ScrappleFace: News Fairly Unbalanced. We Report. You Decipher  




Top ScrappleFace Stories...



Bush Raises Airport Crowding Threat Level to Orange

by Scott Ott for ScrappleFace · 22 Comments · · Print This Story Print This Story

(2007-11-15) — President George Bush, acting on intercepted cell phone and email chatter repeatedly using the cryptic phrase “big plans for the holidays,” today raised the homeland airport crowding threat level to ‘Orange’, and ordered the Federal Aviation Administration to take preemptive action to head off “potentially devastating inconveniences” to U.S. air passengers.

The airline industry, still reeling from last year’s holiday season complaints, welcomed the president’s announcement as commercial carriers plan to transport roughly 27 million passengers over the next two weeks.

An ‘Orange’ crowding threat level is the second highest, and indicates a high risk that heavily-booked flights will slow transitions through airports raising traveler anxiety.

“In the post-9/11 era,” said one industry source, “it’s comforting to hear the commander in chief offer the resources of the federal government to ensure that the family gets to grandma’s house while the turkey’s still hot.”

In related news, Usama bin Laden released another video warning that his al Qaeda network is “stronger than ever” and planning to do “something really big and scary, really really soon that will bring the Great Satan to its knees forever…again.”

Similar ScrappleFace News:



Tags: U.S. News

22 responses so far ↓

  • 1 EXT // Nov 15, 2007 at 2:50 pm

    The whole overcrowing thing and, of course, Global Warming, could be brought to a schreeching halt immediately. All we must do is outlaw air travel entirely and do as algore (and therefore God) intended by staying home and watching TV. Until that’s outlawed…..or priced out of reach (2009 is coming, have you bought your expensive new digital TV yet?).

  • 2 Ms RightWing, Ink // Nov 15, 2007 at 3:35 pm

    Is that why gas is so high. Gee, and here I been blaming it on Saudi-Arabia, China and the San Fran-boat crash.

  • 3 gafisher // Nov 15, 2007 at 4:30 pm

    I think the two-pronged approach Homeland Security has proposed ought to help. For two weeks infants under two and women over 70 will be excused from the random intensive search routine. Oh, and international flights will be suspended.

  • 4 Just Ranting // Nov 15, 2007 at 4:51 pm

    I don’t want to travel this Thanksgiving. Y’all wanna come to my place? I’m deep fryin’ a big turkey, and the little lady’s got some great yams. We can build a fire and tell ghost stories or stories about Hillary becoming POTUS, which is even scarier. Its time to fun up!

  • 5 its-just-me // Nov 15, 2007 at 5:56 pm

    gafisher, I think that would be considered “age discrimination.”
    I know I would be offended….
    :)

  • 6 mindknumbed kid // Nov 15, 2007 at 6:01 pm

    In related news, Usama bin Laden released another video warning that his al Qaeda network is “stronger than ever” and planning to do “something really big and scary, really really soon that will bring the Great Satan to its knees forever…again.”

    Like supporting Hillary for President?

  • 7 Tinman // Nov 15, 2007 at 6:10 pm

    I think we’ll drive to grandma’s.—

    Wait, we are grandmas.

  • 8 mindknumbed kid // Nov 15, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    As my family it ain’t gonna be much of a holiday this year, wife will be working all day long. I’m going to pick up a pre-made Turkey dinner from Albertson’s and we will scarf it down over her lunch hour.
    Was originally hoping to have family travel to our new abode for the day, but it isn’t gonna be that way for this year…..maybe for Christmas, if the weather permits.
    Christmas, BTW, is the day we celebrate the birth of Christ,the very son of God. He (Christ) was our greatest gift.

  • 9 mindknumbed kid // Nov 15, 2007 at 6:52 pm

    Speaking of the Son,that reminds me of the facy that there is also a Father, then there was one chosen to be the earthly mther, That is what we all call a family.
    What happens when you elect a Republican that is not a conservative ? You get the mess that is called California.
    Yes, I will vote for Rudy over Hillary any day, any time, any where. But I fear the results may be dangerous.
    Vote with your eyes open and your brain fully engaged ! And PLEASE, stop drooling over the promised bag of GOODIES, we don’t need no more goodies we are already fat enough !

  • 10 camojack // Nov 15, 2007 at 7:05 pm

    I’ll check it out for myself, tomorrow…

  • 11 mindknumbed kid // Nov 15, 2007 at 7:10 pm

    Looking to beat the rush,eh ?

  • 12 Ms RightWing, Ink // Nov 15, 2007 at 7:21 pm

    I’ll shoot the first person that comes near my place on Thanksgiving. The only piece of meat that’s around here is the turkey neck and my cat has been starring at it all day.

    Hmmm, cat roast

  • 13 gafisher // Nov 15, 2007 at 8:19 pm

    Sorry, It’s-Just-Me Re#7; if you look like a middle-eastern male between the ages of 16 and 60 they just might make an exception. :lol:

  • 14 mindknumbed kid // Nov 15, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    I wonder how thorough the search would be if you skipped showering for a week in August, skipped the Right Guard, and pee’d your pants (or worse) and ate garlic and onions all day before your flight……

  • 15 debass // Nov 15, 2007 at 8:37 pm

    “I wonder how thorough the search would be if you skipped showering for a week in August, skipped the Right Guard, and pee’d your pants (or worse) and ate garlic and onions all day before your flight……”

    You would smell middle eastern and they would let you right through.

