in Spain finally feel free to express themselves.

  • GILMORE||

    I randomly came across this, and find it somewhat relevant =

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....grec_index

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "The unfettered growth of the Department of Homeland Security and the T.S.A. ..."

    Sooo close, and yet so far. Why restrict your criticism of "unfettered growth" to just these two entities, Cohen?

    Cue standard "big government is good!" claptrap in 3...2...

  • Max||

    ARFARFARFARFARFARFARF!!!!!!

  • Wonkette||

    TRUCKNUTZ!!!

  • Chad||

    Externalities!!!1!

  • shrike||

    only a Christ-fag capitalist pig would criticize our glorious leader Obama.

  • Max||

    Maybe when Ron Paul goes through security, the TSA should suck his cock

  • PIRS||

    Max, in your post above, what did you mean by the word "heathen"?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I dare Max to replace "Ron Paul" in his example above, with "Barney Frank" or "Barack Obama".

    Being the sniveling pussy Max is, he won't do it. But it would be, for a change, a Max post one would WANT to read.

    Kinda.

  • PIRS||

    I wonder if Max is homophobic?

  • ||

    That would explain why Tony and him don't acknowledge each other like say tony and Chad do.

    Shrike is....anyone notice if Max and Shrike get along at all?

  • Juanita Wayback Machine||

    Juanita|3.19.10 @ 1:06PM|#
    I think the real reason is because the dutch allow pot. All their soldiers, gay or not were stoned. This is why our miltary drug tests.

  • ||

    I may not be as steeped in Reason left wing troll lore as I should be.

    Who is Juanita?

  • PIRS||

    Juanita is [or was] a troll who came here for several years and was anti-drug above all else. She would justify everything from prison rape to no-knock-raids that leave dogs dead if it was in the name of the War on Drugs.

  • Rhywun||

    I'm pretty sure she's an anti-troll. Her stuff was just too spot-on stoopid to be taken seriously.

  • not that bright fanboy||

    Yeah, uh, it's like how you, uh, never see Peter Parker and Batman, like, in the same place...

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Well, Max DID chastise the "heathens" earlier, so apparently he has a hidden right-wing Christian authoritarian streak...

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Perhaps he has an authoritarian Buddhist streak.

    "Accept the Eightfold Path, heathen, or suffer more samsara!"

  • actually ||

    I wonder if Max is homophobic homosexual?

  • TSA||

    Considering the anti-TSA attitude of people like Ron Paul, we doubt any "dick-sucking" will be taking place either way.

  • Max has made his last post||

    Max|6.24.10 @ 3:29PM|#

    Go suck ron puals dick, morons. You peeple are fucking retarded. I`m done coming to this wingnut sight. this is my last post.

  • RyanXXX||

    Okay, confession. ^That was me :)

    Had you guys convinced, tho

  • SIV||

    Go To Hell Gators !
    Go To Hell !
    EAT SHIT!!!

    Go To Hell Gators !
    Go To Hell !
    EAT SHIT!!!

  • l0b0t||

    What is happening? You invite me to your house to cheer on regional sports collective. Instead, I am finding you in yard, wrestling with local oaf.

  • Mr Whipple||

    Have the Christmas shopping money on the game?

  • BakedPenguin||

    No, he just hates the Florida Gators, like any reasonable person.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    This.

  • Mr Whipple||

    No. THIS

  • SIV||

    'Noles Win!
    31-7
    The Gay-tors are no doubt enjoying their fecal meal in the Underworld about now.

  • ||

    nttawwt

  • Juanita Wayback Machine||

    Juanita|2.18.08 @ 7:24AM|#
    All drugs are evil without exception. I am sorry Dr. Morgan is dead but he should never have advocated the use of drugs. Illegal drugs are illegal for a reason and can never be used safely in any dose, and anyone who uses them even once is an addict and a criminal.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "Maybe when Ron Paul goes through security, the TSA should suck his cock"

    More than likely, TSA would give Paul one of their enhanced patdowns. Shit, the guy is probably on a terrorist watch list.

    But more to the point, he WOULD get checked at least to some degree, whereas higher-ranking/more-important politicians would just skate right through. What TSA goon would dare touch the hem of Michelle's skirt, let alone deign to cop some tit?

  • mad libertarian guy||

    I think that Michelle and the 2 girls should have to go through TSA without the TSA knowing. Then go home and tell daddy what kind of fucked up shit comes out of his policy.

  • ||

    Given their parents' demonstrated behavior, they're probably exhibitionists. I wouldn't be surprised if they pose for PB when they turn 18.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Those poor kids are gonna be so fucked in the head after eighteen years of their parents bitching about rich people, while Barry plans his next multi-million dollar book deal...

  • RyanXXX||

    Haha, that Max quote wasn't real. I thought you guys would see I was mocking him, but apparently that's something he could reasonably be expected to say

  • ||

    Our boy Max does seem to have an oral fixation about Dr Paul.

