This weekend, the TSA celebrates ten years of molesting and irradiating passengers in airports — and increasingly on busses, trains, ferries, and even highways. War-criminal and torturer George Bush signed the legislation authorizing this unconstitutional power-grab on Nov. 19, 2001.

Within a year, the agency had hired an army of ex-cons and high-school drop-outs to assault their betters. Norman Minetta, then Stooge—sorry, Secretary of Transportation had no more shame than to brag about how quickly he sicced these savages on us: “[We had to s]tand up an operational agency conducting passenger screening with extensively trained [yep, Minetta lies shamelessly, too] new federal employees at airports and do it in one year, and much more. Well, we did it. … and that accomplishment is something of which everyone can be proud..." That's what you think, Bozo.

Perverts, perverts, perverts: how often must we warn you not to free-lance? Why do you persist in violating the only restriction politicians impose on your unprecedented license?

Your depravity can rage unchecked now, thanks to Our benevolent Rulers: over the last decade, they’ve discarded most of the quaint Victorianisms that hobbled civilization but — and this is key — only at airports. Get it? Whatever turns you on, you can most likely indulge yourself so long as you’ve convinced the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to hire you and so long as you do so only at its checkpoints during “working” — heh, heh! — hours.

Most of us understand that government is naturally, irredeemably incompetent. We also realize it can’t stop being so, any more than water can stop being wet.

And yet some of us demand that its natural, irredeemable incompetents decide who may enter the country and who may not.

That bit of irrationality leads to such lunacy as the “Diversity Visa Lottery,” in which “the U.S. State Department is considering 9,036 applicants from nations that have been designated as ‘countries of interest’ by the Obama administration because their citizens, and people travelling from them or through them are deemed a heightened terrorist risk to the United States.”

"Executives advising Obama on jobs and competitiveness" announced last week that "'America can't afford to let high-skilled immigration reform remain attached to the controversies that surround comprehensive immigration reform more broadly,'" Reuters reports. "...'Given the challenges our economy now faces in a global age, we all need to rethink,' the chief executives from GE, Boeing, DuPont and other firms said."

And so rulers should graciously allow foreigners to immigrate here — but only if the country can use their talents. Forget those "tired, ... poor, ... huddled masses yearning to breathe free": if it's obvious you're a winner and you can "contribute," America wants you. And if not ... well, buddy, we've already got enough losers here.

Sometimes I almost feel sorry for politicians. Well, OK, I very rarely do, and my sympathy never lasts for more than a nanosecond.
 
Why would I waste even that minute but irrecoverable fraction of time? Because these sociopaths face impossible expectations. Americans consider them omnipotent, benevolent, able to work miracles — and on a budget, too. We demand that they protect us from hurricanes, floods, terrorists, contaminated food, and pollution. They’re supposed to train our kids and coddle our grandparents. We even assume they’ll conserve the country’s beauty in national parks while also paving the highways that take us there.

It’s as if I hired a plumber to repair my overflowing toilet — but then also asked him to play Mozart on my baby grand. Perhaps some plumbers are accomplished pianists. But most would disdainfully demur: “Lady, I fix johns. Ya want me to take a look at yours or not?”

Helicopters buzzing overhead, sirens, screams, armed thugs besieging the town’s biggest employer, others searching house to house, grabbing people, shackling them and pushing them onto busses for trial in kangaroo courts.

It sounds like a nightmare from a banana republic. But it happened here in cities across the country as the U.S. government battled “illegal” immigrants.

Public sentiment against immigrants, especially those who haven’t asked a bureaucrat’s permission to enter the country, continues high. Many Americans applaud the Feds’ brutality as they rip families apart and terrorize communities. That’s what lawbreakers deserve, or so the thinking goes.

But like any war, the one against immigrants has collateral casualties, and they’re Americans. The Feds have retreated from the assaults — military in all but name — that George W. Bush’s administration launched in our streets, but during the years since, millions of our friends and fellow citizens have coped with the neighborhoods those attacks devastated.

Like me, you probably picture “illegal” immigrants as stooped, worn-out folks picking peaches for pennies and barely surviving on the pittance they earn.

Boy, are we wrong! Migrants’ work apparently pays big bucks, with “illegals” waxing wealthy and living high on the hog.

