"President Obama is in a corner on this one. He has no choice but to remove Napolitano immediately."

Ah, but Janet is a true-believer! She fits his idealogical mold to a TEE! Besides if Obama got rid of every stoooopid appointee of his he'd be awful damn lonely!

p.s. how come the world doesn't love us yet? Obammy's been Prez for a year!

"Allowing Napolitano to stay would be a political nightmare for him"

HAH

Look at Obamacare.

He doesnt care about political nightmares. he knows he wont get impeached. He figures he can lock up 40% of the vote on 2012 by citing Bush as the source of all his problems. He figures between immigration reform and bribery and a 3rd party candidate to siphon republican votes he can squeak out a victory in 2012.

As for nightmares he figures he can make a canned speech, blame it on Bush, talk about hope and change, and then go play a round of golf. This president job is easy.

With Obama ideology trumps a warm body any day of the week. With Obamacare he has no problem sacrificing quality of healthcare for more centralized control of healthcare. Ultimately, Napolitano is expendable. There are other sycophants who can fill this position who will no longer be a drag on an administration that has all of a sudden been subjected to the laws of gravity.

"He has no choice but to remove Napolitano immediately."

Disagree. This whole tempest brewed up between Christmas and New Years. Now there is a weekend after New Year's Day. That is a real memory stretch for the ADD-riddled US populace. Their ferocity is already clouded by the terrors of Time Warner vs Fox. Feed them one more "crisis" of any proportion and they won't remember Napolitano any better than Geppetto.

Yes, IF there is any other transportation-terror incident they will rise with a roar, but that's probably a gamble BHO is willing to take.

But, IF one of the 20 something other bombers-in-training make it through, then watch for Admiral Dennis Blair (the DNI) to take the harpoon. After all, he is just a smart, savvy, experienced old white guy. Certainly a good sacrifice. He hasn't paid his political dues the way Napolitano has.

Hyperbol much?

re: "Already suffering plummeting approval numbers"

The Gallup Daily Approval poll numbers are now exactly where they were last August - 5 months ago.

"He has no choice but to remove Napolitano immediately."

Lol. Actually it's pretty definite that someone's head will roll, but there is no indication or solid reason that it should be Napolitano. Conducting a bad interview does not have an effect on our nation's security.

Maybe Napolitano will fall - if she's at fault - but nobody has shown she's at fault that I've seen - and some conservative asshat declaring she's at fault won't be enough by itself.

Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this.

I won't hold my breath.

I saw a serious article yesterday that said that Napolitano was brought into Homeland Security as a staging position for her appointment to the next vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Imagine that.

Is it November yet?

"I won't hold my breath."

Oh, you disappoint on all levels. Just go ahead and do it. I double dog dare you.

"Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this."

Okay shithead. Who the hell is running the show there? Bush? Does she know who is doing what, and why? Evidently not. Since a terrorist went through 'the system' AND NOT ONE FUCKING ALARM WENT OFF!

Truman used to say "The buck stops here". Not your butt buddy Obama. He'll throw some underling under the truck and keep his faithful minions about him so that they can continue to spout worthless crap like "man-caused disasters" and "the system worked".

Can't wait until they get hold of health care.

"Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this"

Spoken like a true liberal! Doesn't matter one bit whether she is directly at fault - she certainly IS responsible for the actions of her duties.

Imagine a corporate CEO explaining to the shareholders that it wasn't his fault!

"Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this."

You surprise me Sabre since the administration s already taking the line that the undie bomber was a total failure of the system. Are you now taking an anti-Obama stance? I suspect that you are simply too incoherent to know when you are attacking the policies of Obama and when you are defending them. Or perhaps you are taking the position that the boss should take the blame for the failure of the staff and Obama is really the one who should take the blame for this? In the future you should try thinking through your position and what it really means.

Frankly I think Obama should keep Napolitano around. She makes Gibbs look competent.

Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this.
5. Posted by Sabre5 | January 1, 2010 2:40 PM |

I'm gonna take a wild ass guess here in your little pea brain thinking that it's Bush's fault.

"Imagine a corporate CEO explaining to the shareholders that it wasn't his fault!"

Shit, rockwood. Imagine a president doing the same thing.

Here come de urgenturgent emergency spending legislation, without which we all gonna DIE! I figure the idea will be included in Obama's First Annual State of Decline Speech For The Ages later this month. Look for the sweeping recriminalization of Sedition under Homeland Security.

It's for the children.

re: "Already suffering plummeting approval numbers"

Really Sabre, could you be any more divorced from reality?