  • ||

    I am beginning to think Max does not even exist and in fact he is simply a series of puppets conducted by a large group of spoofers all not knowing that they are in fact spoofing other spoofers.

    The original Max posted only once in 2007 and in fact was a libertarian only the person who first spoofed him misread a joe post and confused the author of it.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Dunno. He sounds like just about any random lefty. Maybe he's a nebulous hive-mind creation, a disembodied soul that temporarily invades the fingers of Reason posters?

  • pancakes||

    Oh, I think they know.

  • sevo||

    "But more to the point, he WOULD get checked at least to some degree, whereas higher-ranking/more-important politicians would just skate right through. What TSA goon would dare touch the hem of Michelle's skirt, let alone deign to cop some tit?"
    Imagine trying to *find* a TSA goon who would submit to looking at Pelosi in that thing.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Ew. Ew ew ew.

    The turkey I had at Tuesday's pre-Thanksgiving get-together, is threatening to reappear. Nekkid Pelosi Mind-Image is THAT powerful an emetic.

    In fact, that may make one puke up a meal one *hasn't" yet eaten.

  • sevo||

    Living in SF, I'm often confused; has Pelosi ridden *my* (taxpayer) jet back to town or is that just a breeze off the sewage treatment plant.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    She didn't deserve the jet in the first place, though saying that is likely hate speech.

  • ||

    The fact that your background offers no indication that you would pose any threat will be interpreted as even more reason to grill, scan, investigate you even harder.

  • Slap the Enlightened!||

  • RyanXXX||

    Look, I have no doubt that Al Qaeda was behind what happened, with no help from the Neocons or the Israelis or any of that (foreknowledge is more debatable)

    But even I have questions about what happened, with all the weird shit that doesn't QUITE add up

  • ||

    Conspiracy theories assume a level of competence which our leaders have never shown any evidence of having.

    If you want to tell me the 9/11 investigation was botched and missed some critical evidence of some kind, I'm willing to listen.

    If you're going to postulate that our government and/or "THE JOOS" were somehow in on it... Sorry, but you're nuts.

  • Robert||

    There's one way to beat this rap:

    Put an ad for all terrorists to list everyone they want killed. No questions asked, anyone who wants to claim terrorist status gets to answer. Then we have the cops round up everyone on the list and gas them. Once everyone anyone wants dead is dead, the rest of us are off the hook forever.

  • Dave||

    That works until some asshole says "Everyone."

  • Robert||

    They have to name them. In pool you don't get to say your target ball is all of them.

  • Robert||

    Also, imagine how much nicer everybody will be to everybody else under such a system. You don't want enemies, you really, really don't.

  • Milton Quaffalot||

    Obviously, Mr. Cohen is being paid by the Koch brothers. He's probably a racist too.

  • ||

    What I would really like to know is how I can get in on all this Koch money which is supposedly flying around. I'm a big libertarian-cause cheerleader already, and would LOVE the opportunity to be a paid shill.

  • Dave||

    Mr Cohen asked about the wisdom of grouping hundreds of people at checkpoints as if hundreds of people on airplanes were the only possible targets. I had been thinking the same thing myself - wasn't there an attack like this at an Italian airport in the 1980s?

  • Super Patriot||

    Duhhh... terrorists hate us for our freedoms. Therefore the government must take away said freedoms so the terrorists don't hate us anymore.

    Simple logic.

  • ||

    "Anyone who has...seen dismayed youths being ordered back into the scanner booth by agents connected wirelessly to other invisible agents gazing at images of these people in a state of near-nakedness,..."

    On a serious note, all of these images are presumably saved as potential evidence in court, aren't they?

    If I were the father of a teenage daughter, I'd really have a problem with that.

    It's bad enough that strangers are looking at your daughter naked--at the very least, they should assure us that they're just looking at my daughter naked--and not keeping pictures of her naked that could end up on the internet somehow.

  • ||

    There is no reason to save the scans. If the scan shows questionable items on their person then they will be searched manually, and the results of that manual search will be all the evidence you need.

  • ||

    Also we need to get past this idea that the scan is equivalent to a naked picture. All that appears is the outline of the body. Yes, you can tell how big someone's breasts or penises are, but it's not like a visual image. And beyond that, the scan doesn't detect facial features well, so there is no way anyone looking at such a scan on the internet is going to be able to identify who it's of.

  • ||

    Tulpa: "Also we need to get past this idea that the scan is equivalent to a naked picture. All that appears is the outline of the body."

    Sure. Like electronics never improve. Once we're all nicely used to the scanners, why would we complain when the new high-res models get rolled out?

  • ||

    I've seen the pictures.

    If I had a 14 year old daughter? I wouldn't want anybody lookin' at my daughter like that.

    If they're saving pictures of people's 14 year old daughters that anyone else would go to prison for possessing otherwise?

    They need to be very careful about who they're letting see those images, how much information TSA is connecting to those images (especially home addresses) and especially how those images are stored.

