rssThe Case Against Janet Napolitano
Friday, April 24, 2009 at 9:12 am
- 6 Comments
For some reason MSNBC just had Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) on to talk about the fringe House Republican demands for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s resignation. Burgess didn’t make much of a case. The problem with Napolitano, said Burgess, is that the Obama administration “prides itself on its messaging” and that Napolitano is bad at that, and that he has gotten letters from “good citizens who are genuinely hurt” by the media coverage of the DHS “rightwing extremism” assessment.
“It really does defy gravity in so many ways,” said Burgess, nonsensically.
There’s a real problem with news judgment and accountability here. A month ago, all you needed to do to get on TV was be a House or Senate Republican demanding the resignation of Treasury Sec. Tim Geithner. Then the stock market bounced back and those people, like Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), stopped talking. There’s really no question about Napolitano’s fitness to serve outside of the House GOP and some Canadian columnists, and yet the demands of Michael Burgess are covered as serious news that will have some kind of impact.
Follow David Weigel on Twitter
6 Comments
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 9:23 am
I read a better analysis of Napolitano's report here:
She essentially profiled US veterans. She loses confidence.
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 10:30 am
David,
I understand your position on the DHS report, but you can't deny that some regular people were genuinely pissed off about this thing. A lot of these people aren't shameless Rovian agents spouting talking points, just regular military folk with blogs (see here, here, and here). Put yourself in our shoes for a second, and you'll realize that veterans are a shrinking minority in this country, the crazed vet meme on the cultural consciousness still lingers from Vietnam, and we have to come out swinging. I agree that there's some politically opportunistic potshots here for congress members, but there's no need to dismiss criticism of the report as sheer wingnut quackery (which seems to be your beat lately).
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 10:51 am
Janet Napolitano should go. One of the few people who has managed to unite Canadians from across the political spectrum, against a US official. And Canadians are pretty tolerant and easy going: you have to be a major idiot this reaction out of them. US – Canadian trade will rise with her exit, benefiting both countries and more than paying for her severance.
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 4:23 pm
I read a better analysis of Napolitano's report here:
She essentially profiled US veterans. She loses confidence.
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 5:30 pm
David,
I understand your position on the DHS report, but you can't deny that some regular people were genuinely pissed off about this thing. A lot of these people aren't shameless Rovian agents spouting talking points, just regular military folk with blogs (see here, here, and here). Put yourself in our shoes for a second, and you'll realize that veterans are a shrinking minority in this country, the crazed vet meme on the cultural consciousness still lingers from Vietnam, and we have to come out swinging. I agree that there's some politically opportunistic potshots here for congress members, but there's no need to dismiss criticism of the report as sheer wingnut quackery (which seems to be your beat lately).
Comment posted April 24, 2009 @ 5:51 pm
Janet Napolitano should go. One of the few people who has managed to unite Canadians from across the political spectrum, against a US official. And Canadians are pretty tolerant and easy going: you have to be a major idiot this reaction out of them. US – Canadian trade will rise with her exit, benefiting both countries and more than paying for her severance.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