Or so we can assume from the legislation Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) co-sponsored last fall, then “re-introduced” this summer. Their “bill would provide roughly 11 million illegal immigrants a path to legalization by directing them to register with the US government, pay back taxes, pay a fine for being in the country illegally, learn English, pass a criminal background check, and wait in line for an opportunity to become a permanent resident...”

Everyone’s favorite dung-beetle at the Department of Homeland Security, Secretary Janet Napolitano, echoed them: “A path to citizenship should be found for many of the country's estimated 11 million unauthorized immigrants, she said, but ‘they must get right with the law’ by paying fines, committing to learn English and submitting to criminal background checks.”

The War on Terror turns a decade old this Sunday. It’s raged for 24 more months than the Revolution that founded the country, 250 percent longer than the fratricide that nearly severed the nation in 1861, and for twice as many years as America’s combat in both World Wars put together.

Our newest conflict shows no signs of a ceasefire, either. Indeed, it seems headed for the same immortality as the War on Drugs. The more money, time, and anguish these two wars consume, the more their partisans demand.

You might think killing the arch-enemy would grant us a reprieve. Nope: Osama bin Laden’s body had barely hit the water before Our Rulers — even previous ones — warned that the struggle would not only continue but intensify. "Al Qaeda remains a dangerous enemy," former vice-president Dick Cheney pontificated.  Who knew that retired officeholders still receive classified updates? "Though bin Laden is dead, the war goes on."

The Feds ceaselessly propagandize on behalf of their silly War on Terror; now, with this cause célèbre completing its first decade next month, the hype kicks into overdrive. Our Rulers pretend that dire danger lurks, and morons without the sense God gave plankton amplify that hysteria.

The Helicopter Association International, for instance, urges “members and operators of aircraft to review security ahead of the tenth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. U.S. officials have stepped up warnings over the threat posed by lone individuals or small groups.” Why? Has one of them announced his intentions to load his chopper with explosives and take out a farmhouse? Only in the Feds’ fervid imaginings. In reality, “no specific or credible information has been issued about planned terror attacks on the United States.” Duh.

Of course, a catastrophe could happen. And there we have the entire War on Terror in a nutshell: $66 billion per year squandered and liberty smothered on the chance that someone somewhere might possibly plot mayhem — almost always at the FBI’s instigation.

Ashley Yang is so hopelessly confused he should run for office.

For starters, Ashley is a man pretending to be a woman. And though he’s willing to ingest female hormones to further his charade, he’s apparently drawn the line at cosmetic surgery to remove certain telltale organs. But with or without such mutilation, and despite all the hormones in the world, those pesky ol’ XY chromosomes infest every nucleated cell in his body. Ergo, Ashley remains what the good Lord made him.

The same Creator blessed — or cursed — me with an imagination as active as it is vivid. Still, were I to hop out of the shower one morning and notice what unfailingly designates the male of the species protruding from me, I think I’d need more than hormones and a new hairdo to convince myself I’m really a girl.

Not Ashley. He insists he’s a woman despite all evidence to the contrary, and he demands that we sign on to his delusion. I suppose we can rejoice he hasn’t declared himself a Lamborghini with orders that we gas him up every week — premium only, please. Indeed, Ashley’s fantasy prompted this pseudo-philosophical musing from a blogger at “Queer Town”: “When does one stop being a man and start being a woman, and does that require surgery?”

If you’re yearning for a walk on the wild side of the looking glass, you can either read Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland or the latest newsletter from your elected sociopath. These shameless advertisements for re-election push both the sociopath’s grossly inflated and risibly erroneous view of himself as well as his agenda for grabbing more power — and we serfs pay for each megalomaniacal word.

It seems that every few days, one of our local leeches pollutes my snail-mailbox with yet another of these skeezy self-promotions. I am represented up the wazoo — in New York City’s Council, in New York State’s Assembly and Senate, in the national House and Senate. And all this representing gets me nothing but tighter chains and higher taxes.

You might think the tyrants committing these crimes would crave anonymity like other thieves; after all, the guy who burglarizes your home or mugs you in the alley doesn’t send you a brochure bragging about it, with his name, address, and picture blazing across the top. But the criminals in office have egos inversely proportional to their morals. And so they waste the money they stole from us crowing about their latest malfeasance.

