…that the bad guys really are winning.

The Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, which posted hundreds of civilian volunteers along the U.S.-Mexico border over the past five years, has disbanded, citing what it called “rising aggression” in the country and decisions by lawmakers in Washington who have “pushed amnesty down our throats.”

“The mental attitude of many Americans is turning meaner … and we are concerned that this could cause problems,” MCDC President Carmen Mercer told The Washington Times on Monday. “You see aggression surfacing even at the tea party marches. We just did not want to deal with the liability anymore.

“We have to protect the ranchers as well as the volunteers,” Ms. Mercer said, noting the killing on Saturday of Robert Krentz, a prominent Douglas, Ariz., rancher who was shot along with his dog on his ranch by a suspected illegal immigrant who fled into Mexico and remains a fugitive.

Nothing like a government run by people who apparently believe that their mission in life is to destroy the country they “govern” by any means they deem necessary.

“From the surveillance videos we have gathered in the field over the past six months, it is more than evident the violators of our borders seem to have been given carte blanche permission to willfully violate our public safety,” the message said.

She also said that the MCDC volunteers would be returning to the border to tell Mr. Obama that his immigration policy is wrong and to send a message to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano that she is “an unqualified buffoon who risks the lives of American citizens every day she is the head of DHS.”

Emphasis mine.

…an unqualified buffoon who risks the lives of American citizens every day she is the head of DHS. Spot on!

Read on.

…such as policies guaranteed to disintegrate any vestiges of America as it was prior to his inauguration, rendering our very Constitution a vague memory, doing unto whatever is left of our economy as the “fat broad” in the B.C. cartoon does unto the snake, diluting our Homeland Security capabilities and embracing any policy he can, such as Cap & Trade and amnesty for illegal aliens, that will create ever-increasing unemployment for Americans (the more unemployed, the more will be dependent upon the government for their daily bread), Mr. Big Shot Obama, the self styled king of America and indeed of the world, takes his mantra of change to limits that boggle the mind, even to treating the leaders of nations we have long enjoyed friendly relations with, in fact long-time allies, as though they were of less than secondary importance.

Good one, Michael Barone!

Barack Obama’s decision to postpone his trip to Indonesia and Australia — to a democracy with the world’s largest Muslim population and to the only nation that has fought alongside us in all the wars of the last century — is of a piece with his foreign policy generally: Attack America’s friends and kowtow to our enemies.

Examples run from Britain to Israel. Early in his administration, Obama returned a bust of Churchill that the British government had loaned the White House after 9/11. Then Obama gave Prime Minister Gordon Brown a set of DVDs that don’t work on British machines and that Brown, who has impaired vision, would have trouble watching anyway.

More recently Obama summoned Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House, permitted no photographs, laid down nonnegotiable demands and went off to dinner.

Yeah, that Barack Hussein Osama Obama can sure pontificate. He is such a big shot, our community organizer king who uses his authority, both real and perceived (see U.S. Constitution), to undermine what it took our great nation two centuries to achieve.

Some may attribute these slights to biases inherited from the men who supplied the titles of Obama’s two books. Perhaps like Barack Obama Sr., he regards the British as evil colonialists. Or perhaps like his preacher for 20 years, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, he regards Israel as an evil oppressor.

But the list of American friends Obama has slighted is long. It includes Poland and the Czech Republic (anti-missile program canceled), Honduras (backing the constitutionally ousted president), Georgia (no support against Russia) and Colombia and South Korea (no action on pending free-trade agreements).

In the meantime Obama sends yearly greetings to (as he puts it) the Islamic Republic of Iran, exchanges friendly greetings with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, caves to Russian demands on arms control and sends a new ambassador to Syria.

On the topic of Obama’s treatment of Israel, my favorite liberal, former New York mayor Ed Koch, has a few things to say.

President Obama’s abysmal attitude toward the State of Israel and his humiliating treatment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is shocking. In the Washington Post on March 24th, Jackson Diehl wrote, “Obama has added more poison to a U.S.-Israeli relationship that already was at its lowest point in two decades.
Tuesday night the White House refused to allow non-official photographers record the president’s meeting with Netanyahu; no statement was issued afterward. Netanyahu is being treated as if he were an unsavory Third World dictator, needed for strategic reasons but conspicuously held at arms length. That is something the rest of the world will be quick to notice and respond to.”

