Canadians Question Napolitano's Qualifications

[SF-TX]

Yes, how did she get her job?

The border for dummies

National Post

Can someone please tell us how U. S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got her job? She appears to be about as knowledgeable about border issues as a late-night radio call-in yahoo.

In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.

All the 9/11 terrorists, of course, entered the United States directly from overseas. The notion that some arrived via Canada is a myth that briefly popped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and was then quickly debunked.

Informed of her error, Ms. Napolitano blustered: "I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."

Just what does that mean, exactly?

Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Napolitano equated Canada's border to Mexico's, suggesting they deserved the same treatment. Mexico is engulfed in a drug war that left more than 5,000 dead last year, and which is spawning a spillover kidnapping epidemic in Arizona. So many Mexicans enter the United States illegally that a multi-billion-dollar barrier has been built from Texas to California to keep them out.

In Canada, on the other hand, the main problem is congestion resulting from cross-border trade. Not quite the same thing, is it?

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1520295

[CoLawman]

This is beginning to sound like a broken record! Liberal speak is so......so......predictable. Everytime they get caught in an uncomfortable (or idiotic or illegal) position!

IRS: You failed to pay your taxes from years past.

Liberal: I can't speak to that, I can talk about the future.

[The Reaper]

This is beginning to sound like a broken record! Liberal speak is so......so......predictable. Everytime they get caught in an uncomfortable (or idiotic or illegal) position!

IRS: You failed to pay your taxes from years past.

Liberal: I can't speak to that, I can talk about the future.


Doesn't seem to affect them when they are blaming everything on the previous administration.:rolleyes:

TR

[rubberneck]

I can't help but get the feeling that the current administration is in for a very hard landing sometime in the next 6 to 12 months. The number of gross missteps is fairly staggering even for a new administration. So far the media has covered the President's back but I get a sense that the anger is growing and it isn't just on the right. There are plenty of people that voted for him that are just beginning to realize that the Obama who campaigned against John McCain bares no resemblance to Obama the President. As long as things go well in the economy or national security they might be willing to suffer of it but if we don't do well on either front he is due some serious backlash.

[The Reaper]

I can't help but get the feeling that the current administration is in for a very hard landing sometime in the next 6 to 12 months. The number of gross missteps is fairly staggering even for a new administration. So far the media has covered the President's back but I get a sense that the anger is growing and it isn't just on the right. There are plenty of people that voted for him that are just beginning to realize that the Obama who campaigned against John McCain bares no resemblance to Obama the President. As long as things go well in the economy or national security they might be willing to suffer of it but if we don't do well on either front he is due some serious backlash.


I thought so as well, but his poll numbers are holding well so far.

OTOH, the majority of pollsters cited over at realclearpolitics.com appear to be taking opinions from anyone who identifies themselves as "Americans", a few are using "Registered Voters", but the Rasmussen poll is the only one I have seen which consistently uses only "Likely Voters".

Not sure how significant this trend is, but while the rest of the Obama sycophants like the NYT, CBS, Gallup, etc. are calling a 30 point plus spread favoring Obama, the Rasmussen gap is down to single digits, and his negatives have gotten pretty high.

TR

[rubberneck]

I thought so as well, but his poll numbers are holding well so far.

OTOH, the majority of pollsters cited over at realclearpolitics.com appear to be taking opinions from anyone who identifies themselves as "Americans", a few are using "Registered Voters", but the Rasmussen poll is the only one I have seen which consistently uses only "Likely Voters".

Not sure how significant this trend is, but while the rest of the Obama sycophants like the NYT, CBS, Gallup, etc. are calling a 30 point plus spread favoring Obama, the Rasmussen gap is down to single digits, and his negatives have gotten pretty high.

TR

I heard a pundit say the other day that job approval rating historically is a lagging indicator. The key indicator is the right track wrong direction numbers. If you look at those numbers right now he isn't doing nearly as well with the recent trend going against him, especially in the surveys done by the non partisan (Pew, Rassmussen, Gallup, etc) pollsters. While he still remains personally very popular that will change quickly if the people who view him favorably begin to believe that we aren't headed in the right direction.