“Yeah, but in a democracy, we need to stay informed,” some voters might object. “We gotta keep tabs on politicians, that’s part of being a good citizen.” Really? With news on radio, TV, and the internet 24/7, we are the most informed citizens ever: how’s that working out for ya?

Government is horrific enough when it sticks with its strengths of war and taxation. But when it departs those battlefields for art, it inevitably proves itself a philistine. Its subsidies glorify what any civilized person flushes down the toilet as “artists” photograph crucifixes in urine or dab dung on pornographic depictions of the Virgin Mary.

The city of Marquette, Michigan offers the latest example. Its “Arts and Culture Division” features an exhibit entitled, “What’s in a Name?”

Governments claim to establish such “divisions” because they want “to encourage, develop, and facilitate a rich environment of artistic, creative, and cultural activity…” Balderdash. There’s no quicker way of turning art into propaganda than empowering politicians and their cronies to pick and choose which artists to publicize or ignore. And in these tough times, Marquette’s 21,000 residents with their “per capita income (in 2009 inflation-adjusted dollars)” of $20,946 probably have better things to do with their money than subsidize propaganda.

On the other hand, where will we find more knowledgeable experts on names and what’s in them than the political class? Here are twits who gussy up galleries as “Arts and Culture Divisions” and talk about “revenue enhancement” instead of “taxes,” which is itself a euphemism for “We want money, so we’re stealing yours.”

Here’s a shock: ABC News reported last week that President Barack “Pinocchio” Obama “misstated” the facts yet again. Recall that “during his 2008 presidential campaign and the fight for health care reform, President Obama often told the story of his mother Stanley Ann Dunham and how she spent the months before her death fighting with insurance companies who tried to deny her coverage based on a pre-existing condition.”

Turns out his mother’s insurer paid for almost all her care; it balked when she requested even more funds to cover “several hundred dollars” of miscellaneous expenses a month. Where was Barry at this point? Teaching law and earning a generous salary at the University of Chicago.

Unlike Ms. Dunham, I have no medical insurance. I'm one of the 50 million Americans for whom Obamacare will supposedly provide “access” to the market. Problem is, I don’t need “access”: I already have it. Just like anybody else, I could forgo luxuries or even a necessity to buy insurance if I considered it important enough. But my robust health makes other priorities more pressing.

One of the enduring complaints against immigrants is that they “steal” jobs from natives. Whether it was Chinese laborers laying track for railroads in the nineteenth century or Mexicans harvesting fruit today, these cheeky foreigners take what rightfully belongs to Americans.

Indeed, the Chinese thieves sparked some of the first legislation against immigrants. Before their crime-spree, Americans welcomed the world to their shores. Their continent was a huge one, wild and wooded, in need of farmers, families, and entrepreneurs to tame it. And since the Constitution never empowers the federal government to interfere with movement over the national border, no laws kept newcomers out.

That hospitality disappeared in 1875, when Congress passed legislation barring convicts and prostitutes (except itself, of course). More categories of undesirables followed: lunatics and idiots (Congress again exempted), paupers, and Chinese laborers could no longer settle in America.

Such dictatorial legislation inspired litigation, and lots of it. Some of the cases landed before the Supreme Court – which had decided to uphold the new laws no matter what, judging by the justices’ legal hijinks. Since they couldn’t cite the Constitution to justify the power-grab, they relied on other authorities, including “Mr. [William] Marcy, the secretary of state under President Pierce,” who insisted, “Every society possesses the undoubted right to determine who shall compose its members, and it is exercised by all nations, both in peace and war.”

On Monday, June 27, American Daily Herald Contributing Editor Becky Akers appeared as guest on The Power Hour radio show with Joyce Riley to discuss the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) and the erosion of the Fourth Amendment.

Akers has long been an outspoken defender of natural rights as understood by the Founders and has likewise been a fervent critic of Washington’s increasingly aggressive efforts to undermine the Bill of Rights.

During her appearance on the show, Akers explained the problems with the TSA.

“This is just the absolute definition of sheer evil and sheer totalitarianism,” she told Riley of the TSA. “And it’s the almighty dollar trumping everything with companies that manufacture these porno-scanners, making their bucks off of our misery and our cancer.”

To listen to the entire program, click here.

To hear more from Becky Akers, tune in to the Alex Jones radio program from 1 to 2 pm EST on Wednesday.