Posted on 11/19/2010 7:57:42 PM PST by markomalley
Representative John A. Boehner, soon to be the Speaker of the House, has pledged to fly commercial airlines back to his home district in Ohio. But that does not mean that he will be subjected to the hassles of ordinary passengers, including the controversial security pat-downs.
As he left Washington on Friday, Mr. Boehner headed across the Potomac River to Reagan National Airport, which was bustling with afternoon travelers. But there was no waiting in line for Mr. Boehner, who was escorted around the metal detectors and body scanners, and taken directly to the gate.
(snip)
And so on Friday, he did. But not without the perquisites of office, including avoiding those security pat-downs that many travelers are bracing for as holiday travel season approaches.
Michael Steel, a spokesman for the Republican leader, said in a statement that Mr. Boehner was not receiving special treatment. And a law enforcement official said that any member of Congress or administration official with a security detail is allowed to bypass security.
“The appropriate security procedures for all Congressional leaders, including Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid, are determined by the Capitol Police working with the Transportation Security Administration,” Mr. Steel said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Hmmm...Let me think....why why why? I just don’t know?! I’m sorry, I’ll have to get back to you, I can’t imagine why they didn’t mention those others... Maybe someone else will have the answer.... Anyone?
I just fail to see the problem here.
Hey, all I did was point out the hypocrisy (inconsistency) of these guy's comments. They're contradictory statements.
If you look at it from how he's compared to other members of congress, no, he's not really receiving any special treatment.
If you look at them (all of them, not just this guy) compared to the rest of us unwashed masses, they are because they don't have to endure what they're inflicting on us.
It comes across as denial or total obliviousness for Steel to say that Boehner's not receiving any special treatment by bypassing security when the option for us to do so isn't available. It just smacks of elitist smugness from Steel, thinking that we can't see the difference.
Those politicians are given options the rest of us aren't. That's special privileges.
I understand FReepers objections to the slimes doing this about a Republican as a hit piece because it is. They could have done it with any dem, like Kennedy or Kerry, or Pelosi, or whoever and they didn't. Not too subtle in my book.
But that isn't what my initial comment addressed and that isn't what some others have understood judging by their response to my comment.
Let me simplify the current order, Marxist, Dimwit, Witch, Jackass.
As of January 2011, Neutered Marxist, Clueless Dimwit, Patriot, same old Jackass.
Seconded!
Hate to burst anyone’s bubble, but I missed it as well.
I don’t have to worry as I don’t fly anymore.
This is a hit piece plain and simple. Where’s the mention of the other 434 congress critters and 100 senators getting the same bypass because THEY ALREADY HAVE A SECURITY DETAIL AND CLEARANCE!
This is pure Alinsky tactics being used and it’s obvious it works. Boehner is the current target.
Why waste any time on Boehner who poses no threat whatsoever? We need more profiling, not less.
It would be pointless and stupid to grope up Boehner's security detail, who are no doubt well armed. In fact, it would be sort of funny, as the TSA guy finds an Uzi, a Glock and other weapons "hidden" on the Speaker's posse.
I know the leftists are trying to have it both ways. They love the Gestapo when their people run it. And no Democrat will ever be criticized for anything.
It still smells of elitism and Boehner should know better.
>> Why the big deal about Boener and not the rest of them?
It’s not about Boehner personally. It’s about you and the threat you pose to the Country.
Reading that in context sounds like he was only talking about members of Congress so he was accurate. That would be how I would read it, clearly you see it a different way, so ok. We will disagree on that.
Of course they are given options we aren’t. I am at a loss as to how to proceed to debate that without specifics. Some of those may be totally ridiculous, and some probably make perfect sense. For instance, security makes sense to me. I don’t want them getting killed. I’m willing to pay for that. On the other hand, I don’t think we should have to pay for lots of luxuries for them. However, I’m sure we could go on and on about THAT stuff. :)
13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and 'frozen.'...
You see no difference in flying on a private jet and a commercial flight (even given bypassing security checks)? Otay....
I said we’re BECOMING a caste society, not that we were (as in yet)
By Jove, I think you’ve got it!
And somehow, you've missed the essential *If we have to then.....* part of the responses.
And you've clearly missed the the rest of the responses that say we shouldn't have to either.
OK
It is kind of stupid to make him go through security given who his is and the fact that he has a friggin security detail.
Come to think of it, its kind of stupid for ANYONE to have to go through security given that there will be plane load of highly trained and heavily armed Secret Service agents onboard the aircraft.
I'm guessing that Secret Service agents probably have a better grasp on security than your garden variety TSA thug.
Ya think? ;)
This is a tempest in a teapot. Since he should have a Secret Service detail due to the direct succession to the presidency as the next Speaker of the House it’s probably not his decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.