October 17, 2006
Last Saturday, I received an email from Joe Wierzbicki, who works for Move America Forward's ad agency and who wanted me to post about Fox's rejection of their recent anti-Clinton ad. While checking it out, I came across this appallingly ignorant spot they had produced about airport security. The spot defames TSA uniformed personnel, possibly to the point of libel.
I know more than a little bit about airport security. Following 9/11, being over the (arbitrary) age limit for military service, I was able to make a contribution wearing the uniform of my country in the brand new Transportation Security Administration. The salary was significantly less than what I had made in advertising, and the working conditions were not quite on a par with a 9 to 5 creative career (it would eventually cost me one of my knees as well, TSA has one of the highest injury rates in the Federal service). But the rewards were outstanding; among them the opportunity to work side-by-side with a dedicated and professional group of people who had survived a hiring process that turned away 11 out of 12 applicants. The tragedy of the TSA is that the non-uniformed "Executive Service" managers put in charge of this group survived a hiring process that emphasized political favors, cronyism, and CYA abilities. These are the people who deserve to be lampooned by MAF, and, in fact, Wierzbicki claimed in an email to me that they were the targets of the spot.
Unfortunately, MAF chose to use a scattergun approach, when the precision of a sniper was required. Their video, which Wierzbicki says attacks TSA policy, portrays uniformed TSA folks as incompetent oafs. I pointed out to Wierzbicki that TSA screeners, no matter how long they have been on the job, are subject to daily testing while on x-ray duty, and must re-qualify every six months in a difficult process that evaluates every aspect of their training. Failure to re-qualify means termination. Joe had no reply to this. No one at Move America Forward could even be bothered to attempt to defend the video. In itself, that lack of response says quite a bit about the organization, none of it good.
I can't sit by and watch my former colleagues, dedicated patriots, be maligned by the ignorance of Move America Forward and whatever ad agency hacks produced this video. What's next for this group? If they disagree with policy in Iraq or Afghanistan will they produce a spot showing our soldiers as murderous oafs? Will they become upset with police policy somewhere and dump on the uniformed cops?
Until Move America Forward pulls this spot, they'll get no support from me.
Update: The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler and DeMediacratic Nation agree.
Marvin adds his word.
Ex-cop Signal 94 Lays down the law.
Posted by: Bluto at
10:05 AM
| Comments (35)
| Add Comment
Post contains 478 words, total size 3 kb.
Absurdity is one thing, gratuitously insulting people is another.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:32 AM (vBK4C)
Each "command center" at each airport interprets the policies in their own way. That's why you note inconsistencies. Under pressure from the airlines, TSA now allows small tools and blades. That's why your awl and tape weren't taken.
Did you know that the "genius" is subject to requalification if they miss a test object during their time on the x-ray? And that they can expect to get several such test objects during each half hour shift? How would you like that sort of scrutiny in your own job?
You're absolutely wrong in your assessment of the average screener.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:39 AM (vBK4C)
The gospel of airport security is that EVERY alarm must be resolved. Do you know for a fact that the old lady being searched kept her carryons in sight and that no one tampered with or added a little something extra to them? Of course not, and neither does the screener.
In my experience, the loudest complainers were almost always the condescending and arrogant business travelers who are too important to put up with the same inconveniences that little people do.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:43 AM (vBK4C)
This television spot is not an indictment of TSA agents, for they do not set the policies that are in question. The ad is a comdedic spoof - it demonstrates absurdity by being a bit absurd itself.
As I explained to the good Dread Pundit Bluto:
Appreciate your feedback. But I think you've missed the point we are making in the ad. It is not the TSA screeners who set the policies that we are critical of.
Rather I would refer you - as just one of many examples, and I can provide others - of policies by the DOT and Homeland Security to avoid using criteria that is common sense:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Coulter also writes that a few months later, at Mr. Mineta's behest, the Department of Transportation (DOT) filed complaints against United Airlines and American Airlines (who, combined, had lost 8 pilots, 25 flight attendants and 213 passengers on 9/11 - not counting the 19 Arab hijackers). In November 2003, United Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. In March 2004, American Airlines settled their case with the DOT for $1.5 million. The DOT also charged Continental Airlines with discriminating against passengers who appeared to be Arab, Middle Eastern or Muslim. Continental Airlines settled their complaint with the DOT in April of 2004 for $.5 million.
