On my way home to LA last week, I saw the epitome of political correctness gone wrong.
When I got in the security line at the airport, Michael Reagan was only two people in front of me. Now the fact that I was at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and there two people in front of was President Reagan's son hit me immediately (I know to all you non-DC folks that sounds weird but it is true).
I said hi while waiting in line and that I really liked his book. Unlike the other son, Michael actually is a very talented media personality doing great work keeping his father's legacy alive and not just using his dad's name to make it.
If that were the end of the story, it would have been neat but no real big deal. You frequently run into "famous" people in DC.
Not so fast my friend. When he went through the metal detector he goes off due to a artificial hip. So of course in the post 9-11 world of "we can't offend anyone so everyone has to be treated equal" (well except the people who are actually blowing up planes) he has to go to the hand pat down screening area.
I mean come on!!! The airport is named after HIS DAD!!! If anyone should be able to just walk through without any hassles at any airport, much less Reagan airport, you would think a former president's son could.
This is just yet another example of how we are letting political correctness waste our time and money just to have a false sense of security. The minute former presidents' children start hijacking planes then screen him away. However, until then, we should at least give him the respect of his dad and let him through security without being treated like a common criminal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Pathetic.-cbl
and you call yourself a politician? you should side with whats right and fair, not allow special treatment.
I'm not asking for special treatment...I asking for common sense. What sense does it make to screen people who would never in a million years do anything to harm this country.
its your opinion that they would never do anything to this country in a million year. Plus, how would it look if we were just letting famous people walk right past security checks? I think that would look worse than giving them a simple screening. Also, common sense kind of points out that the security workers might not have known who he was. Just thinking logically here...
You are probably right in that the screeners had no idea who he was nor did probably 99% of the people in the airport...only political geeks like me probably did.
However you are missing the real point of the post. It has nothing to do with letting famous people have special treatment, but everything to do with the stupidity of the screening process. This example only points it out even more.
If you are an American citizen, then I don't think you either should ever have to go through extra screening without due cause. Can you name one American citizen who has EVER hijacked a plane?
At one time in this country law enforcement officials had to have a reason to search anyone. However b/c of the idiocy of the political correctness crowd, we can't risk offending the people who are actually a threat for fear of being labled as bigots.
I'd feel bad for every foreign Middle East muslim man having to go through extra screening when they fly to this country. However that demographic is the one that has hijacked planes and so all our focus should be on them until they stop.
The minute former President's kids, white American males, 80 year old grandmothers or any other demographic besides the one stated above start hijacking planes, then broaden the screening. Until then, leave us the heck alone...you included if you don't fit the above description!
oh wow... I would like to point out how unprofessional it is to say that middle eastern men should be screened more. There are terrorists in every religion, race, nationality. They have hijacked planes too? So... just because they didnt do it on 9/11 they shouldnt be screened?? And just because they lived here for a while an passed the citizenship exam (which is just memorized trivia anyways) they shouldnt have to be screened? Not only would that weaken our national security (which we were just given "f's" on), but the racial profiling would go down in history as an embarrassment just like the Japanese internment camps did. There's a difference between being cautious and ignorant...
First off...thanks for continuing to come back...this is a very good debate...also thanks for keeping it civil and clean as my lil sister reads periodically =)
I'm sorry if you think that is unproffessional but can you name one terrorists that has hijacked a plane or killed innocent civilians that wasn't of middle eastern decent and/or part of the muslim religion in the last 25 years?
It is easy to blindly say everyone does it...but let's see proof or your claims are just baseless allegations.
The only other ones are the IRA and that was focused only in Ireland and has been over 10 years if I remember correctly.
You do make a good point that we have to keep an eye on in the future and that is terrorist's recruits trying to become citizens first before carrying out their acts of hatred. But here again the focus is very narrow on radical muslims and not jews or christians or buddist or any other religion.
The shame of the Japanese camps was that it involved American citizens who had been here for years before the war and not just foreign nationals. Had only recently arrived foreign nationals been put in camps or deported until properly screened I wouldn't have had a problem with that at all.
I contend that one of the reasons the security is not where it needs to be (the 9-11 Commission doesn't get all A's either)is because we are wasting too much money on being politically correct in order to not offend anyone. If we focused on the true treats, we would have more money available to fix other security risks like ports and the border.
Sorry I havent responded, I'm in the middle of finals. Needless to say, I am exhausted but relieved that I am done with Organic Chemistry!!
The point I was trying to make was that it leaves the door open for too many bad things to happen. There are white fundamentalists, and just because they have not recently (as you said, past 25 years) done anything, does not mean that we should not stay cautious. We had never seen anything like September 11th, and thats why we shouldve been more cautious before. We shouldnt make the same mistake twice.
Politically, you cannot look at this situation and only consider hijackers. Any form of terrorism is important to consider. Disturbed people like those who were responsible for the Oklahoma bombings and the package bombings were could easily use this opportunity if policy was changed to only screen middle easterners.
The reason we screen everyone is not to be politically correct, but instead because it is amazingly biased to do so otherwise and also to be cautious.
The law is meant to be what is right, not what is popular at the time.
Lastly, I'd like to point out why these terrorists commit such acts. They obviously hate America- right? So, why fuel their hatred by targeting their people? I think that would simply make the problem worse. Right now, that is something we definately do not need.
Welcome back...I feel your pain on Organic...not a fun course.
We don't screen everyone. The screening is supposedly completely random. If we were to screen everyone exactly the same way, I would have less of a problem with that than what they do now.
The reason we don't do that, even though that would obviously make us safer, is because we can't afford to do that financially and people don't have the patience for it.
So, we randomly screen. That is where I take issue. Random screening is the absolute least effective method.
They hate us because we are free, we support Israel and because we are a Christian nation. No amount of screening or not screening will change that. They have been committing their dispicable acts long before we had any kind of special screening in airports, so you arguement to not screen them so as not to make them hate us more would solve nothing.
They do not hate us because we are free, but rather because we do not cherish our freedoms and respect others.
I thought about how I should respond to this, and here it is:
Ignorance is bliss.
Being smarter about our screening policies has nothing to do with respect and everything to do with protecting our nation from people who want to kill every single one of us.
Being ignorant about who is coming into this country will definitely not bring bliss.
Post a Comment