Janet Napolitano Answers Uh, Uh, Tough, Uh, Border Questions
58The Greta Van Susteren Interview
Tonight, July 15, 2010, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano actually sat down on the Mexican border to talk at length with Greta Van Susteren. No, not the Mexican border in Arizona. Fat chance. This took place at Laredo, Texas. It still counts as a major coup for Greta and her Fox News program, On The Record. No question about that. But did Napolitano provide any answers We the People really want to hear?
Not so much.
This hub was started while the interview was still running. Gotta get those notes recorded while they're fresh, you know. The first ultra-obvious factor that leaped right out from the screen was an irritating "uh" factor. At every turn, the Secretary prefaced answers to the tougher questions by saying, "Uh, uh, look, I said, uh, uh."
I hate that.
Didn't care much for anything else she had to say, either. A few examples:
1. She sounded the bugle for Obama's immigration reform push, stressing that "the people" are most upset about comprehensive immigration reform legislation not passing to date, and that's the reason for all the upset.
BRAAA!! BRAAA!!! BRAAAA!!!!
Oops. Sorry. Forgot to turn off my B.S. detector.
2. She uh, uh, uh'ed her way to swearing up, down, and sideways that the OzBama adminstration has been pouring resources into the Tucson sector to secure the border for the past 18 months!!
BRAA-- Shut up, detector. I already shut you off.
3. When asked whether she, as a lawyer who'd read the law, believed SB 1070 contained any racial profiling elements within its wording, her non-response was "...that's not the essence of the lawsuit...." (filed by the Department of Justice against Arizona). Greta did poke at her a few times, but Polly Politician 'Politano wasn't about to get trapped; she likes her cushy job as a political appointee wa-ay too much to pull a Robert Gibbs.
An Apology
Frankly, I've got to apologize for this hub. It's a waste of time. Of course Janet Napolitano is a weasel. Of course she's going to tap dance her way around the truth whenever the truth is inconvenient (to paraphrase another master fibber). So I need to apologize to you the reader for those seconds or minutes you spent on this page. I need to apologize to myself for taking the time to write it.
Because now Glenn Beck is on. Guess what? Remember all those vehement promises OzBama made in order to get Health Care Deformed passed? Specifically, remember those promises he used to neuter Bart Stupak, promises that never never never never never never NEVER would his Socialized Medicine plan provide federal funding for abortions?
Sure you do.
And yeah, now he's whipping out those Executive Orders, setting up high risk pools in Pennsylvania and New Mexico to guess what, pay for abortions of all types with federal funds.
Wanna bet against Sarah Palin and a few dozen other Mama Grizzlies rearing up on this one?
For the most part, I happen to be pro-choice. But I'm also anti-lying-used-car-salesman, and no way in Hades do I see using tax dollars extorted from pro-life taxpayers to fund abortions as an acceptable function of guv'mint.
So now it's time to go into deep contemplation, figure out how on Earth to write a hub that will provide fresh insight into this horror that is the current White House. At the moment, steam is coming out of my ears--maybe from the extreme heat pouring down on me all afternoon while I worked on a yard fence, but more likely from the shame and dishonor to which our beloved America is being subjected.
Remember in November.
CommentsLoading...
RebelFollower, my wife is also pro-life, and her beloved youngest son's mate is now expecting their first child. I'm not looking forward to updating Pam on this one in the a.m.
So what is the essence of that lawsuit?
If I've understood correctly, and I certainly hope I have not, the essence seems to be: "The feds made a law on immigration. Because the feds made a law, the feds get to decide whether to enforce it. When the feds choose not to enforce, the states are not allowed to enforce it." That seems so ridiculous that it can't possibly be true. Please, please, someone explain this?
Is mutual support of law and mutual support of common defence no longer part of the mentality of those we elect? Or is it all about ... more dollars and more control (deciding when/where to enforce a law) come through designated hands if we're the ONLY governing body that can support enforcing immigration laws?
Excellent rant here Ghost. I didn't expect this Janet to be much different than the other Janet. Just another mouthpiece spouting the same old word salad.
