Just because we didn't stand up when it first happened, due to whatever reason, doesn't mean we can't be outraged.
Indeed, I wonder how much of the outrage is because the TSA is so ineffective. People seem to be pretty on board with how techniques like stop and frisk have helped bring crime rates in the big cities down dramatically over the last few decades.
How would a new legal justification for something cops have been doing forever suddenly cause a crime reduction? You'd have a much better case arguing that the semi-professionalization of the police in the aftermath of Warren court rules complicating police procedure caused it.
I'm not sure I understand your larger point at all: Singapore is a police state and people there seem to be pretty on board with it, so until everywhere is like Singapore we shouldn't do anything about it?
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just saying it's strange to be surprised by it. It's even a stretch to call it hypocritical because you are talking about two types of situations.
I'm not sure how one government agency abusing its power in one way makes it ok for another agency to abuse its power in another way. Your argument could easily be restated as: "in World War II, the government put Japanese people in internment camps, so it's silly to complain about stop and frisk as if it's an unprecedented weakening of the 4th amendment."
I'm not saying what the TSA is doing is okay. I said I find it amusing to watch the armchair civil libertarians come out of the woodwork soon as something inconveniences them and argue against the TSA from an extremely principled position.