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/columns/column.aspx?aid=578
*I'm very sorry we lost the confidence of Bluto, but I'm not sure what we can do to earn it back, given that we stand behind the spot we produce and we know the message we wish to convey. It is not consistent with how Bluto says he interprets it.
Posted by: Joe Wierzbicki at October 17, 2006 11:24 AM (R8SvA)
Posted by: Rusty at October 17, 2006 11:28 AM (JQjhA)
I had an awl in my computer bag (not intentional) and a roll of packing tape with a serrated edge in the same pack as the toothpaste yet they did not have a problem with them. They confiscated my toothpaste. The awl they missed, the tape they held up and put back in my bag.
In fact short of carrying a gun, the only thing they have ever caught on me beside toothpaste was a lighter and that was two years ago.
Where as I am sure you were a great TSA rep Bluto and I believe the dead weight remained post 9-11, the genius operating the typical screening machine and those who frisk are not exactly the cream of the crop when it comes to common sense. That is what the ad is trying to say. My cammo colored back pack is more likely to be hand searched than a typical carry on.
Posted by: SeeMonk at October 17, 2006 11:28 AM (7teJ9)
While I'm sure mabny TSAers are well-intentioned and dedicated, the org as a whole is a disaster.
We constantly hear of ridiculous searches of 80yrold ladies and infants, while penetration-test show that a determined badguy would have no problem getting through.
As a govt worker myself, I am stung by barbs that seem overbroad but am honest enough to ademit that the complaints are by-and-large justified.
While it might be nice if a spot showed a dedicated ramrod-straight TSA checker being grilled by a moron for not performing enough cavity searches on old white ladies, the spot as is is just fine.
Posted by: BC at October 17, 2006 11:33 AM (/UAJE)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 12:54 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: Joe at October 17, 2006 01:40 PM (R8SvA)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 02:25 PM (Igoub)
Ignorant of security procedures?
Confiscating a GI-Joe doll's teensy plastic rifle, diosallowing military from flying with medals...
Give us all a break. Far too many anecdotal incidents to believe any valid security purpose is being served by this crud.
When my (thouroughly "anglo") boss's two-yr-old gets searched on a Texas to Nevada flight, something has gone severely out-of-whack.
I don't care where the orders/directives are coming from or who is tasked with executing them, the TSA is one of the biggest jokes in the country, and by defending it you harm your credibility.
Posted by: BC at October 17, 2006 02:39 PM (/UAJE)
Get over it Bluto, or better yet, go tell your mom.
I've seen thicker skin on pudding.
Posted by: dick at October 17, 2006 03:03 PM (XlQVK)
dick: you're pretty mouthy for a poufter who posts gay porn on his site. Why don't you go ask your boyfriend what he thinks?
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:16 PM (vBK4C)
And BC, it was the screeners who complained enough to get the policy on military travelers changed. They were all being flagged by the airlines because of the way the government buys tickets. Screeners filed formal grievances with the TSA ombudsman over having to do secondary screening on them. The policy was changed.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:20 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: Rightmom at October 17, 2006 03:24 PM (0lpqx)
I was in possession of an all access badge for the Atlanta airport. I worked there for almost six months. Perhaps things were different where you worked. The folks in Atlanta were taken right off of the unemployment line.
Additionally, there is as much more danger to most flights from FOD on the flightline as there is from terorists trying to get on to a plane with a weapon. I was shocked to see all of the trash and debris that was allowed to drift. Employees are always wandering about as well with tools and stuff that could be picked up by a passenger after they had passed through security.
Posted by: SeeMonk at October 17, 2006 03:27 PM (7teJ9)
Keep in mind that every federalized airport represents a three-way civil war between TSA suits, the "stakeholders" (airlines and vendors) and the FAA. A couple of the things that upset me the most were the easy availability of all-access passes for maintenance personnel and the fact that TSA management had no contingency plans in place for emergencies.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 03:42 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 04:16 PM (Igoub)
TSA screeners have the highest injury rate of all federal employees:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4441227/
This article is from 2004, maybe things have improved since then, but I doubt it.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 04:29 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: Howie at October 17, 2006 04:35 PM (D3+20)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at October 17, 2006 07:31 PM (v3I+x)
Saw your email complaining about emails from Move America Forward. So I am responding there but also emailing this to you to make sure you received a response from someone associated with Move America Forward.
