Skip to main content

No experience necessary at Department of Homeland Security senior positions

One of the positions that Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson has taken is that the Department of Homeland Security should be abolished.

Now, current Janet Napolitano seems to be making his case for him.

Janet Napolitano:  Naw, Senator, I
don't see why anyone in charge of
Honeland Security really needs
experience . . . .
If Homeland Security is such a critical department--and indeed the life of the nation is in daily peril from people stuffing explosives into their underwear--then why don't the senior people she's hiring need any relevant law enforcement experience to get their jobs?

The Daily Caller gives us several examples.

First, there's Jordan Grossman: 

Jordan Grossman was a special adviser and deputy to the deputy chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security, for instance, yet his resume shows no law enforcement experience. Before Grossman got his post in January 2009, he was a “special assistant” at the Obama-Biden presidential transition team after working for Obama’s 2008 election campaign.
Before that, Grossman worked as a research assistant at the Annenberg Public Policy Center, a communications think tank at the University of Pennsylvania. Grossman also interned for the left-wing Center for American Progress, and for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
He lists no law enforcement experience on his resume, even though the Obama administration had hired him into a senior law enforcement role. Grossman has since left his government position for to attend Harvard Law School.
Then, there's Vladmir Skoric:

Apparently working
for Obama for
America is all
the qualifications
Vladimir needs.

Vladimir Skoric serves as a “special assistant” to the Homeland Security “deputy under secretary for cybersecurity.” Skoric began his career in politics in May 2007 as a “volunteer coordinator” at Obama For America. He then interned for Washington Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and served as Obama For America’s Washington, D.C. youth director.
Skoric has also worked for The Small Business Project, Inc., as a business development analyst for a little more than two years. That organization describes itself as a company that “brings knowledge and expertise in starting small business programs to intermediaries, which in turn serve to strengthen small businesses locally,” focusing specifically on “providing forestry sector expertise.” Its mission does not have anything to do with law enforcement.
Even so, Skoric scored a senior level position in Obama’s Homeland Security Department.
Sadly, there are actually more examples in the article.


The two most immediate thoughts I have in response to this are Golan "McGreevy thought he was hot" Cipel and Michael "Brownie's doing a hell of a job in New Orleans" Brown.


The reality is that the Department of Homeland Security has been a pork-laden, civil-rights-trampling, alarmist entity since the first days of its creation.


In 2003 I did some consultancy work with the Office for Domestic Preparedness (for which I had an actual military background) in training DHS State and Local Readiness Officers.  There I met a young lady who had just been been appointed to a senior assistant position in cyber-security.  Her previous job had been as a personal assistant to actor Tom Hanks, while he was filming The Green Mile.  So it has happened with DHS since the very beginning, under both Republicans and Democrats.


It needs to go.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...