IMO, Janet is "good" on immigration (a big part of the gig) and civil liberties, as well as other issues of interest (she was, for instance, Anita Hill's attorney) and I like the idea of her being involved with those things.
she was anita hills atty? i didnt know that!
Yup. She and Joe Biden go way back.
id forgotten that yours is a border state and yes, i think that does play into the experience aspect of this. immigration and border control i suspect will become big issues once everything related to the economy dies down again.
Bill Clinton appointed her a US attorney for Arizona and her work in that position included investigation into the OK City bombings. She then became our state's attorney general before becoming governor.
yep, ok this feels like relevant experience too. when i first heard her name i was thinking that her experience as a gov prolly didnt qualify her for all that might happen, if for example, this country was hit by terrorists again but i think knowing what the border access problems are and knowing how to investigate an act like that makes for the right kind of experience. one thing i did like about the way that the OKC bombing was handled is that it was handled as a law enforcement issue not as a war issue. true the perps were not outside stateless terrorists but stateless is the key word there for me and as bad as what happened on 911 was i still see it as a law enforcement issue.
she doesn't patronize people. I mean ... under her administration, we're not going to be told to run out and buy duct tape to protect ourselves from weapons of mass destruction, you know? And I really believe that had Katrina happened under her watch, there would have been a wholly different outcome to that fiasco.
are fema and dhs agencies that work together or does fema fall under the DHS umbrella? it makes sense that it should, really.
FEMA is under the DHS, as is immigration, the coast guard, the secret service, customs, and a lot of other organizations.
i was reading an article the other day about people in tx who are still displaced after hurricane ike. they are still living in parks and shelters if they are lucky and waiting for temporary living arrangements. that situation really hasnt had much publicity. despite katrina, the federal response to weather extremes seems to be lacking still. that of course leads to the whole what role should the federal govt have in that kind of situation. katrina was the most extreme example but i have to wonder why texas hasnt stepped in to help these people either? at this point i dont think its about being overwhelmed by numbers it really seems like they are forgotten.
DHS is a huge department -- whomever heads it will largely set a tone as much as anything, and I trust her to do that well, an in a prudent manner. No, I don't want to lose her as governor, but when I think of the other people who might be appointed head of DHS... I think she's a good selection.
how will her replacement be handled? will there be a special election or will there be someone appointed? anyone running ahead of the pack at this point?
It would automatically become next-in-command Secretary of State Jan Brewer, a republican which would give us a (state) republican controlled legislature and governor, and not bode well for Arizonans. We can pretty much say goodbye to environmental stuff Janet oversaw, for two years, and more, if she's retained in the 2010 election (which is how democrats got in the governor's office in '88, with our first woman governor, Rose Mofford, when Ev Mecham was impeached, but then in 91, we went right back to republican governors, with Fife Symington, who was a part of the Keating Five, and like McCain, escaped without punitive action. He was then re-elected, and resigned when indicted for extortion, and convicted of bank fraud, since we have laws against convicted felons holding office.) Janet pushed money into education and health insurance here, and it was she who vetoed an anti-abortion bill. I'm trying to remember what the specific issue was, and can't, but I think I posted something here about "why we don't want Jan Brewer as governor" -- might have had to do with our (recently passed) anti GLBT marriage bill.
how will her replacement be handled? will there be a special election or will there be someone appointed? anyone running ahead of the pack at this point?
wouldnt the lieutenant governor then just ascend to the position of govenor if this were to happen?
i was reading an article the other day about people in tx who are still displaced after hurricane ike. they are still living in parks and shelters if they are lucky and waiting for temporary living arrangements. that situation really hasnt had much publicity. despite katrina, the federal response to weather extremes seems to be lacking still. that of course leads to the whole what role should the federal govt have in that kind of situation. katrina was the most extreme example but i have to wonder why texas hasnt stepped in to help these people either? at this point i dont think its about being overwhelmed by numbers it really seems like they are forgotten.
i didnt know this either...you're right there hasnt been much publicity on this...wonder why? 'course it could have something to do with how many people in texas take a sorta pride in saying that texas is likes its own country....i have heard this repeatedly from many texans....
IMO, Janet is "good" on immigration (a big part of the gig) and civil liberties, as well as other issues of interest (she was, for instance, Anita Hill's attorney) and I like the idea of her being involved with those things.
she was anita hills atty? i didnt know that! id forgotten that yours is a border state and yes, i think that does play into the experience aspect of this. immigration and border control i suspect will become big issues once everything related to the economy dies down again.