    Why shouldn't fathers everywhere be concerned about government employees collecting a database of nude adolescents with their home addresses?!

    I had to show ID with an address on it when I got my last boarding pass. It had to match the address on the credit card I bough the ticket with.

    Just because we're not stupid doesn't mean we're paranoid.

  • ||

    I've seen the pictures.

    I'm meant I've seen pictures these machines take linked to by Hit & Run and media have linked...

    ...you know what I mean!

  • ||

    If I had a 14 year old daughter, I wouldn't want her in a database with pictures that look like this...

    http://www.google.com/images?u.....;gs;_rfai=

  • Just Sayin'||

    If I had a 14 year old daughter? I wouldn't want anybody lookin' at my daughter like that.

    I've got news for you. Your 14-year-old daughter has already taken pictures of her tits with her phone and sent them out to half the boys in her art class.

  • ||

    Some kids are into sexting, so middle aged government employees gawking at my kid's nude photo and filing it away in a database for easy access--that should be perfectly okay?!

    Some stupid kids sexting and government employees routinely gawking at everybody's daughters--that's supposed to be the same thing?! What weird brand of kool-aid do you have to drink to think like that?

    Hey, my doctor's seen me naked, so why shouldn't the cops be able to strip search me at will?

    P.S. I don't have a daughter, but if I did? She wouldn't be a tool.

  • sevo||

    "so there is no way anyone looking at such a scan on the internet is going to be able to identify who it's of."

    And that's supposed to make it all better?

  • ||

    I didn't read the last two thirds of what you wrote the first time...

    "Yes, you can tell how big someone's breasts or penises are, but it's not like a visual image."

    Does the term "self-contradictory" mean anything to you?

    "And beyond that, the scan doesn't detect facial features well, so there is no way anyone looking at such a scan on the internet is going to be able to identify who it's of."

    Like I said, if the TSA isn't stopping people based on information they've collected from their home address? Then they're not doing their job. If a known terrorist can get on a plane 'cause the TSA doesn't know to stop someone with a ticket matching his known address? Then this all really is for nothing.

    You can't get on a plane anymore without showing picture ID with a home address--a passport or driver's license. Why wouldn't all that information be put together in a database somewhere?

    If they're saving all those images for later--you think it's all being saved in an anonymous file? When they know everyone who's going through security based on their ticket and driver's license/passport anyway?

    That seems willfully naive to me. I think they know exactly whose image they're taking when they take it, just like they know whose luggage they're looking at. Why wouldn't they know that. If they know whose image they're taking, why wouldn't they keep all that information together?

  • ||

    Admittedly I haven't been through a security line since the new procedures were adopted, but when I went through security last May, your ID and boarding pass were checked by one person at the entrance to the checkpoint area, and after that you walked up to a screening lane of your choice. I didn't have to show ID to anyone in the screening lane itself.

    There is really no way they would know whose carry-on was going through the scanner or who was walking through the metal detector. I mean, perhaps they could do it by going back through the security video after the fact, but I don't even remember the ID-checker even recording my name or boarding pass information -- he or she would just stamp the boarding pass after seeing that the name matched that on my ID.

  • ||

    You can't get on a plane anymore without showing picture ID with a home address--a passport or driver's license. Why wouldn't all that information be put together in a database somewhere?

    I've had the wrong address on my drivers license for over two years now and multiple times flying...and never had a problem. Passports don't have addresses on them at all, btw, aside from the blank area where you can pencil in an address if you want.

  • ||

    Associating an address with a piece of identification is easy.

    For some reason I thought my passport had my address--I just checked and I see that it doesn't. It showed my birthplace, and that's probably what threw me.

    Still, I'd be mighty surprised if they aren't attaching an address with whatever information they're gathering when they decide to check some people rather than others...

    Landlords can get all your former addresses by doing a cheap check on you--it's absurd to think the TSA isn't doing at least that much on you when you buy a ticket. Even the automated screens when I got my boarding pass last time wanted me to swipe my driver's license or take a snapshot of my passport.

    They're checking you against a database of people on the "no-fly" list--at the very least. Like I said, if the "no fly" list doesn't have any home addresses (and a lot of other information) associated with your name, then the TSA isn't doing its job.

  • ||

    There are orders of magnitude more people buying airline tickets than applying to rent apartments every day. There is no way the TSA could be doing background checks on every flier.

  • ||

    According to TSA's website on this topic, the only thing they check w.r.t. the watchlist is name, birthdate, and gender. So I don't know who was demanding your address too.

  • robc||

    Why should we have to get past it? If I wanted you to see the outline of my body, I wouldnt wear close that obscure it.

  • robc||

    clothes even.

  • ||

    I guess we need to get past the whole "unreasonable" search and seizure thing too...

    ...so long as they're not giving us a colonoscopy, what do we have to complain about?

  • ||

    I didn't say you should enjoy or even approve of the outline of your genitals being seen by strangers. I said you need to stop acting as if it's the same thing as a naked picture in the visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum.

  • robc||

    I consider both unacceptable.