  • 16 debass // Nov 15, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Lord, I apologize and for all the starving…..

  • 17 egospeak // Nov 15, 2007 at 11:43 pm

    (Note to fellow Scrapplers: this is “off track” and a continuation of a conversation/debate with Everthink. Please feel free to bypass this comment and pickup with the next “on track” comment.)

    ET, I thought it might be helpful, perhaps even informative to amplify some of my comments from last night.

    Regarding Democrat principles from 70-80 years ago, I neglected to mention several.

    First is the idea that big government is better than small government. (The fact that the Founding Fathers argued over whether we should have a strong or weak central government just goes to show how old this battle is.) Obviously big government won (at least for now) and today the question is, do Americans want bigger government or unbelievably hugely bigger government? My guess is that no matter who wins in the next election we will get the former and if the current Congressional leadership remains and has its way and a Democrat is elected president in 2008, we will, almost certainly, get the latter. (For the children, of course.) This had its modern roots in Johnson’s “Great Society” and “War on Poverty”. Nice ideas, yet once again, no thought about unintended consequences. By the way, poverty won.

    Second would be taxes: who to tax and how much. Initial income tax rates began at 1% with the highest rate at 7% for the rich (those with incomes over $500,000.00 per year in 1913). Initially less than 1% of the population paid income taxes. If you thought that tax rates would be low during the Great Depression, you would be wrong. The lowest rate was 4% but the highest rate was 79%!!! I guess taxing the “rich” is one of those Democrat principles that has remained pretty constant over the years although the definition of who is “rich” has been downgraded considerably over those same years.

    Regarding the takeover of the Democrat party by the anti-war activists in the early 70’s: the leadership was not nearly as radical as the far left wing. While there certainly were some who “loathed the military” and believed that it was a force for evil in the world, they were still a minority in the party.

    They were vehemently opposed to the Reagan buildup in the 80’s and with their “fellow travelers” in Europe hysterically protested the placing of Pershing missles in NATO Europe to counterbalance the Warsaw Pact and the Soviets. They derided the Strategic Defense Initiative as “Stars Wars”. They disparaged Reagan as a war monger and insisted that if left to his own devices he would bring on Armegeddon. (Ironically, it was the policies of Reagan that ended the Cold War.) Even then they were still a minority in their party and not fully anti-American.

    It wasn’t until the (s)election of George W. Bush as president and their becoming a force to be reckoned with within their party that their anti-Americanism was fully realized. We now have a political party that has bet its future on America’s military and strategic defeat. Even worse, their leadership is working to that end! I believe that this is unprecedented in American history, and it is surely beneath comtempt. (Please understand that this is not a personal attack on you, it is a criticism of a political party and the activists that are steering it.)

    The reason the election of 1994 was important was because the newly minority Democrats had, over the previous 40 years, developed, much like many of their constituents, an entitlement mentality… a belief that they had an inherent right, a divine right of kings as it were, to power. That their back was covered by a lickspittle MSM only underscores the importance of conservative talk radio as I mentioned yesterday. Congressional Republicans were tolerable as long as they knew their place and stayed in it. That all changed in late 1994 and the demonization (the constant comparing of conservatives to Hitler, which continues even to today. Bu$Hitler anyone?) of Republicans in general and conservatives in specific really began.

    The whining about impeachment, the (s)election of 2000, the “stolen” election of 2004, the false claims that Bush lied us into war, etc, were nothing more than childlike acting out on the part of people who knew, knew in their heart of hearts that the American people wanted, nay demanded their return to power to restore America to the former glory she knew during the Clinton years.

    We may well get a return of the Clinton’s years but whether it will mark a return to “former glories” or whether it will merely continue America’s accelerating slide into oblivion… only time and God’s grace will tell.

    Let me reiterate, none of this is intended as an attack on you, it is merely my venting about a political party with which I have significant disagreement.

    Regards,

  • 18 gafisher // Nov 16, 2007 at 6:02 am

    Who says the Dems are limp on homeland security? Hillary’s staff is already doing Level Orange training!

  • 19 Hawkeye // Nov 16, 2007 at 8:34 am

    “that will bring the Great Satan to its knees forever…again.”

    Funny stuff Scott. :smile:

  • 20 gafisher // Nov 16, 2007 at 11:42 am

    Egospeak Re#17: “… unbelievably hugely bigger government … had its modern roots in Johnson’s “Great Society” and “War on Poverty”.”

    Amity Shlaes’ study of the Depression era offers some excellent insights into this issue. I highly recommend this transcript of a speech she gave earlier this year on “The Legacy of the 1936 Election” for a glimpse of the turning point in US government which made your examples possible, if not inevitable.

  • 21 everthink // Nov 16, 2007 at 4:59 pm

    Egospeak,

    The question was: How you think the Democratic Party has changed since FDR, now you want bring it into a Federalist v. Anti-Federalist discussion/debate using comparative terms like “bigger government or unbelievably hugely bigger government?”

    It, also, now appears you agree with those old “Conservatives” who didn’t think Democrats were ever any good.

    ET

  • 22 everthink // Nov 16, 2007 at 5:19 pm

    “The whining about impeachment?” How is you know what I write to Pelosi?

    ET

    “… restore America to the former glory she knew during the Clinton years.” Do you think maybe it is still possible?

    Then again, I’m sure you have something good to say about The Four Horsemen, that I’m too dumb to understand.

    ET

You must log in to post a comment.