Treating our best (and actually only real) friend in the Middle East like a red headed step-child, humiliating Netanyahu with malice aforethought.

President Obama’s abysmal attitude toward the State of Israel and his humiliating treatment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is shocking. In the Washington Post on March 24th, Jackson Diehl wrote, “Obama has added more poison to a U.S.-Israeli relationship that already was at its lowest point in two decades.

Tuesday night the White House refused to allow non-official photographers record the president’s meeting with Netanyahu; no statement was issued afterward. Netanyahu is being treated as if he were an unsavory Third World dictator, needed for strategic reasons but conspicuously held at arms length. That is something the rest of the world will be quick to notice and respond to.”

Especially those Muslim countries who have long chaffed at the bit to wipe Israel off the map, who saw the United States the major obstacle to that ambition.

Supporters of Israel who gave their votes to candidate Obama — 78 percent of the Jewish community did — believing he would provide the same support as John McCain, this is the time to speak out and tell the President of your disappointment in him. It seems to me particularly appropriate to do so on the eve of the Passover. It is one thing to disagree with certain policies of the Israeli government. It is quite another to treat Israel and its prime minister as pariahs, which only emboldens Israel’s enemies and makes the prospect of peace even more remote.

Mr. Koch’s entire column can be read here.

What a disgrace it is, and a humiliation to me, as an American, that our countrymen could have elected someone like Obama to the highest office in the land!

Depends upon what you mean by “care”, here.

Wolf here.

I ran across an interesting article by retired constitutional attorney Michael Connelly, who writes:

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

I hope all the mulletheads who voted in both the lefty congressional majority and Obama, the traitor and enemy of the state in POTUS’ clothing, read and enjoy reading herein what they are responsible for.

The entire article is here.

…isn’t this lovely.

A top FBI official warned today that many cyber-adversaries of the U.S. have the ability to access virtually any computer system, posing a risk that’s so great it could “challenge our country’s very existence.”

Why not?

We’ve already been transformed into an impending socialist shithole by the marxist toilet cakes voted into government leadership by a whole bunch of people who either didn’t take the time to learn how our political system works, nor to study the pedigrees and voting histories of their candidates before voting for them — the only exceptions being those, of course, who despise the entire concept of America as our founders intended it to be. You know, this free, successful, two century old nation that has, as the leftist scum have gradually succeeded more and more in their efforts to destroy it, begun to enter what might well be its last days.

But I digress.

For the last three decades or so, our government and our vital infrastructure have become gradually more computerized, as have private concerns that possess the personal information of millions. Our defense, security and financial organs can now all be compromized and breached electronically.

Steven Chabinsky, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, delivered a strong and urgent warning about the threat of cyberattacks during a presentation Tuesday at the FOSE government IT trade show here. Chabinsky also offered recommendations for countering the threat, including rules that would restrict the ability of some systems to interoperate with more vulnerable ones.

“The cyber threat can be an existential threat — meaning it can challenge our country’s very existence, or significantly alter our nation’s potential,” Chabinsky said. “How we rise to the cybersecurity challenge will determine whether our nation’s best days are ahead of us or behind us.

Thrilling.

“I am convinced that given enough time, motivation and funding, a determined adversary will always — always — be able to penetrate a targeted system,” he added.

Which is about the same thing any competent security professional will tell you about pretty much any protective issue, but… it kinda’ sorta’ sucks to see computer and communications technology, billed to make everything so much easier, faster and more efficient, also render us vulnerable in an extreme, perhaps making for a majorly uneven trade-off.

Chabinsky said that terrorism is the FBI’s top cyber priority, followed by its investigation of foreign countries “that seek every day to steal our state secrets and private sector intellectual property, sometimes for the purpose of undermining the stability of our government by weakening our economic or military supremacy.”

Both terrorists and foreign countries are turning to cyber-technologies “to exploit our weaknesses,” Chabinsky said.

Isn’t that a cheerful thought!

