Thursday, January 07, 2010

O RLY?

If I'm going to feel "shock" at the failure of the intelligence community to ensure that air travel is safe, then please answer this: Why is Napolitano still in place?

It's her job to ensure that the system runs smoothly, yet it seems that coordination of intelligence gathering efforts is stuck in a pre-9/11 loop. Get someone who is competent for crying out loud, and won't claim that the system "worked" (yah, thank goodness for quick-thinking-on-your-feet civilians who had to do the governments dirty work for them) when it's obvious it had a moment of EPIC FAIL.

Before I start dropping f-bombs all over the place, whatever happened to Obama's promise of accountability? Lies, lies, and more damn lies from politicians.

5 comments:

Nat Blair said...

We should totally bring back Dubya. He was all about accountability!

Especially with Rumsfeld and that whole Abu Ghraib thingy. Whatever that was.

Thomas Joseph said...

Obviously that's not a viable solution. Heck, it's not even reasonable.

Rather, the reasonable solution is that we strongly suggest that when politicians make promises, we hold them to it. You know, keep them accountable. When a politician claims he's going to instill an aura of accountability in Washington DC, and we get more of the same old crap ... I presume the politician is full of the same old crap themselves.

I believe that a lot of this "I'm not responsible, and if I am, I'm not going to admit it" crud, took place in the Bush Administration, so if you meant your comment to be a sarcastic retort to where you think my allegiances may lie ... you're wrong.

Nat Blair said...

It wasn't meant to be a reasonable suggestion. It was meant to be annoying. :) And wherever your sympathies lie, your posted material appears slanted to me. Which is ok.

As for accountability, sure, Napolitano was dumb for saying the system work, but it's hard to see where she obviously failed in her duty. From that Fox News article, it appears to lay the blame on a lack of analysts. So unless she's out there arguing against hiring more analysts, or you could so me where she has continued to argue against being responsible (after rapidly copping to her mistake of saying the system works), I'm hard pressed to see how not firing her perpetuates a culture on unaccountability. Especially in comparison to Bush administration transgressions.

And before you paint me as a Obama follower, I have no illusions about the guy. He's a politician just like the rest of them. He just has a couple things I like: a brain that he uses, and an underlying set of principles that I prefer.

Nat Blair said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Thomas Joseph said...

Yah, people get on me for posting FOXNews links. I can't blame them (FOX) for running the article first and putting it on their website as the lead. CNN ran a similar article (citing the "shocking" bit) about five hours later, and placed it in the lower right hand corner of their web page. Meh. As for MSNBC ... nothing, but they suck anyways.

Napolitano is supposed to be in charge of ensuring that the intelligence community is running properly, which means they are sharing information ... and it's pretty clear, at least to me ... that they're not sharing information the way they should be. She's the Secretary of Homeland Security, and on Dec 25th there were American citizens who were not secure (not even close) and her department was sitting on information which could have ensured their security. It's unacceptable. Just because the Bush administration FUBAR'd a lot of things and didn't step up to the plate to accept responsibility is not a valid reason as to why we should give Napolitano a pass.

Heads SHOULD roll IMNSHO. As for her "copping to her mistake" ... yah, she said her comment was taken "out of context". How context had anything to do with saying the "system worked" is beyond me, but I suppose that's neither here nor there at this point.

As for you being an Obama follower, I won't make any bones about it if you are. It was, yet again IMO, a situation of "vote for the best of the worst", so I can't blame people for doing what they thought was right.