Bill Clinton appointed her a US attorney for Arizona and her work in that position included investigation into the OK City bombings. She then became our state's attorney general before becoming governor.
yep, ok this feels like relevant experience too. when i first heard her name i was thinking that her experience as a gov prolly didnt qualify her for all that might happen, if for example, this country was hit by terrorists again but i think knowing what the border access problems are and knowing how to investigate an act like that makes for the right kind of experience. one thing i did like about the way that the OKC bombing was handled is that it was handled as a law enforcement issue not as a war issue. true the perps were not outside stateless terrorists but stateless is the key word there for me and as bad as what happened on 911 was i still see it as a law enforcement issue.
she doesn't patronize people. I mean ... under her administration, we're not going to be told to run out and buy duct tape to protect ourselves from weapons of mass destruction, you know? And I really believe that had Katrina happened under her watch, there would have been a wholly different outcome to that fiasco.
are fema and dhs agencies that work together or does fema fall under the DHS umbrella? it makes sense that it should, really. i was reading an article the other day about people in tx who are still displaced after hurricane ike. they are still living in parks and shelters if they are lucky and waiting for temporary living arrangements. that situation really hasnt had much publicity. despite katrina, the federal response to weather extremes seems to be lacking still. that of course leads to the whole what role should the federal govt have in that kind of situation. katrina was the most extreme example but i have to wonder why texas hasnt stepped in to help these people either? at this point i dont think its about being overwhelmed by numbers it really seems like they are forgotten.
DHS is a huge department -- whomever heads it will largely set a tone as much as anything, and I trust her to do that well, an in a prudent manner. No, I don't want to lose her as governor, but when I think of the other people who might be appointed head of DHS... I think she's a good selection.
how will her replacement be handled? will there be a special election or will there be someone appointed? anyone running ahead of the pack at this point?
My thought was "Attorney General, OK, but otherwise, no."
Arizona needs Janet to stay on as Governor until the end of her term, and after that, I think she'd make a great senator.
I don't imagine that's going to happen, though.
i agree with you here. she seems like an odd choice for homeland security. does she have the experience for this? how will her role in this work with leibermans senate homeland security role? (and why didnt they slap him upside his pointy lil head?)
I'm actually re-thinking my position on this. Here's the deal with Janet: IMO, she actually is the person the McCain campaign was trying to convince us Sarah Palin is:
1. She's smart 2. She's a quick learner. (And let's face it -- this department is still barely six years old, so there's not a lot of precedent.) 3. Although we can't "see" Russia from our back window here, we do have the largest (I think) nuclear power plant in the country here, and one of great strategic import which the Soviet Union chose as a possible target, and was also protected by the National Guard shortly after our invasion of Iraq, so there's been fairly extensive "Homeland Security" stuff with that for a long time, with which Janet is already familiar.
IMO, Janet is "good" on immigration (a big part of the gig) and civil liberties, as well as other issues of interest (she was, for instance, Anita Hill's attorney) and I like the idea of her being involved with those things.
Bill Clinton appointed her a US attorney for Arizona and her work in that position included investigation into the OK City bombings. She then became our state's attorney general before becoming governor.
IMO, she's a good administrator, which DHS desperately needs, and she's popular with her employees, which, again, has been severely lacking in that department.
We in AZ really thought she'd run for the US senate -- especially if McCain retired or resigned, but he announced a few days ago that he's running for re-relection, so really, with our term limits here for governor, Janet being forced out of the governor's mansion in 2010, this is a good move for her. I think she'll do well in the job. One thing about Janet -- she doesn't patronize people. I mean ... under her administration, we're not going to be told to run out and buy duct tape to protect ourselves from weapons of mass destruction, you know? And I really believe that had Katrina happened under her watch, there would have been a wholly different outcome to that fiasco.
DHS is a huge department -- whomever heads it will largely set a tone as much as anything, and I trust her to do that well, an in a prudent manner. No, I don't want to lose her as governor, but when I think of the other people who might be appointed head of DHS... I think she's a good selection.
My thought was "Attorney General, OK, but otherwise, no."
Arizona needs Janet to stay on as Governor until the end of her term, and after that, I think she'd make a great senator.
I don't imagine that's going to happen, though.
i agree with you here. she seems like an odd choice for homeland security. does she have the experience for this? how will her role in this work with leibermans senate homeland security role? (and why didnt they slap him upside his pointy lil head?)