…what if there was a revolution? I mean, what if Americans flatly refused to acknowledge laws stemming from the ObamaCare debacle and started cleaning their weapons, so to speak?

How could anyone call it treason, or otherwise condemn it, when all that these rebels would be doing was emulating our nation’s founders?

The American Revolution was fought, after all, to gain freedom from a kind of tyranny that, in truth, was not much different from what we are experiencing now under the Obama regime — yes, I said regime, not administration.

We, The People, are being ruled by officials elected, according to the Constitution, to govern according to the will of the people, not the other way around.

Yet here we are, having come full circle, so in the spirit of America, it seems to me that if there were a revolution, it should ideally be a short one — it would be an act of treason, in my opinion, for any U.S. serviceman, Law Enforcement officer or other American citizen in a position to do so to take up arms against the people if we got it into our heads to do exactly as our founding fathers did in the 1770s, taking our country away from those who would tax us into oblivion and dictate to us.

These politicians have violated the Constitution which is, given their oaths of office and the nature of their jobs, a federal crime in itself.

So, the Obama Administration and the Democrats in the House and Senate, those who voted for the “HealthCare” bill, are technically all felons, no matter what they and their sycophantic arse creepers of the lefty media say about it.

Doesn’t that make the President and his congressional majority a “renegade” criminal government, anyway, and certainly even less valid than that of the late King George?

…of the ObamaCare vote, which at this point seems to be one of the few things that stand between what America was founded and then succeeded as, and its tragic transformation into a socialist state, I ran across this article by Robert F. Turner.

As a scholar who has studied and revered the Constitution for more than four decades, watching the behavior of our Congress in recent years has been all too often a depressing experience. One wonders whether some legislators have even bothered to read the Constitution, or if the problem is they simply don’t care about the oath they took to support it.

While doing research for my doctoral dissertation many years ago, I had the pleasure of reading extensively from the Annals of Congress, notes from Cabinet meetings of early presidents, and a great deal of other historical material while seeking to understand portions of our Constitution. In the process, I found myself marveling both at how remarkably well-read the Framers were - encountering frequent references to the writings of Locke, Montesquieu, Blackstone, Vattel, and other prominent 17th- and 18th-century thinkers - and also at the high principles repeatedly expressed by members of both political branches of our government when novel issues surfaced.

The pedigree of people we elect to Congress has evidently changed.

Sadly, the latest parliamentary shenanigans in the House, to pretend that the Senate health care bill has already been signed into law so that the (non)law can be “amended” immediately to secure enough House votes for passage, is but par for the course. It is no better than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s attempt to use Congress’ rule-making power to deny future Congresses their constitutional right to repeal or amend a previous law by majority vote. Section 3403 of the bill passed by the Senate provides: “It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.” The Constitution can’t be changed by statute, and it certainly can’t be changed by amending House or Senate rules.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution sets forth detailed requirements for the making or amending of a law, specifying that “Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary” shall be presented to and approved by the president (or enacted over his veto) - so as to prevent unprincipled legislators from bypassing the procedural necessities by the kind of semantical chicanery currently being contemplated by House leaders.

Mr. Turner finishes the column in spot-on fashion.

At some point, if we are to have any chance of preserving our magnificent Constitution, the American people are going to have to start saying “no” and holding legislators accountable at the polls for violating their oaths of office. The senators and representatives we elect were intended to be servants of the people, not a special class of aristocrats empowered to rule our lives while remaining aloof from the very laws they enact. Writing in Federalist No. 57, James Madison assured the American people that one of the checks against legislative abuse of power was that Congress could “make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society.” One can only wonder what the Obamacare vote would be if it applied to members of Congress and their staffs.

After nearly four decades of watching our elected representatives flout their solemn duty and evade the burdens they impose upon the rest of us, I have finally concluded that the time has come to start voting against incumbents who behave as if they are the rulers rather than the servants of the American people.

Me, I’d vote ‘em all out, Left, Right and Independent and elect all Senators and Representatives from among candidates who have never held political office before and impose term limits — one single 6 year term, thus eliminating any ambitions for reelection, leaving them focused solely on their duties as representatives of the will of their constituents, the folks who put them in office.