Sorry you felt so put off about the volume of emails you received. To explain why they do what they do, it's simple. MAF has become the largest grassroots pro-troop organization in the country and accomplished an amazing list of successes. And the reason is that there is so very little fat in the organization. Melanie Morgan and Howard Kaloogian never received one cent in compensation.
There are no monthly payments to the PR firm (who I work for). There's a reason you are getting this email from me at 6:30 PM and not between 9:00AM - 5:00 PM and a reason my associates and I worked this weekend. And last weekend. And the weekend before. We believe in this cause, and we know to advance the ball we have to do the most we can with the resources we have.
There is 1 full time staffer and 2 part time staffers working for Move America Forward. I think between all three of them they are paid less than $55,000 per year.
But, the organization is also not a special interest group - there are no big donors or corporations who have a secret agenda and who use the group as a front (like so many other organizations). Instead the organization relies on the contributions of thousands upon thousands of small donors.
And here's just a few things they've done with it. If I were you, I would feel proud that you invested in something that helped to make all of this possible:
* Sent over 16 tons of coffee, cookie, gatorade, beef jerky to the troops.
* Organized and led the "You Don't Speak for Me, Cindy" tour at a time when the pro-troop movement was paralyzed about taking action to present an alternative voice to the wild-eyed rantings of Ms. Sheehan.
* Organized and led the "Voices of Soldiers" Truth Tour to Iraq where hundreds of our military men and women were able to go on talk radio programs across the nation and speak direct to the American people - unfiltered.
* Are about to embark on a 2nd trip to Iraq, this time bringing Gold Star Families, the mothers and fathers who lost a child in the war on terrorism.
* Conducted the 20-city "We Support Our Troops & Their Missions" bus tour across the nation from San Francisco, California to Washington, D.C.
* Rallied support around the nomination to serve as John Bolton as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations - at a time when almost no one knew who he was, the anti-war Left was destroying his name, and many conservatives sat back and didn't do a whole lot.
* Led the 9/11 "Believe in Freedom" rememberances in several cities across the nation in 2004. Led the "9/11: We Remember" observation in California in 2006.
* Worked with Deborah Johns to arrange Operation Fuzzy Wuzzy which sent over 5,000 teddy bears to the children who survived the terrorist attacks at that school.
That's just a partial list. I am proud of the work Move America Forward does. If it wasn't valuable to the cause of freedom, then I don't believe enough people would contribute. Or the organization could ask for help less often, and just done less work - but that doesn't seem like a logical idea to me.
Hope this letter explains to you that you weren't being harrassed, there's a reason MAF does what it does. This is it.
Good Wishes to you,
Joe Wierzbicki
Posted by: Joe Wierzbicki at October 17, 2006 07:34 PM (R8SvA)
Bluto: Doesn't help because you didn't answer the question of how do they get hurt on the job? Could it be irate travelers in the Airport punching them in the nose? Could it be falling down the escalator on the way to a smoke brake? Could it be lifting the little change bucket in front of the X-ray machine? Could it be lifting the 20lb carry on baggage? Could it be eating over priced airport food? Please explain cause of these injuries.
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 08:12 PM (Igoub)
Posted by: Howie at October 17, 2006 08:35 PM (D3+20)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 17, 2006 08:40 PM (Igoub)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at October 17, 2006 10:11 PM (vBK4C)
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 01:18 AM (Dd86v)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 18, 2006 04:26 AM (Igoub)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 18, 2006 04:29 AM (Igoub)
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 18, 2006 04:53 PM (Dd86v)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 19, 2006 07:52 PM (ZVu3J)
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 19, 2006 11:03 PM (Dd86v)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 20, 2006 07:59 PM (AP2ro)
Posted by: Last gasp Larry at October 23, 2006 12:23 PM (Dd86v)
Posted by: Greyrooster at October 24, 2006 10:47 AM (zqSqi)
34 queries taking 0.0566 seconds, 190 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.