  • robc||

    The phrase "distinction without a difference" comes to mind.

    I dont see the point in distinguishing.

  • ||

    Of course you see the point in distinguishing. Otherwise you'd stop ballyhooing about "naked pictures" which provokes an emotional reaction.

  • robc||

    When have I ever used, much less ballyhooed, the phrase "naked pictures"? Ive been anti-radiation, not anti-photo on the backscatter. I just accept that other people dont like their junk and/or outline of junk photographed. And respect their opinion and dont see a difference. Its not even remotely my concern. But I accept those for which it is as allies.

  • JoshINHB||

    Tulpa

    You need to read this.

    http://intolerantfox.wordpress.....been-told/

    Then try the technique yourself.

    They are taking naked pictures.

  • GILMORE||

    Yes, you can tell how big someone's breasts or penises are,

    Which is why *i* demand they put my name on my body-scan.

    Pat down? maybe for $10. But all you get is a picture for free, bitch.

  • Whappan?||

    Already happened.

  • dunnder||

    I discount the "threat" of terrorism. You're statistically more likely to die from drowning in your bathtub.

    http://www.americanthinker.com.....htubs.html

  • ||

    I think one of the most rebellious, libertarian things an individual could do over the last 8 years or so, was to be individually unafraid of terrorism...and talk about it.

    Not being afraid of terrorism and talking about it? That makes people mad.

    When I said things like that I'd rather suffer a few more 9/11s--rather than lose my constitutional rights? It made them furious.

    And when I said things like that people who give up their rights and liberties becasue they're afraid are cowards? ...specifically "cowards", mind you?

    ...It made 'em livid.

    I'm not about to say that I'd rather die than lose my rights and liberties, but we're not talking about certain death here. We're talking about losing my rights and liberties to improve my chance of dying in a terrorist attack from...what? 1 in 500,000 to 1 in a million?

    ...and I think that's being generous!

  • Robert||

    So the patriotic thing to do is take a bath (see link).

  • rhea||

    Let’s face it; the American government does not have the political will to be honest with the American people, whichever branch in the government they are. http://www.pathtoasia.com/jobs/

  • ||

    Great article on bow we're falling behind China:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....57131.html

    Their #1 export to us? Computer equipment.

    Our #1 export to them? Waste paper and scrap metal.

    Doesn't sound like a "win win" to me! We need fair trade.

  • ||

    Yes, Kenneth, I'm sure your Robert Reich/Paul Krugman/national greatness-style Econ 101 professor gives you very good grades for regurgitating his talking points so faithfully.

    How are the rest of the freshman humanities classes going?

    Oh, have you checked who is developing and designing all that computer equipment "they" are selling "us".

    On the other hand, perhaps you're not really a naive freshman. Maybe you're just a garden variety racist who's afraid the yellow bastards are going to come and steal our white women after they've got all our jobs and stuff.

  • ||

    Read the column, it talks about how the "advanced" jobs are being shipped overseas, too.

    Why pay an American $100,000/year to design a computer when you can pay a Chinese $25,000/year, just like how you can pay a Chinese $1/hour to assemble the laptop vs. $15/for an American.

    R&D follows manufacturing.

  • ||

    That leaves the question, are Chinese wages too low, or are American wages too high?

    Also, should America adopt China's environmental policies so that we can compete better?

  • ||

    Or even more importantly, what makes Americans so special that they deserve jobs over the Chinese? We're all human beings, so I'm happy people in China are able to work their way out of degrading poverty, even if it means a trained, educated American worker by effect has to find another job. Many jobs cannot be outsourced, and in a truly free market, we can move to China and work for less but have a significantly lower cost of living if we want to. Of course in a truly free market, America would be more competitive and the economy would grow due to the reduced deadweight loss of government.

  • MNG||

    People in China eagerly await the Xmas presents you are going to buy them.

    What? You are only going to buy presents for your loved ones? But people in China are people too!

  • ||

    I don't know about you, but I don't use race or national origin as a basis for picking my "loved ones".

    Admittedly, I'm stuck with the family I was born into but beyond my own family members I get to pick and choose those I associate with, cooperate with, do business with or engage in other more intimate associations with. Like others, I discriminate, however I have never seen national origin as a reasonable basis for discrimination in choosing the foregoing associates.

  • MNG||

    But why not include Chinese people as loved ones? There are many chatboards with Chinese people on them that you can easily find. They are human beings too, and they want some xmas presents from you dammit!

  • MNG||

    My point is that just like you are born into a family and feel an affinity for them you are born into a community, a state, a region or a nation and can do the same for that grouping. It's not racist to want to see Americans do well relative to other nations.

    I guess you really hate the olympics, all that rooting for people just because of what nation they happened to be born into...

  • ||

    Actually, I don't just really hate the olympics, I really, really, really hate the olympics!!!

    And yes, one reason is the orgy of nationalistic mutual mastubation rooting for athelets solely on the basis of national origin.