We haven’t posted for a month, but between Wolf’s current activities, Chuck’s maritime indulgences and my own incumbent issues, well… My apologies, and hopes that these intervals between posts are able to return to pre 2008 levels really soon…

…The course on the front burner today is obviously the ObamaCare debacle, which is summed up pretty well by Wesley Pruden.

Being me, I’ve gotten into debates of sorts with a number of people who have been either undecided (not unusual, considering that the very template upon which the entire government-run healthcare equation is based is a virtual labyrinth of contradictions and blank checks interwoven with the seeds of stealth legislation, promoted as “good for us” by a media which is as ignorant about the technical details of the whole thing as most of us) or sort of decided.

My way of talking about the issue is, I think, pretty simple.

The vast majority of Americans would rather have small government and keep more of their hard earned money. They want quality medical care and the choice of where to obtain it.

Passing ObamaCare, or any federally managed health care legislation, would be the equivalent of uploading software into your computer that contains a few dangerous and irradicable viruses.

It would install a permanent, ever-growing chain of bureaucracies inside our government, scoring an instant and lasting victory for the tax-and-spend socialists on the far left, essentially transforming the United States of America into a socialist country.

Obama, Pelosi and their ilk are willing to sacrifice the careers of a score or more Democrats on the Hill, decimate their own party for the next decade or so, just to force this single bill on us because it will, if enacted, provide that “change” Barack Hussein promised during his campaigning days — a 180 degree change, as a matter of fact, one that would make America as we know it disappear for all time.

I’m serious, folks. Even a “far right” majority would be stuck with the system — unable to reverse the legislation, they’d be tasked with maintaining it, feeding it, expanding it to keep it alive while it sucked the blood from the U.S. taxpayer and destroyed a successful private sector run healthcare industry that only a marxist with a political agenda could call “a failure” with a straight face.

The only response by Republicans in Congress to government run healthcare should be NO! NO NEGOTIATION, NO CONSIDERATION, NO GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTHCARE, PERIOD! MOVE ON!

But no, the GOP still address the issue as a valid topic of discussion, which it is not — remember, we are governed by The Constitution, and therefore government run healthcare is not, legally, even supposed to be on the board.

Now, we even find, the lefties are seeking ways to get around the rules in order to get their agenda passed.

If the GOP allows this legislation to pass in any way, shape or form, they will have failed not only every conservative in the nation, but every American.

Chuck here.

First, I’ve gotta’ say, I have got to get me one of these!

Second, I’m certainly pleased to be on the west coast at this time, because being on the east coast or in the deep south, the latter a place where one has rarely seen any snow in the past, means falling victim to an overdose of global warming.

ATLANTA (AP) — The Big Chill turned into the Big Dig on Saturday for many Southerners — the Americans who least expect to open their doors to see up to a foot of snow.

Some stayed indoors a day after the storm moved out to sea, while others turned icy streets and snow-covered parks into sledding playgrounds. Many who tried to dig out found shovels in short supply at home improvement stores.

Tens of thousands of people lost power in Texas and South Carolina, and thousands of others were left stranded by airline flight cancellations.

The National Weather Service says Dallas got 12.5 inches of snow, while Harkers Island, N.C., got 8.8 inches, Belleville, Ala., got 6 inches, Foreman, Ark., got 4 inches and Atlanta got more than 3 inches.

OOOOOH, dogie!

Third and finally, I was having an interesting telephone conversation with Seth earlier, and we touched on the decision by Evan Baye not to seek reelection.

Like all the other Democrats who have made the same decision, he of course cited some logical reasons for the move. Congress has become too partison, to the point of gridlock, it’s time to serve the people in a more private capacity, etc. Some may say they merely wish to spend more quality time with their families, yaddayaddayadda…

The truth, of course, which they will never admit, is simple:

Between Osama Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and a few others, who attempted to bury our republic to the point of smothering it in far left agendas despite the will of the bulk of the American people, the Democrats have destroyed their own party. A Republican wave is on its way in, a Republican majority is on its way back. November, 2010 and November, 2012 will see to that.

No, all these Democrats are merely rats deserting a sinking ship. Period.

Having said that, both Seth and myself have misgivings about the aftermath.

