She was the governor of Arizona before President Obama pressed her into service as the head of Homeland Security. Last week Senator McCain asked his ex-governor about her opposition to the Arizona law-enforcement bill, SB1070. Had she read it? Well, no, not actually, but it was a bad idea. What about it exactly was a bad idea since she didn't actually know what was in it and since most Americans favored it? Well, it's just a bad idea.
For as long as I lived in Arizona with Napolitano as governor, the news reported repeatedly her disgust with the federal government for not enforcing immigration law. She complained continuously that they needed to act. So last week she informed us that ICE is not required to process people arrested by local police. What? Apparently she was only upset about the federal government not doing their job as long as she wasn't part of it. I mean, one could make the argument that she was only complaining about the federal government while she was in Arizona as a ploy to avoid having to do anything about it herself. One could make that argument. It doesn't bode well for her that she seems to have carried the "do nothing about it -- it's someone else's problem" attitude with her.
The good news, of course, is that Janet Napolitano is on the job. As head of Homeland Security, she is now stepping up to the plate. She has assured us that she will be keeping the pressure on BP until this invasion of oil has been turned back. Not to worry, America. Janet Napolitano is on the job!
Or, to put it another way, it's government as usual ...
5 comments:
Stan,
I'm surprised at you. The answer to your post is right in front of you. When she was governer of Arizona chiding the administration about lack of effort securing the borders was true for her at that time. Now she is head of homeland security and ICE not being required to enforce or control immigration is true for her.
The truth is relative, Stan. There is no problem here. Not doing enough was true then, doing nothing is true now. It's as simple as that. (Tongue now beginning to puncture cheek from excessive internal pressure).
Yeah ... like I said ... "government as usual". Hey, you might want to get that cheek looked at.
When Holder said he hadn't read the bill I believed he hadn't. But given that it is a short read, and for law an amazingly incredibly short read, and given that no one in the administration that I know of will admit to having read it, I smell raw and uncooked-and unrefrigerated-politics.
Yeah, I did that earlier because it really got to bothering me; but it was the weirdest thing, the doctor looked at it and told me that when she was a resident they petitioned for more nurses to treat cases just like this, but now that she was licensed as a practitioner they no longer served cases of cheek impalement.
I informed her that it really hurt to which she responded, "that might be true for you, but it's not true for me. Have a nice day." This relative truth thing sounds pretty good, but it can really be a hassle when you're on the working end.
Dan: "I smell raw and uncooked-and unrefrigerated-politics."
Yep! "Government as usual." (Although I think I like your turn of the phrase better.) Isn't it odd that we have a government who can't be bothered to read the bills they pass or protest?
Jeremy: "This relative truth thing sounds pretty good"
Yeah, saved my life once. I stepped out into the street and some guy yelled, "Look out for that bus!!" Well, the bus was true for him, but since I didn't believe in it, it never hit me at all! Isn't relative truth grand? Oh, man, now I need to see a doctor about my cheek ...
Post a Comment