And FitnezzJim.....option #2, sad to say. I think they are playing around with this issue instead of doing what needs to be done.
Both are such good examples of the fact there is no integrity among politicians.
Perhaps Janet Napolitano is just living up to her last name .Napolian would be proud.
Jim, the lawsuit is exactly as frivolous as you describe. The only way the feds can win it is if the Supreme Court (because it WILL go all the way there) is in Big O's pocket...and so far, 5 of the 9 Justices are not. Current law prohibits inteference with federal statutes, but does NOT prohibit helping out (and helping out is what SB 1070 does). You know, like local law enforcement throughout the country helps to arrest bank robbers before turning them over.
It's all political, with--I suspect--one key addition. OzBama strikes me as a schoolyard bully. He really does believe he should be deified, worshiped, etc. A state daring to demonstrate independent action is, to him, a child at recess daring to keep his own lunch money instead of giving it to the bully. And, just exactly like any bully or gang leader from Bloods and Crips to Mafia dons, he can't have that.
Joni, nothing to add to your comment; it speaks for itself.
Sheila, I seldom disagree with any of your observations but would like to modify this one just slightly. That is, "...FOR THE MOST PART there is no integrity among politicians". Because there is no doubt in my mind that Sarah Palin and at least some of the Mama Grizzlies she's been endorsing this year do possess integrity of the highest order.
Someonewhoknows, why didn't I think of that? A typical turncoat female politician with Little Man Syndrome!
First off, I am a former 45 year Arizonan, who left that state in 2006 due to having been the victim of three illegal immigrant thefts in the last seven years there, and also a victim of the mortgage mess where they were selling loans based on the London index rate LIBORs to all those in the west and southwest who were forced into refinances due to rising costs of ownership (and the open borders contributed to that also in increased homeowners and auto insurance rates in addition).
Napolitano is a New Yorker, and cares about building up the Wall Street bankers as her boss does also. And used Arizonans for revenue purposes unabashedly in setting up those "big brother" speed cams due to the Australian company that manufactures them giving her a bundle for her campaigns to insure they got that government contract, in bed with those Silicon Valley venture capitalists.
But you are wrong in one instance, since Americans have been funding abortions for decades since Planned Parenthood started doing them, which receives federal taxapayer grand monies as also an "educational" institution.
Amazing truly just how many do not know that most of those lawyer led illegal immigrant groups also receive your tax money, as does the ACLU through their lobbying for that statute which awards their legal fees for any and all "civil rights" matters - which has now been judicially extended by their fellow Bar members to foreigners who are suing Americans in federal court for "civil rights" reasons, although our Constitution states specifically "We the People of the United States...for US and OUR posterity" (which also flies in the fact of those groups positions that kids born by those illegals in the U.S. are actually Americans - they are not unless one of their parents was a legal citizen at the time of their birth.
Napolitano is a female Hitler, and New Yorker who came to Arizona and used the Arizonans and the border issue for her own political greed and is no true "lawyer" whatsoever, as her boss is not.
Who just recently took the Constitutional right of a trial by jury of those affected by the BP disaster illegally away from them, and then put that foreign British based company in charge of negotiating settlements TO THEIR SATISFACTION independent of any American public scrutiny.
Criminals all under the true law of the land.
Thanks for commenting, Betsy. There is incalculable value in having your depth and breadth of experience recorded here.
About federal funding for abortions: I was actually more "sloppy" than "incorrect". That is, I did not mean to say the feds had not been providing such funding (which I knew well they had indeed) but rather that I do not consider it acceptable for them to do so.
Of course, the vast majority of what the federal government does today is considered unacceptable in my personal view.
RebelFollower 22 months ago
Ghost was a good hub thank you, I missed the interview and as usual I figured Janet Reno Jr....errr Janet Napolitano wouldn't give a straight answer to anything!
Oh and I will not add comments about Ozbama using funds...I am pro-life so I am sure you can guess what my reactions are to that subject