  • ||

    See, I hate the fucking olympics so fucking much that you even mentioning it made it so that I was utterly incapable of writing that last sentence so it made sense.

    Insert a few prepositions in the right places and I think it will, though. :)

  • ||

    China does Christmas? When did that start? The Jews are going to be pissed they no longer have a place to eat on Christmas day.

  • ||

    No way the PRC would allow Americans to move to China permanently. We would create political problems for them, obviously.

  • MNG||

    On your marks, get set, race to the bottom! Most people will be living in hovels but imagine the overall economic efficiency! At night we can dine on hobo chili and economic statistics and by day all the soot you can breath/eat!

  • ||

    And here I thought liberals were against income inequality.

  • MNG||

    Yes, the simplistic caricature that liberals that care about income inequality want to see everyone equally poor is just that, a simplistic caricature.

  • ||

    So, you don't care about income inequality, as long as there's a border between those with unequal incomes.

    Because that's what your China policy seems designed to do (though it wouldn't work anyway).

  • ||

    As usual, you are unwilling to answer the question.

    Are Chinese wages too low, or are American wages too high?

    Is there some reason why an American who has not bothered to avail himself of the educational opportunities that have been all but forced upon him with a gun to his head at huge expense to the tax-paying workers of this country should get more money to do menial labor that a sub-moron can do than some poor Chinese son of a peasant who never had a chance remotely resembling that kind of privilege in his life?

    To believe that he does you need to be some kind of racist or something.

  • ||

    More on that:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....77274.html

    They have a plan to develop their eceonomy--their government acts in the interests of their economy according to their plan--where's OUR government and OUR plan? Why aren't they defending our economic interests?

  • ||

    Seems to me, Kenny, that you're way more scared that the nasty Chinees are going to improve their lot.

    We all know that only good white people deserve to be rich don't we?

    But then, those of us who aren't just out of high school (or have you even gotten that far?) remember when it was the Japs that were going to take over.

    Hell, some of us even remember when it was the Soviets (scientifically planned economy...something...steal underpants...something...take over the world).

  • ||

    You can't compare the Soviets to the Chinese.

    Look at the glittering metropolis that is Shanghai and compare it to the old roach-infested, delipadated capital that was Moscow under Stalin.

    How many consumer goods that we bought in the store said MADE IN THE USSR on them?

    None. Now, China? A whole lot.

    We need to compete, or we'll wake up in a world dominated by China, and people will look to one-party autocracy instead of democracy as the model

  • ||

    Kenny, China has all the makings of a real estate and construction bubble courtesy of the same kind of policies that gave us ours.

    This is where listening to the likes of Thomas Friedman has taken us and will continue to take us.

  • ||

    That's not a bubble, that's called "building for the future, today".

    In 1993 I was in Beijing on the Second Ring Road and I thought "why is this so empty? This is kind of absurd to build so much!"

    Well, today, the Second Ring Road is pack to the brim and so is the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth.

    Those empty buildings will fill up with millions of new middle class Chinese from the countryside in no time.

    1.5 billion people need a lot of housing!

    What's more, they pay cold, hard, cash for their homes. No crazy mortages there!

  • ||

    The "crazy mortgages" here are one of the creations of a previous generation of economic planners, namely the "New Dealers".

    Barney Frank and the other enablers of Fannie and Freddie and their ilk are just the heirs to this brilliant policy of fetishizing home ownership and making loans to people who can't repay them.

    Virtually none of the crisis policies you identify are free market policies. Almost all of them are legacies of "national greatness" planning some of them going back to colonial times.

  • ||

    Wrong! The housing bubble was caused by both the private and THEN the public sectors, and both were asset bubbles designed to disguise the fact *we don't make things anymore*!

    We've been propping up the economy with financial Wall St. smoke-and-mirrors for 30 years and its all ending in tears!

  • ||

    Dude, I'm pretty sure "Kenneth" is a sockpuppet. Once again, he's too perfect at what he does (argue a particular protectionist/nation building line) to be real. Though I give his creator credit; "Kenneth" is rage inducing.

  • SIV||

    Speaking of good columns, George Will has one:
    Our Puritanical Progressives

  • Cyto||

    He introduced me to the term "Pecksniffian". Great word - he calls them Pecksniffian progressives. It doesn't mean what my apparently too literal mind imagined it to mean though.

  • ||

    Want to fix the deficit? Here's an idea:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/opinion/28friedman.html?hp

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Well, that was a waste of time, Kenneth. What else you got?

  • ||

    You didn't even read it.

    What about it is a "waste of time"?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    The fuck I didn't read it. Wasted several minutes trying to pick some useful nuggets out of the pile.

  • ||

    Kenny, besides all the national greatness economic planning schemes that have all been, more or less, part of US public policy since the New Deal days, on and off, and have never been anything but failures, whatever good ideas Friedman proposes (cutting SS and Medicare) are politically unlikely to happen. And it will be people on Friedman's side of the fence who will prevent it from happening.