Rasmussen, who has been more accurate than just about any other polling organization over the last two presidential elections, had Obama's approval rating at inauguration at 65% approve, 30% disapprove. Today it stands at 46% approve, 53% disapprove. Strongly approve has nearly been cut in half (from 44 to 24%)and strongly disapprove has more than doubled (from 16 to 42%).

Most media outlets have admitted that it is the biggest first year decline in popularity for a president in the last century (which is about as long as there have been polls to measure that).

You may suffer from Paula Kael syndrome, but that doesn't mean that the rest of us are similarly in the dark.

"Feel free to show how Napolitano is at fault on this."

"Okay shithead. Who the hell is running the show there? Bush? Does she know who is doing what, and why?"

So he can't show how Napolitano is at fault - can anyone else?

"Spoken like a true liberal! Doesn't matter one bit whether she is directly at fault - she certainly IS responsible for the actions of her duties."

lol - anyone else want to try?

"I'm gonna take a wild ass guess here in your little pea brain thinking that it's Bush's fault."

Another FAIL. Anyone else?

"You surprise me Sabre since the administration s already taking the line that the undie bomber was a total failure of the system. Are you now taking an anti-Obama stance?"

No - I'm just asking a simple question - what specifically did Napolitano do or not do that makes her the one who should be fired.

So far, much to my surprise, nobody here can answer that question.

"Conducting a bad interview does not have an effect on our nation's security."

I'm afraid you are missing the point. The interview(s) revealed her complete detachment from the realities of an extraorinarily important issue. Janet Incompetano end up in the scrap heap of former Obama cabinet appointees.

Napolitano was right in saying the system post-event worked.

What she should have done was of course to address the mistakes before the event.

So basically, what republicans want is to bark loudly until Obama does what they say. I think he should not acquiesce, simply because there is no good faith left in the opposition - they want to humiliate Obama, and do not really care if Napolitano can do the job correctly or not.

A strong reaction should be made because of the flaws bared by the undie bomber, Obama must show accountability.

But Napolitano was right in saying that the system worked - she was talking of another system than the one people assumed she was talking about.

Sabre, Napolitano made the representation that the system worked the way it was supposed to creating the impression (many people think accurately so) that she doesn't care about actually preventing terrorism, but only about catching terrorists afterward for prosecution. The public wants acts of terrorism stopped before they are attempted. By creating the impression that the administration doesn't care about doing that she deserves to be sacked.

Axel, You are completely wrong. While the left may only care about who is in power (demonstrated by the tremendous silence now that Obama has adopted policies regarding Guantanamo that are virtually congruent to Bush), but the right actually cares about what is done. We care that terrorism is stopped before people are killed or put in danger. We are not asking for prosecution of terrorists, we want prevention. If Obama were to actually promote a policy where that were the case we would be happy with it and turn our disagreements to something else.

The difference between left and right in this case is that the left never really cared about Guantanamo and what went on there. They only ever cared about who was in charge. That's what happens when you have no moral compass.

Democrats like Richard Codey are now going into CYA mode. If Napolitano doesn't have the experience for the job, isn't a week after a terror attack a little late to be telling us?

This is another indication that Democrats just can't be trusted with the security of America or the lives of American citizens.

Napolitano lied when she said "the system worked." How come "Bush lied" is bad but "Napolitano lied" is completely OK with our liberal trolls?

sabre[5 tenths of a brain cell] "No - I'm just asking a simple question - what specifically did Napolitano do or not do that makes her the one who should be fired."

How should we [or anyone] know at this point?

Is the complete investigation over? No.

Which raises the question: Why are you so adamant Napolitano is completely innocent of any errors or wrong doing?

To paraphrase you, I believe I'll maintain my normal respiration rate while waiting for an honest and complete answer from you.

A couple exit questions for you: Who was it that thought the 9/11 attackers entered the U.S. via Canada?

Who was it that made the claim in Feb. 2009 that Mexican drug violence wasn't crossing the U.S. boarder?

"Right now it has not (crossed the border). But it is a contingency we have in mind because it could," the former Arizona governor told reporters. "We have contingency plans should violence spread into the United States."

At the time of the quote according to the Dept. of Justice and the DEA, Mexican drug-gang activity went from coast to coast and operates in at least 230 of America's largest cities.

Sabre,
I would like to add that I think the irony of the implications of this incident is lost on the liberal mind. Liberals put their faith in government to a much greater extent than conservatives when it comes to managing our lives. Sometimes it's even uninvited. We currently have an administration completely committed to maneuvering much more of our lives to collectivism and assuring us that the political elite knows what's best. The response to this particular crisis by those in the highest positions of oversight highlights why some in our society put less faith than you do in government in general and this administration in particular.

sabre5 ..

