Department of Homeland Security

"Let's Just Kill 'Homeland Security'" Already!

|

After you've read through Jesse Walker's exclusive look at the much-hyped Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report of "sovereign citizens," check out my argument for disbanding DHS altogether. Created in the "mad crush of panic, paranoia, and patriotic pants-wetting after the 9/11 attacks," DHS oversees 22 agencies. It was a stupid idea from the beginning and it has continued to disappoint. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) regularly lists it as awful and ineffective at just about anything except wasting taxpayer dollars and surveys of federal employees document that even the Post Office has higher employee morale. 

Absent legislative action, come Friday DHS will be unfunded due to an ongoing fight over Barack Obama's executive action regarding illegal immigration. The Republican Congress is threatening to pull funding for the whole department and the Dems are (so far) standing firm in their threat to shut down the government.

In my latest Daily Beast column, I argue that scrapping over this small corner of DHS activities misses the bigger picture insight that the whole cabinet-level departmet should be chucked "into the dustbin."

You'd figure Barack Obama would be sweating gravy over even a partial shutdown of DHS. Instead, last week he stressed not the "security" part of the department's functioning, but all the dollars its workers spend in a congressional district near you. After noting that most DHS employees would be working for IOUs during a funding freeze, he said: "These are folks, who if they don't have a paycheck, are not going to be able to spend that money in your states. It will have a direct impact on your economy." That's about as open an admission that federal employment is essentially a form of workfare as you're likely to hear. Only later in his comments did Obama get around to the idea that these same workers also, you know, keep us safe from the odd underwear bomber and all those undocumented Mexicans we hire to cook our food and clean our houses….

The Daily Beast

Even Obama's Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, couldn't muster much in the way of if-then fearmongering. Earlier this month, Johnson trotted out a parade of horribles that was about as scary as a late-night rerun of Plan 9 From Outer Space. Without uninterrupted funding, warned the secretary, some of the "government activities vital to homeland security and public safety" that might be affected included "new communications equipment for over 80 public safety agencies in the Los Angeles area to replace aging and incompatible radio systems," "fifteen mobile command centers for possible catastrophic incidents in the state of Kentucky," and "bomb squads in the state of Idaho." My God, where have our priorities as a nation gone? Come Friday, Pocatello is a sitting duck.

DHS is not only responsible for Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), each of which needs a major ass-kicking and rebooting:

It only gets worse when you look at the sheer amount of junk DHS spends money on. The Customs and Border Patrol (CBP), for instance, built 21 homes for agents in a remote part of Arizona. The price tag was $680,000 per house in a part of the country where the average home sold for less than $90,000. When the TSA isn't hiring defrocked, child-molesting priests…, it is shelling out hundreds of millions of dollars on radiation detectors for cargo containers that don't work and full-body airport scanners without bothering to "perform a cost-benefit analysis…before rolling them out nationwide."

Read the whole thing here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Exclusive: Here is the New Homeland Security Report on 'Sovereign Citizen Extremist' Violence

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. OT: Anyone want to argue for school choice or charter schools? How about how “white flight” as a concept explaining urban plight is racist? I’ve given up.

    http://lj.libraryjournal.com/b…../#comments

    1. The best part of the white flight argument is that white people are then criticized for moving back to the cities because they call it ‘gentrification.’

      Literally anywhere white people choose to live, their motives must be racism.

      1. It’s almost like they think white people are the worst – as if they were chicks.

        1. More than half of them are chicks.

      2. I remember meeting friends out for drinks a few years ago in the U Street corridor in DC and I actually overheard some hipster douche (who apparently lived around the corner) complaining about this. I was torn between finishing my beer and bashing him over the head with it.

        1. No good reason to waste beer on a douche.

          I’m surmising you made the wise decision to drink your beer and ignore the douche.

          I think that’s the DC equivalent of, “Leave the gun – take the cannoli.”

          1. It was a Founders Breakfast Stout. It’s a testament to my degree of hatred for this asshat that I even thought about spilling a drop on his account.

        2. The best part is that it’s usually some douche who moved in six months or a year ago complaining about everyone who moved in after him.

    2. Also, the claim that private schools have ‘more money’ to spend on libraries is horseshit. Private schools actually spend *less money* per student than public schools, it’s just that public schools blow their money on eight layers of bureaucracy and are then confused why there isn’t money left for a library.

      1. I mostly agree, but private schools are more likely to get major donations for things like libraries.
        But people who think that lack of money is the problem with public schools really aren’t paying attention.

    3. Holy fuck, this is amazing:

      “A different way of looking at the situation is to consider that whatever the best schools do, they probably have good reasons for doing.”