    Just as it was his type who created such unsustainable expansive entitlements in the first place while those counseling restraint were dismissed as hardhearted villains wanting the poor to freeze in snowbanks.

    And all the national greatness economic planning schemes have been failures in the long run while producing short term benefits for the politically connected while leaving an ever increasing pile of debt for those who aren't.

    If you weren't such an immature little twit, you'd know that none of these ideas are new.

    I'm assuming you are young and immature out of kindness, otherwise I'd have to call you stupid.

  • ||

    Wow, the wisdom of Thomas Fridman:

    Obama deserves much more credit than he has received for stabilizing the economy and reviving the auto industry.


    Ummm, Tom (and Kenneth), the auto industry was doing just fine. Two decrepit mismanaged companies were bankrupt and the economy would have been better off in the long run if they had been allowed to fail.

  • Max||

    Isaac Bartram is no expert on the auto industry, but he fucking knows his Libertarian catechism.

  • ||

    Oohhh, ouch, Maxie. That was so clever.

    So which is it Max, are libertarians a marginal powerless minority or are they an international conspiracy that controls the world?

  • Amakudari||

    Okay, fine, fuck, I'll bite:

    What’s driving it? Let me say what’s not driving it. It is not that millions of Americans suddenly started worrying about the national debt. ...

    The long-term concern is that people intuitively understand that what we need most now is nation-building in America. They understand it by just looking around at our crumbling infrastructure, our sputtering job-creation engines and the latest international education test results that show our peers out-educating us, which means they will eventually out-compete us.

    Let's see, so Americans didn't wake up and start fretting about the national debt, which is a recent problem exacerbated by the financial crisis, but they did wake up and start fretting about our infrastructure and test scores, something they've never given a fuck about for the past few decades.

    At the same time he says the president should support the draft recommendations from the Bowles commission to seize the debate. Now, there's not really a debate or anything, but still, he should seize it.

    I have no clue what he's trying to communicate other than "a bit more stimulus = good."

  • Thomas Friedman||

    "Americans want a plan to make America great again"

    Damn, I'm good.

  • hmm||

    Well that was not a very shocking article from a Fabian socialist.

  • ||

    Shorter Kenneth:

    "Ooh, China!"

    FAP FAP FAP

  • ||

    Heresy

    A leading Republican lawmaker on Sunday rejected the Obama administration's assertion that ratification of a new arms control treaty with Russia is so pressing that it must be dealt with by the lame-duck Senate.

    Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona denied there was any partisanship behind his calls for a delay. He said the Senate has more urgent business to attend to in the weeks before it breaks for Christmas, including dealing with potential tax increases and funding the government through the rest of the budget year.

    "It's more a view of reality rather than policy," he said. "These are higher priority items."

    Trying to make a qualitative distinction in order to establish priorities?

    Insanity, I tell you!

  • hmm||

    This popped up on FARK. If this isn't and indication we are paying some academics too much and hey live so far out of touch with reality that at least on thinks furnishing a home with used furniture and shit you found is some how novel. Even when I had the money for a new item I go for the used if its cheaper or do build it myself if I can. I swear these fuckin' supposed smart people live on mars.

    http://www.fosters.com/apps/pb.....-1/FOSNEWS

  • MNG||

    Richard Cohen in the WaPo on Palin's attacks on Michelle Obama's comments about being proud of her nation for the first time

    "It's appalling that Palin and too many others fail to understand that fact - indeed so many facts of American history. They don't offer the slightest hint that they can appreciate the history of the Obama family and that in Michelle's case, her ancestors were slaves - Jim Robinson of South Carolina, her paternal great-great grandfather, being one. Even after they were freed they were consigned to peonage, second-class citizens, forbidden to vote in much of the South, dissuaded from doing so in some of the North, relegated to separate schools, restaurants, churches, hotels, waiting rooms of train stations, the back of the bus, the other side of the tracks, the mortuary, the cemetery and, if whites could manage it, heaven itself.

    It was the government that oppressed blacks, enforcing the laws that imprisoned them and hanged them for crimes grave and trivial, whipped them if they bolted for freedom and, in the Civil War, massacred them if they were captured fighting for the North. And yet if African Americans hesitate in embracing the mythical wonderfulness of America, they are accused of racism - of having the gall to know more about their own experience and history than Palin and others think they should.

    Why do politicians such as Palin and commentators such as Glenn Beck insist that African Americans go blank on their own history - as blank as apparently Palin and Beck are themselves? Why must they insist that blacks join them in embracing a repellent history that once caused America to go to war with itself?"

  • ||

    So she wasn't proud of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

    Or, at least less proud of that than she was of electing a man with slightly brown skin who continues to send disproportionate numbers of African-Americans to prison, or to die in needless overseas wars, and keeps them stuck in failing schools.

  • MNG||

    Call me crazy, but if I were black and alive when the CRA passed I'm not sure pride would be what I felt. More like "about damn time." And then I would pick up the paper and see the news of various governments vowing to resist the law and even less pride would ensue...

