When Dimwits Defend Deviants

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

A recurring theme in the corporate media is that there’s nothing inherently wrong with the TSA despite its sexual assault, pedophilia, and thefts (whether petty and authorized [shampoo and mouthwash] or large and unauthorized [iPads and jewelry]). No, these apologists for totalitarianism and economic fascism claim the agency merely suffers an “image problem.” Writers far smarter and more engaging than poor Joe Davidson at the WaPo fall for this nonsense, so Joe’s column there yesterday shouldn’t have outraged me. But it did.

I can usually laugh Joe off: He’s a shill for the unions and about as dumb and gullible as you’d have to be to endlessly mistake extortionists and brutes for heroes striving to protect workers. But yesterday he tried to whitewash the TSA’s crimes by quoting a guy named John Palguta.

I never heard of Palguta, either, but my hackles rose when Joe informed us that he’s “a Partnership for Public Service vice president…” [Note to Joe: “Partnership for Public Service” is a name, you ninny. That makes it a noun. Nouns do not modify other nouns such as “vice president”: that’s an adjective’s job. If we cannot say, “a vice president at the Partnership for Public Service,” we at least insert hyphens between the words in the noun we have drafted as an adjective. This shows we are not illiterate and ungrammatical but only awkward.]

Said “Partnership” is one of the vilest organizations around: it “works to revitalize our federal government” — yep, at a time when Leviathan is about as robust as any government has ever been, these bozos squawk about “revitalizing” it — “by inspiring a new generation to serve [sic for ‘leech off the serfs’] and by transforming the way government works.” I know: retch. “Building, energizing and maintaining a high-quality workforce [sic for ‘sponges’] is the key to success for any organization — and the federal government is no exception. Our strategy for revitalizing” — there’s that word again — “public service [sic for ‘enslaving the public’] is pursued through five strategic goals: Inspire and hire mission-critical talent; Develop strong leaders…” In other words, the “Partnership” further indoctrinates budding Hitlers and Obamas, Mussolinis and Romneys, Stalins and Kennedys, Maos and Clintons to lord it over the rest of us. And pretends this is a good thing.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Joe delivers a bombshell: “The Partnership has a content-sharing relationship with The Washington Post.” [Hey, at least he got the hyphen right this time.] Or maybe it isn’t a bombshell. Maybe none of us should be shocked that the feds’ house-organ maintains a “relationship” with such twisted propagandists.

Whatever, Joe quotes Palguta on the TSA’s “image problem” [alas, no hyphen]: “I believe it’s more a function of the fact that … the standards of conduct are both clearer and more stringent at TSA than at many other federal agencies…”

Whoa! Is this cretin serious? An agency that hires employees to sexually molest passengers while pilfering cosmetics and snow globes from them, and this moron calls the “standards of conduct” “both clearer and more stringent” than those in the rest of the bureaucratic regime?

On the other hand, maybe Palguta’s right. Consider the murderers at the BATF who shoot mothers holding their babies or the thieves at the IRS whose persecution drives victims to suicide. What’s a little groping and plunder beside all that?

Joe’s faith in the TSA’s unionized deviants remains intact. Though he begins his article by listing four airports at which the agency has fired its minions en masse for “misconduct” (no, not for gate-rape or abusing passengers: those terminated didn’t rifle our bags as thoroughly as the TSA decrees they should) he concludes, “…these cases are creating a major credibility and image headache [sic for 'credibility- and image-headache'] nationwide for an agency whose workers, for the most part, are professional, honest and competent.”

I trust you’re now as outraged as I.

10:57 am on October 25, 2012
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts