The Henry Hazlitt Foundation, publisher of the premier libertarian portal, Free-Market.Net, as well as other successful channels such as ifeminists.com and Bureaucrash, is broke. If you care about liberty and can help in any way, please do.

The Transportation Security Agency now says that fliers should not pack food or lock their bags. Apparently, the government’s “high-tech bomb-detection devices” can’t tell the difference between a bomb and a fruitcake.

Also, it seems the only way the TSA can hire enough qualified screeners is to offer them the opportunity to rifle through passengers’ bags every once in a while. The airlines got a lot of flak for their supposedly lax security on Sept. 11 (though it should be noted that all of the hijackers boarded with items that were legal at the time), but there’s a very practical reason why the airlines ran security the way they did: the chances of a terrorist attack are so small that the daily needs (that is, desires) of passengers to be processed quickly overrode security concerns.

Now, of course, the feds are in charge, and they have no reason to consider passengers’ desires at all. That is, they have no financial motive, only political pressures. As tragic as Sept. 11 was, it’s not clear to me that putting the feds in charge so they can pass these ridiculous rules is going to make future hijackings less likely. What will make the difference — and has already made the difference — is a change in how the passengers and the flight crew deal with terrorists. They no longer mediate, but confront.

Of course, flight crew are not allowed to carry guns, and neither are law-abiding passengers. So there’s one method of self-defense thrown out the window. And now that fruitcakes are banned, yet another potential defensive weapon has been removed from the modern passenger’s arsenal.

CNN says Trent Lott is stepping down as Senate majority leader. Does this mean he’ll have yet another change of heart on affirmative action?

The scenario I laid out below about why Dubya seemed to be dragging his feet on Trent “All These Problems” Lott seems to be wrong. According to the AP’s David Espo:

White House officials have told Republicans that Bush is willing to accept the consequences if Lott loses the majority leader position, quits the Senate and allows Mississippi’s Democratic governor to replace him, GOP officials say.

Bush’s political advisers say they were not impressed with Lott’s explanations, including a news conference Friday, but they insist they’re not getting involved in the Senate’s internal debate over Lott’s future.

Oh, well.

For all of his talk of being a compassionate conservative, Dubya’s reaction to the Trent “All These Problems” Lott idiocy has been disappointing. Sure, he condemned his statement yesterday but seemed to let him off the hook for apologizing, “and rightly so.”

Trent Lott is not only a disgrace to the Senate but an albatross around the neck of the Republican Party and Dubya’s hopes for re-election. Why the soft touch? Have we heard any leaks about White House pressure on the Senate to censure Lott or vote him out of his leadership position? Nope. Porque no?

According to Bob Kemper’s story on the Sept. 11 commission in yesterday’s Tribune:

But the Sept. 11 families, as well as some lawmakers, are even more concerned over what they see as Lott’s all but certain decision to block [Warren] Rudman at the urging of the White House.
Rudman is viewed by the families as someone who would not shy away from taking on the intelligence, diplomatic and military establishments. He also might join up with the commission’s five Democrats to create a majority for authorizing subpoenas and taking other aggressive investigative actions.

Lott has until Sunday to appoint commission members. A Republican familiar with Lott’s plans said it is unlikely Rudman will be picked. Lott’s aides have told family members that Rudman is on their list of candidates for the job, but that they are looking for someone more qualified.

Dubya’s scared to death that a real, independent Sept. 11 commission — you know, one that’s not headed up by a war criminal — will find out something that could remove the post-9/11 gloss. Which, by the way, I think is ridiculous. Unless a commission unearths a memo to Dubya on Sept. 10 that says, “Al Qaeda terrorists will be hijacking four planes tomorrow and flying them into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and possibly the White House,” the public is unwilling to saddle the president with the blame.

It’s well understood by anyone who doesn’t have an axe to grind that Sept. 11 was an intelligence failure, an INS failure, an airport security failure, etc. It was not a presidential failure — but rigging a commission to achieve a fixed result would be a failure of monumentally stupid proportions. But that’s what Dubya’s willing to do. The one stumbling block to achieving that whitewash would be All These Problems Lott, fearing the loss of his leadership and much of his pork-barrel pull, turning tail on Dubya by appointing Rudman.

As bad as it is for Dubya’s image and for the GOP’s image to have a segregationist-sympathizer as Senate majority leader, it’s not as bad as somehow getting the blame pinned on him by a Sept. 11 commission. The president figures things will take of themselves. The ball is already rolling. Lott won’t be able to take the heat much longer. Why get his hands dirty? Why take a stand? Why take a risk?

How compassionate.

Cardinal Law has resigned. My question is, when does his trial begin?

Check out the Reason magsters’ new group blog, Hit & Run.