  • ||

    Call me crazy, but if I were black and alive when the CRA passed I'm not sure pride would be what I felt. More like "about damn time."

    She was born in 1964....I think it is more like she did not experience not being able to vote then suddenly being able to vote.

    I am sure many felt pride when they experienced that change.

    Michelle was probably speaking from her own personal experience.

    Of course if I was born in a stable libertarian utopia I would probably never experience any national pride from the day I was born to my death 500 years later.

    I might feel pride that I never felt any pride but that gets a bit meta.

    Anyway I am just pointing out that maybe Michelle, like me, just isn't one of those big national pride type people.

  • sr7||

    Born in 1964, she was 16 when the US won against the Soviets in Hockey, so fuck her and her lack of national pride.

    USA! USA! USA!

    More seriously,
    Man on the moon, no pride?
    Cuban boat lift, no pride?
    Vietnamese boat lift, no pride?
    1986 immigration reform, no pride?
    Fall of the Berlin Wall, symbolizing the end of the Cold War and the defeat of communism, the most oppressive system of governance in human history, no pride?

    But the nomination of her doofus husband? Pride?

    Fucked up bitch is fucked up.

  • sr7||

    Besides, what is there to argue about? Everyone recognizes the annoying ass 'what have you done for me' whining on display every time the airheaded bitch opens her mouth. She wasn't expressing anything more than the brain dead sentiments reinforced in the cultural milieu of an affirmative action pick and we are here picking for nuggets of wisdom to build arguments pro and contra. Maybe we are every bit as stupid as she is for indulging the nonsense.

  • RyanXXX||

    Amen. To Conservatives, it's a matter of dogma that American history has been one of light and goodness triumphing over evil

  • hmm||

    There's an interesting semantic conflict going on here.

    Nation v. Government

    I'm a little surprised a poli sci PhD missed this. I'm sure Palin and Cohen would miss it, but a person who has made politics a fundamental aspect of their life should catch such things. Michelle said she was proud of her country, which is the sovereign state, and not the nation which is the people and culture. I find it hard that these educated people are incapable of delineating between the two and that the delineation is not intentional.

    I'm proud of my nation to this day and will be till I die, even as the country goes to hell and the State is worthless and oppressive.

    I would be proud if the civil rights act just deferred to the already existing legislation and model. All men being equal before the law and government. Writing more and more legislation instead of deferring to the larger concept tends to backfire and cause as many problems as it solves. Look at the retarded argument over gay marriage. How about we just get rid of second class citizens period.

  • MNG||

    Was the country or the nation full of pernicious racism most of its history?

  • hmm||

    Like most of the world at the time? Yup. Sure the US was late to the table to fix the problem, but it also has currently gone farther than any other country to date in making it work. Cherry picking history to bolster your argument is a dangerous thing.

    How about African tribes slaughtering others based on color of skin? Racist?

    Normally the argument that others did it is a fallacy. But when the others compromises all known civilization, well that's a hair different.

  • ||

    The US was hardly late to the table on racial issues.

    There was an active debate on race relations in this country while other countries were sweeping their own race issues under the carpet.

    Yes, the US had serious flaws, but other countries that got all high and mighty when the Civil Rights Movement butted heads with the various state establisments in the US didn't have any racial minorities to speak of and when they started to get some because they ended immigration restrictions that tended to exclude them they found that racial harmony was not a slam dunk after all.

  • Cyto||

    Most other nations had a much more straightforward resolution to the problem. "We don't allow your kind around here". See Japan, northern Europe, Persia, Arabia... pretty much everywhere that wasn't a colony nation (not just subjugated like India and Africa, but colonized by foreigners, like the US, Brazil, Australia..). How many places still have restrictions on full citizenship to foreigners? How many places that allow a path to citizenship for immigrants still have cultural "not one of us" divides?

  • ||

    Was the country or the nation full of pernicious racism most of its history?

    The 100 or so years Before 1964 it was the Democrat party which was full of pernicious racism.

    The rest of the nation and country was a mixed bag.

    But for the anti-pernicious racism crowd they were almost exclusively Republicans with a handful found in anarchist socialist and communist circles.

  • LBJ||

    Had them eating out of my hand, but being a student of history, I knew creating Negro dependency was the best way to keep the race from rising above their proper caste in society. At least until that race traitor Bill Clinton came along with Welfare Reform. Now we even have a black president. The thought of that causes me to shutter even here in the pits of Hell.

    Of course, I supported protecting their voting rights, you damn liberal hippie college professor fools! No better way to undermine a people's strength than to politicize all means available to them.

    Why, its none other than Machiavelli coming to give me a high five for a good job. Well, as we use to say in East Texas 'brotha I am paying for it now!'

  • ||

    Nah...I don't think the Dems are that devious. Their reforms are heart felt...only very misguided and ineffective.

    LBJ would have been more successful in achieving economic equality by reducing income taxes to a flat 50% and doing away with regressive social security taxes.