That is, did the Republicans learn anything from their loss of the majority back in election 2006?

Neither of us considers the people on the right side of the aisle’s current tooth and nail opposition to the left wing legislation we’ve been asaulted with over the last year or so as any indication that any lesson was learned. All they’re doing now is fighting for their political lives.

What remains to be seen is what they’ll do after they have their majority back. Will it be back to business as usual, liberal-like pork spending while ignoring the conservative base, or have they truly learned, and will they make a return journey to the realm of small government, prudent spending of the taxpayers’ hard earned dollars and support of the principles that made America great to begin with? Will they renew the respect by our government for the Constitution, and embrace the will of not only their conservative electorate, but of our nation’s founding fathers?

We, as they say, shall see.

…but first:

Who dat, who dat, who dat say dey gonna beat dem Saints?

I was reading this morning’s Santa Monica Daily Press, and came across an OpEd by John W. Whitehead, a Constitutional lawyer, and found myself in total agreement with a commentary he titled Are You Brainwashed?

Precisely because Americans are easily distracted — because, as study after study shows, they are clueless about their rights — and because the nation’s schools have ceased teaching the fundamentals of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights — the American governmental scheme is sliding ever closer toward authoritarianism. This is taking place with little more than a whimper from an increasingly compliant populace that, intentionally or not, has allowed itself to be brainwashed into trusting their politicians.

If the people have little or no knowledge of the basics of government and their rights, those who wield governmental power inevitably wield it excessively. After all, a citizenry can only hold its government accountable if it knows when the government oversteps its bounds.

{The emphasis in the first paragraph is mine.}

I would recommend reading the entire piece, it’s right on the money.

…have e-mailed me, wondering why I haven’t yet commented herein on the Errol Southers kerfuffle. After all, they reasonably reason, I do tend to pursue topics that concern the government’s affairs regarding our mutual area of endeavor, especially those of the Transportation Security Administration, with what one of my distinguished colleagues describes as “a tenacity that would make a pit bull envious”.

So here goes…

Truth to tell, I was first pleased, then disappointed by and at the same time, cynic that I’ve become where the neo-Democrats are concerned, unsurprised by the entire affair, from Southers’ nomination to his stepping down as nominee.

When he was first put forward by the Administration, I thought, Alright (High Five!!!!), the White House is finally getting it! Unlike in their appointment of the supremely unqualified and profoundly incompetent Janet Napolitano as National Security Advisor, they’re actually looking to appoint a qualified security professional to head up a security agency, the TSA no less.

Assistant Chief of the Los Angeles World Airports Police Department’s Office of Homeland Security and Intelligence, head of USC’s Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events. Well thought of in the security field, a man who has devoted his career to security and counter-terrorism and who is an expert on both counts.

The man was also appointed by the Governator as Deputy Director for Critical Infrastructure Protection of the California Office of Homeland Security.

Since he earned his Master’s Degree in Public Administration at Brown University and later served on the Santa Monica Police Department and the faculty of the Rio Hondo Police Academy, every aspect of his career has been dedicated to the protection of the public and combating terrorism, and eminently qualify him to head up TSA. While with the FBI, he worked in counter-espionage and counter-terrorism, and was a shooter to boot: he was a member of their elite SWAT team.

Southers’ vision for the future of the agency, in the training aspects, the adoption of Israeli methods for identifying potential threats and enhanced utilization of existing technologies, was exactly what is needed.

I was truly impressed. The Obama Administration was actually going to put the right person in the right position, a real security expert as Director of the TSA!

Who’d a’ thunk it!?

And then…

…along came the broadsides, first the revelation that Southers was entertaining the idea of unionizing (collective bargaining, anyone?) the TSA.

“What!!!?” I exclaimed.

I’m sorry, but I in no way believe in unionizing any part of critical infrastructure, and as a protection professional, there’s no way I can condone the unionizing of any security agency.

Why?

“We’re going on strike, screw the lives or itineraries of the public, we want more lucre!”

“I don’t care if you’re short handed, my union contract says that I don’t have to work any overtime if I don’t want to!”