      Want to know what most of the ‘best schools’ (i.e., private schools) don’t have? Entrenched and powerful public school unions.

      So the writer wants to eliminate public unions, correct?

      1. let’s not assume that far. The writer makes a lot of sense compared to others in the profession, but she is still a librarian. As a profession, librarians donate 11-1 democrat to anything else.

        1. That’s my point. I assume an ‘annoyed librarian’ is not going to be gung ho about the elimination of teacher’s unions, despite the fact that, by her own logic, we should do that since it’s what the ‘best schools’ do.

          1. I suspect she may mean “best public schools”. But even that isn’t very useful. The best public schools seem to be in places where there aren’t mostly poor people and where a lot of parents care about education for their children. I think that the biggest factor in having successful schools is probably having parents who are engaged. Which is another reason why private schools are mostly better. Parents who send their kids to private schools will tend to be the type who actually care about educating their kids well.

            Of course, unions, choice and competition are important factors too.

            1. Our kid had been having trouble at daycare and we were asked to come in for a conference. My wife was all freaked out because her son had been kicked out of three daycare centers by the time he went to school. It went well. They identified what they had observed and we agreed that we were seeing the same things at home. Together we thought of some things to do different, and it worked. The kid has been a whole lot better behaved. I think part of what happened with her son is that he spends most of his time with his dad who is not engaged. All he does is get violent when the son misbehaves. Oh, did I mention that he’s a cop?

            2. But Zeb the Unions can’t have it both ways and they seem to want to both blame lack of funding and lack of parental support as to avoid any discussion of accountability which rubs me the wrong way.

              1. There has to be some standard to judge performance.

                1. If you have to have some formal performance measure, it seems to me that testing the kids at the beginning and end of the year to see how much they improve and comparing how teachers in the same schools perform over several years would be a pretty good way to do it.
                  But as I say below, I think it is pretty obvious for the most part who the good teachers are. People act like it is impossible without some quantifiable evaluation.

            3. Unions and progtard mentality (equality, diversity) eschew merit.

              So yeah, getting rid of unions and reinstating a meritocracy would fix many of the problems bad schools have.

              It still would not make up for lack of parental involvement but it would go a long way.

              1. Unions and progtard mentality (equality, diversity) eschew merit.

                The argument I have seen the most is that merit is difficult to measure.

                For example if one teacher gets kids with parents who are engaged, and another does not, then assuming both teachers are equally skilled at their jobs, the former’s students will have better grades than the latter’s. I can understand the argument, but on the other hand some teachers are just obviously terrible. But how do you measure a teacher’s ability without being subjective? They want some concrete measure, like tests, but as I said in my example that is subjective.

                So they settle on seniority since that is easy to measure.

                1. The argument I have seen the most is that merit is difficult to measure.

                  Which is a pretty weak one, I think. It may be hard to quantify, but everyone knows who the good teachers are and who the bad ones are.

                  There are too many factors involved to have a truly objective assessment of teachers. Subjective measures might occasionally screw over someone who doesn’t deserve it. And that is a shame. But I’d say it’s better than pretending that it is impossible to figure out who the good teachers are and reward them.

            4. Parents who send their kids to private schools will tend to be the type who actually care about educating their kids well.

              But that’s not fair to parents who don’t give a shit and just want to goof off all day!!1!

            5. But the best public schools only take the top 1% of students, the lazy dumbfucks and cheaters (the students – even the best public schools have lazy dumbfuck cheating teachers) are told to go fuck themselves elsewhere.

      2. I think you give the author a bit too much credit for following her logic all the way down the tracks, Irish. I would love to see the look on her face if you posed this question though.

    4. No, Spencer. You’re deflecting and rationalizing. DHS should defunded and the Big Brother handouts suspended indefinitely. Stop trying to change the subject. You know people who would lose their lunch and their pensions because DHS is what they do for a living.

      1. Allow me to draw your attention to the OT prefix. It denotes the following will be “off topic”.

  2. “These are folks, who if they don’t have a paycheck, are not going to be able to spend that money in your states.”

    Well, sheesh, for the sake of the economy, give them all big raises!

    1. Gosh, maybe we should stop taxing people and let them instead spend that money on their own states!

      I have to say, it’s almost entertaining to watch Barack Obama shit himself so obliviously.

      Somewhere in Illinois a second tier college is missing an untenured adjunct professor with economically ignorant beliefs.

      1. Somewhere in Illinois a second tier college is missing an untenured adjunct professor with economically ignorant beliefs.

        I found her.

      2. I think its safe to say that there isn’t a college or university in the country that doesn’t have an ample supply professors (tenured, untenured, adjunct, whatever) with economically ignorant beliefs.

