December 30, 2009

A friend sent me a link to a blog post, regarding Janet Napolitano. If I’m reading this properly, then she should resign. The blog entry is quite long, but the following 11exchange ices it for me.

. . .
Crowley [CNN State of the Union interviewer] presses on, saying “Well, it seems as though the reason this plane did not explode is that the explosion failed and then you had some quick passengers who jumped on him when he lit this fire. So let me ask you about how he could have gotten on the plane, with this substance, the PETN. I mean, we get on, you can’t have more than 3.4 ounces of toothpaste and you can’t have more than 3.4 ounces of anything in a little bag, and so I think people are thinking, so how does he get on with an explosive? How does that get past security?” Here’s Napolitano again:

Well, we are asking the same questions, looking at what happened in Amsterdam as he transferred flights to a flight that was U.S.-bound. We have already been working with the airport and airline authorities there to see what kind of screening, screening equipment was used. We have no suggestion that he was improperly screened, but we want to go through and see. We’re always …
Blogger: No suggestion! Ridiculous!

Me: If there is no suggestion that the man was improperly screened does that just mean that we’re not looking for this sort of threat? Or does this woman not realize that by definition a man getting through security with explosives indicates he was not properly screened?

Crowley interrupts:

CROWLEY: I’m sorry, but if he was not improperly screened or properly screened, and yet you want Americans to feel safe on the planes, and so if it was properly screened and he got on anyway with that, it doesn’t feel that safe.

NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, it should.
Blogger; Wha?????!!!!

[N:] This was one individual literally of thousands that fly and thousands of flights every year.
Blogger: Oh, thanks. I just read that out loud, and my son Chris said: “That’s like saying you shouldn’t be worried about terrorism at all, because even if you were flying on 9/11, the likelihood of you being on one of the actual flights that were hijacked is very low.”

Me: The Blogger’s son’s extension of Napolitano’s logic seems flawless to me and reminiscent of Clinton’s statement that he often didn’t lie as somehow exculpatory. What is it with these people?


A new low!

December 22, 2009

Can’t say I’m surprised, given Congressional payoffs to various states (Nebraska, Louisiana, Connecticut?), 1:00 AM votes, and more taxes on the horizon (and all).

Will had a nice recent column this weekend with a criticism of events in Copenhagen as a bonus:

I like this line the most:

“And Reid had two advantages — the spending, taxing and borrowing powers of the federal leviathan, and an almost gorgeous absence of scruples or principles. Principles are general rules, such as: Nebraska should not be exempt from burdens imposed on the other 49 states.”


. . . or whether He has a sense of humor. . .


Webb Chimes in

December 7, 2009


A Cynic’s Point-of-View

December 3, 2009

on what it’s all about. . .