“My union contract says that I get two twenty minute coffee breaks every day, and if I take ten minutes to guard that door, I’ll only get half my break! I’m not guarding that door, I don’t care if you can’t get anyone else to do it!”

“I’m real sorry you’re short-handed, boss, but I’m taking a personal day. I promised to take my kid to the zoo.”

“You can’t fire me, buddy, I’m union all the way!”

Sorry, but those entrusted with the safety and security of others, by nature of the responsibilities involved, must be prepared to make sacrifices unasked of those in other lines of endeavor; sacrifices of personal time, personal convenience and, as often as not, personal fortune. If you’re not prepared to assume these sacrifices and such other elements as taking personal risks to protect the lives and the safety of others, you do not belong in the security business.

Unionizing TSA would drive a wedge between the objectives of such an agency and the efficiency necessary to realize them.

Based on the above, Senator Jim DeMint was correct in putting a hold on Southers’ confirmation. Given the virtual ownership of the Democrat majority by the unions, a suggestion by a head of the TSA that his or her agency be unionized would be all it took to see greedy, corrupt union czars authorized to “bargain collectively” with the very lives of the traveling public.

Civilian or not, a security department or agency has to be run more like a military venue than a Teamster’s operation. Imagine all of the firemen, EMTs and surgeons simply walking off the job in the middle of a natural disaster because they have a gripe with the institutions that employ them!

Unions have proven, time and again, to exploit the vulnerabilities of members’ employers by threatening strikes or actually going on strike when the employers have been at their most vulnerable.

Collective bargaining in the public sector is one of the factors behind governmental budget shortfalls and tax increases, and strikes, often tragically, can inconvenience and even endanger the majority of taxpayers to accommodate the greed of a very few. Again, it has no place in the safety and security sectors.

Then, there was the back issue of Errol Southers using the information access of his position to pursue inquiries into his ex’s new flame. To me, the only major problem with that is that he was less than truthful when asked about it.

Look, I’ll level with you here… Only a sanctimonious asshole can say with certainty that in a moment of desperation, he or she would definitely not use information access to which he or she is privileged (the exception being if it jeopardized national security or the integrity of the agency, firm or department in which he or she worked) to obtain information he or she felt he/she absolutely needed to possess.

Southers used such access to gain information relevant to a personal matter.

On the same token, any public servant has, without hesitation, got to tell the truth when under oath or otherwise asked about anything pertaining to his/her actions or those of others in the course of any official inquiry. That in itself is part and parcel in the scheme of things. When you serve the American people, you simply do not lie to them about such things — the people own the decision as to whether or not you are to be trusted in a given position and are entitled to all the facts that pertain to your character and to the details of any actions you have taken in the course of your service that are not officially classified as secret.

Errol Southers lied as a first instinct; There’s no way that anyone with even the most minimal intelligence could possibly believe otherwise. He “didn’t remember” that he himself had used his access to information directly, but rather had others seek private information on his behalf. If he had told the truth in the first place instead of having a “memory lapse”, I could easily find the wherewithal to overlook the underlying incident in light of his dedication and qualifications.

DeMint’s and others’ concerns were reality based, yet the left-wing (mainstream) media and the Democrats cried that blocking Southers’ appointment was based on “politics”.

Southers himself, on stepping down, said that he is “Nonpolitical” and was withdrawing because he believed his nomination and the subsequent ado presented a political lightning rod. On that score, I completely believe he is sincere.

It’s right that Southers did not end up in the job, even though, in my opinion, he was qualified from a professional standpoint.

Yeah, I did mention cynicism, that in my not being at all surprised that Erroll Southers had some “back trail”, as it were, if for no other reason than that he was selected by the Obama Administration: Barack Hussein did, after all, unabashedly bring the corrupt Chicago political machine with him to Washington, and in keeping with everything else he represents, he is forever hard put to produce key position nominees who do not have skeletons, problems with embracing veracity, or at least negative agendas of some kind.

In summation, politics has absolutely nothing to do with my opinion here. Had it not been for the lie and his perception that collective bargaining might have a place in a security organization, I would be, at the least, overjoyed to have a person with Erroll Southers’ knowledge, vision and experience at the helm of the Transportation Security Administration.