    A hot economy with a strong labor market does wonders for tolerance.
    And the desire to sell your goods to people with money in their pocket is color blind.

  • ||

    flat 15%...not 50%

    =(

  • ||

    Nation vs County

    Actually when you say nation i think of the state and when you say country i think of people and culture.

  • hmm||

    That's backwards. I always think of things like the Sioux Nation.

  • robc||

    Sioux Nation to me would be a political entity.

    If I was a 19th century scout, I could see making a statement like "be careful, this is Sioux country" which would be more of a people-type statement than a political-entity type.

  • robc||

    Another example would be with animals:

    "Be alert, this is elephant country."

    I would never say:

    "Be alert, this is elephant nation."

    Elephants dont form nations. Both imply a territory associated with them - but the latter has government stuff attached to it, while the former doesnt.

  • ||

    Nation, like marriage, is a concept that is applied only to humans even though something similar occurs in animals. You don't talk about monogamous animals getting married, for instance.

  • ||

    Several of the Indian nations of the 19th century had little in the way of political structure, if they were politically united at all. So that interpretation doesn't make sense.

    Country emphasizes the land on which a nation lives.

  • robc||

    I would say more that country emphasizes the land on which a people live, with or without a nation. The nice thing being this definiton crosses to animals too, like in the elephant country usage.

    Nation does seem to refer more to the people, as a political group, regardless of land or no land. "State" seems to be the most clear term of them all.

  • robc||

    I agree wish joshua.

    Nation to me refers to "nation-state", the government. Country is a region with a people and a culture.

    Probably because "country" also refers to rural areas, while nation doesnt.

    Growing up, "going to the country", meant leaving the city to visit one or the other (or both) of the grandparents.

  • hmm||

    /shrug

    The difference as presented in every poli sci instance I have read used the words the same as Webster describes them.

  • robc||

    See my other comments above. I think the distinction is you are looking for a word that doesnt imply a piece of ground. I think both nation and country have territory associated with them (as least as I use them), but only the former necessarily includes a government.

  • robc||

    Actually, nation may not have specific ground associated with it, in the case of something like "Sioux Nation" (well, if they dont have any reservations). But, still seems to be a political entity to me. People refer to the lost tribes of Israel, not the lost nation of Israel.

  • hmm||

    Actually the fundamental differences are ground and government. At lest as I was taught. A nation doesn't require a government or a physical location. A country requires both.

  • robc||

    A country requires both.

    Elephants dont have a government.

    I would use "tribe" or "people" for those without either. Nation requires a government as I use it.

  • ||

    Then you use it in an idiosyncratic way.

  • robc||

    The generic name for a carbonated soft drink is:

    Coke.

    (Language is descriptive not prescriptive, as one of my linguistics profs used to say. Again and again.)

  • hmm||

    That's actually very regional.

  • ||

    Nation to me refers to "nation-state", the government.

    This conflicts with historical references to Indian tribes as "nations" and also with most translations of the Bible, which refer to nomadic peoples such as the Ammonites and Perizzites as "nations", and with etymology. "Nation" ultimately comes from the Latin "natus" which means "born", ie, the culture, race, and people into which one is born.

  • robc||

    See my 5:51 and 5:49 posts. **I** would use tribes in some circumstances for them, instead of nation. In current modern english. But, yeah, historically that may not have been the case. Although I would consider the Indians and Ammonites and etc to have a government, in the form of the chief, so nation would also be okay there.

    It sounds like we need 4 words for 4 circumstances:

    1. Ground and government
    2. Ground and no gov
    3. No ground and government
    4. No ground and no gov

    "Mob" might work for #4.

    I would go something like nation,country,tribe,mob. But that doesnt seem to match up with the poly-sci field.

    Im sure within technical literature, these are well defined, but when people from fields start interacting with people outside the field, language always gets tricky. Happens with math terms all the time, as Im sure you are aware.

  • robc||

    Actually, think the 4 should be:

    state, country, nation, whatever.

    State clearly involves a government and a piece of land.

    This allows nation to not involve land, but still some sort of political organization (chief or whatever).

    Also allows country to work for elephants.

  • ||

    The words mean different things to different people, and most people would consider them synonymous. Etymology would indicate that "nation" emphasizes the people and their culture (Indian tribes that have been moved around quite a bit were called "nations" regardless of which patch of territory they were on), while "country" emphasizes the land territory occupied by the nation. The government would be emphasized by "state".

    But all of them are probably used interchangeably in people's minds, especially now that nations don't move around much anymore.

  • GillespesBUTTHOLE||

    Radley, your asshole is smelly and freckly

  • Max||

    Final word: It was a fucking stupid column.

  • sdfgdsg||

    Hello. My friend

    === http://www.aeooe.com ===

    Dedicated service, the new style, so you feel like a warm autumn!!!

    WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT

    YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

    thank you !!!

    === http://www.aeooe.com ===

  • دردشه عراقية||

    Thanks

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement