Comments on: More From Janet Napolitano

By: kathy

kathy — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:16:15 +0000

Hey again, Pup. I would be interested in a link to the source of this letter that you quoted. I may want to put in on my sidebar. Thanks.

By: kathy

kathy — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:11:27 +0000

Praise God for these men. I have been wondering where all the “wise men” are? I started a post awhile back about that. We may be approaching a time when men will have to sacrifice their all to turn this around.

By: Conservative Pup

Conservative Pup — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:48:06 +0000

Thanks Betsy, for coming by and for your comments. As you point out in your own well-written post on this topic on your blog, in the link above, the “Violent Radicalization……Act” of 2007 has passed the House only, so far. It has not come up for a vote in the Senate. So, as far as I know, these seven senators who signed the above letter haven’t voted for that. As for it being “simply CYA” on their part, in your opinion due to funding from the stimulus package, maybe it is. I am not remembering right now if any senators voted against the stimulus package, but will look that up later.

If these seven didn’t vote for the stimulus, then I see no hypocrisy. If they did, then one might possibly make a stretch for that. I am curious though, in your opinion, would it have been better if they had not written the letter? Just not spoken out? I don’t like hypocrisy either, and will do further research to see if these senators are speaking out against something they voted to fund.

I still like it though, that they wrote the letter.

Thank you for your articulate and knowledegable comments; you know more about this than I do, and I appreciate your input.

Pup

By: Betsy Ross

Betsy Ross — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 05:46:37 +0000

This is interesting, since those Senators had to be aware of the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorist Act,” that was passed in 2007 by a vote of 400-35 in the House, and which was funded under that stimulus most of them signed off on which is somewhat responsible also for these actions of DHS. You can read about it here:

http://backupamerica.blogspot.com/2009/04/violent-radicalization-and-homegrown.html

So far, no word whether it has actually formally passed the Senate, but a great deal of the monies for the Fusion Centers and DHS activities under this Act were already funded under that stimulus – whether it has “officially” passed or not. This is simply CYA on the part of those Senators, I’m sure, since some of them have some other skeletons in their closets and will be, after all, coming up for re-election – Vitter in 2012 I believe.

By: Betsy Ross

Betsy Ross — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 05:11:00 +0000

Napolitano likes to split hairs. As most lawyers do for their convenience – it is part of the training in playing both sides against the middle. It is a “civil” matter, it’s in the civil codes and statutes. It is not a “criminal” matter is what she is referring to. But that is so only because those that are the globalists and liberals in the House and Senate have fought criminalizing it. In Mexico, incarcerated indefinitely if you are there either under visa or lawfully. It’s in their Constitution. In fact to most border residents, it is a well known fact that Mexico’s policies with respect to Americans is actually to hold them in jail and then charge their relatives to visit them until they bleed those relatives dry, or if someone in the embassy finally intervenes. Although since America is now cowtowing to Mexico in every respect, the embassy rarely intervenes.
There are thousands of stories by border residents of what they have experienced at the hands of Mexico’s justice – including waiting months for bodies to be released until the thousands of dollars worth of extortion are paid to the Mexicans if one of your loved ones should happen to die while visiting that country.

By: Reaganite Republican Resistance

Reaganite Republican Resistance — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:52:38 +0000

All who were left scratching their heads when Obama chose this obedient toady to head Homeland Security now can get a handle on it: a serious choice, focused upon real terrorist threats (not imaginary, partisan ones i.e. the TEA parties)- like, say, a Rudolph Giuliani, wouldn’t have been a willing collaborator in a sham report trashing US vets for the President’s political purposes.

Napolitano’s qualification for this job was simply being a liberal Obama sycophant… certainly not any skills, insight, or ability.

Her statements on the Canadian border illustrate how incompetent and puzzled she is- Neopolitano completely lacks the credentials to be in-charge of protecting our country from the likes of Al Qaida.

Trouble is, narcissist Obama needs to be surrounded by mindless drones to confirm his omnipotence and pollyanna world view. But such appointments as Napolitano and Panetta to vital national security posts are a show of weakness that will surely encourage terrorists and myriad other rogue characters who see America as their enemy- no matter how hard Barack tries to schmooze them.

Anyone who expected this president to place the nation’s practical defense interests above those of his own political security and radical agenda hasn’t really looked at how he got this far in the first place.