NaPo direct DHS personel to stop paying attention to Muslims ... and to treat threats as criminal matters ...

so yes she is at fault and responsible ...

Said a few days ago Napoleianna would soon be viewing the undercarriage of a marxist bus..

Barry should have sent Her to the front line days ago? Guess He was too busy taking mulligans, plugging divots and trying to understand the moral to "My Pet Goat."

Sabre5 - "So far, much to my surprise, nobody here can answer that question."

Not surprising. For a liberal, NO ONE IS RESPONSIBLE. Shit just "happens".

Look on the bright side Sabre. It's what you and Obama have dreamed of. It's BIPARTISAN!

Where in hell are Nappy's qualifications for
heading this department? There ARE none, ergo
she is UNQUALIFIED!.....kinda like "Brownie"
in the last administration. Are libs so dumb
as to protect Obama's choices (in the face
of their inadequacies) just to protect HIM?
This will infuriate non-bots as much as his
pay-back appointee system already has. Some
knee-jerk apologists need to zip it. Think
"Van Jones"

Napolitano is a lawyer by training and a two term governor. She is the source of the change in terms from terrorism to 'man-caused disasters', as if woman suicide bombers didn't exist.

Three months after becoming United States Secretary of Homeland Security she still held the false view that the 9/11 perpetrators entered the United States from Canada. Like her boss, Napolitano holds the view that terrorism is a criminal enterprise and that terrorists are just criminals.

What's freighting is her statement that "the system worked." I see some claim she was talking about some other system than the security system, but the truth is no system saved Flight 253, nor was it saved by heroic passengers, it was saved because for some unknown reason the bomb's detonation system failed. If it had worked the PETN would have exploded immediately with nearly twice the force of the same weight of TNT, and given where the terrorists was sitting, could have brought the plane down.

The question for Obama is does he think Napolitano is the best qualified person for the job? If he keeps her on then the blame for any future event will fall on him. Maybe he should see if there's room under the bus for one more.

Charles Krauthammer says it well:

"The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration's response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. . . . Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy -- jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon -- turns laxity into a governing philosophy."

Napolitano needs to go if it is only BO throwing her under the bus to make it look like he is correcting the above. Even if she goes, nothing changes policy wise.

Napolitano clearly must go. Its not that she was directly at fault, its that her incompetence is apparent every time she speaks. Her ridiculous comments show a lack of judgement and a failure to grasp the issues her department us faced with. Calls for her dismissal will only get louder. This is not a partisan issue. Heck, there's even a guy on ebay right now who'd selling a fire janet napolitano now .com domain name!

Paraphrasing a little Abraham Lincoln, arguing with Sabre5 is like trying to teach pigs to sing. It's totally useless, plus the pigs like it.

Do you really think you can convince him of ANYTHING? When was the last time he answered without sneering? How about never.

He likes it.

Let's also remove the goofball that's the Chairman of the congressinal committe Benie Thompson as well . This guy is a crook and also know nothing about Homeland Sercuity. He's under investigation for hitting up contractors to fund his re-election.

SAber5:
Simple (even without a reality check): When a baseball team (Homeland security) screws up, the Manager (Napolitano) gets fired.
And you really have to admit, Homeland Security REALLY SCREWED THE POOCH HERE!!!

"No - I'm just asking a simple question - what specifically did Napolitano do or not do that makes her the one who should be fired.

So far, much to my surprise, nobody here can answer that question."

Who cares? Fire Her ass! Shes unqualified to be a playground patrol let alone the position She is in. I dont remember there needing to be a reason to fire 90 something attorneys under Clinton other than it was a political choice. Well, this is also. Barrys ship is taking on water fast and there are no watertight doors to shut.

Bail out and abandon ship..

Hey Sabre, here ya go, dumbass.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWI2MGE2YTE4MzM4M2QyMTE5ZWE0OWI0Y2E3OTZiMGU=

In summary, if the "leaders" don't give a shit, why should the troops?

woman. check
lesbian. check
lefty. check
Democrat. check

Well, she has all the diversity 'qualifications' needed to be on Team Obama so I don't see what all the griping is about....

She is in way over her head. bring back Chertoff.

No need to insult lesbians Les... just because she's another Clinton era flunky with a Janet Reno haircut means nothing...

No insult intended. Calling someone a lesbian isn't a put down to the Left, is it? In fact, it's a big plus for hiring purposes.

If Nappy steps down, it won't make much difference. Odumbo will just appoint another irresponsible idiot to the post. Besides that, no matter who he appoints, they will be taking orders from him, and we all know the only thing he is aware of is his reflection in the mirror and the sound of his voice.
Madalyn