  3. Nick, I hope you’re not seriously trying to argue that the United States as a nation could hope to survive even one day without the invaluable services of the DHS.

    1. we could maybe test it out. just the tip.

    2. I’m shivering in terror just thinking about it.

    3. I’ve been alive long enough to remember what life was like before the DHS and Before Twitter.

      1. Someone call the Home and let them know Grandpa’s been on their computer again.

      2. Frack that…. I remember before cell phones!

        1. anyone else here punch an 80 column card?

          1. Yeah, but I didn’t put it down, so it kicked my ass.

  4. The terrorists hate us for our multiplier effects.

    1. It seems like there should be real work at killing the idea of the multiplier effect. I mean, real goddamned science. Nobel prizes and stuff.

      Why are we not funding this? Where are your Koch brothers now?!

      1. You don’t understand! When the government redistributes money (after taking out a chunk to pay bureaucrats) it makes that money multiply! It’s magic!

        1. Yes, but it’s such a retarded theory that we should have easy and irrefutable proof that it’s false…

          1. It goes back to the seen and the unseen.

            http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

            You can’t prove the unseen except with logic, and I’ve noticed in life that many people are impervious to logic. Seeing is believing, so they say. If they can’t see it, they won’t believe it. You can see government employees spending their paychecks. You can’t see what would have happened had that money had been left in the hands of productive people and not given to government employees who create nothing of value.

            1. Just like public funding of football stadiums. If taxes pay for the stadiums, you can see the shiny seats and huge billboards. If you don’t take that money from taxpayers, it doesn’t get spent – they burn it or bury it in the backyard.

            2. Yes, but can’t we see, with certainty, that that money they are spending doesn’t multiply?

              1. Yes, but can’t we see, with certainty, that that money they are spending doesn’t multiply?

                I did a quick google and didn’t see much.

                Thing is, who will fund such a study? It takes time and money to do those things. If such a study is funded by anyone other than government, then the left will dismiss it out of hand. And government most certainly isn’t going to fund something like that.

          2. it’s such a retarded theory that we should have easy and irrefutable proof that it’s false

            You mean, like this?

            Three economists, one from the St. Louis Federal Reserve Board, another from the University of California, and the third from the Bank of Canada, engaged in a study by examining historical evidence in the US from 1890 to 2010.

            What they found is that when the US Government spends a dollar during periods of high unemployment, the multiplier effect of that dollar is less than one. The economic benefit of a dollar spent by the government ranged from $0.54 to $0.64. It was slightly better when unemployment was above 6.5% ($0.63 to $0.78). Thus, a dollar borrowed or taxed from the private sector loses power when filtered through the federal government. The conclusion is that the benefits are not generally commensurate with the cost.

            http://itreconomics.com/blog/d…..ier-effect

  5. I would love to see a poll of how satisfied registered voters are with the performance of DHS at the Airport. Positive answers would have to be in the single digits.

    That ALONE should be enough argument to shut the whole damn thing down.

  6. The DHS was born in the midst of a nasty political fight (IIRC, a triple amputee veteran was accused of being “pro bin Laden” due to his stance on its formation). It deserves to die in the midst of another nasty political fight.

    1. Nope. No glory. Just drawn & quartered at sunrise.

      Hand the contractors their hats.

      Estate sale for office materials. Real estate bids for the building. Authentication and estimates for a museum pieces to the end of an error. Junk sweeps in all urban centers. You can make money from the scrap.

      It will be okay.

      1. Chumlee: What ya got there boss?

        LAH: Well, I’ve got a box of blue gloves from the old TSA.

        Rick: Yeah, the TSA was basically a make work security theater program after 9/11. The government spent billions employed GED graduates that didn’t prevent one terrorist attack. How much for the gloves?

        LAH: $10.

        Rick: I can’t go that high, I was thinking $5.

        LAH: Chum can use them to clean the toilet.

        Rick: Deal, let’s do some paperwork.

        1. Thanks for the laugh! I needed it!

        2. Well done.

  7. Absent legislative action, come Friday DHS will be unfunded due to an ongoing fight over Barack Obama’s executive action regarding illegal immigration. The Republican Congress is threatening to pull funding for the whole department and the Dems are (so far) standing firm in their threat to shut down the government.

    So let me see if I get this right, the Party of Michael Moore wants to maintain the DHS and the PATRIOT ACT, and now shutting down the government is a good thing? Wow, what a difference a couple of years makes.

    1. But I’m sure it’s still the Republicans who are holding the nation hostage, right?

    2. Well, most of the media is covering it as the Republicans shutting down the government, because apparently a Republican majority frustrated by a filibustering Democratic minority is just as much the Republicans’ fault as a Democratic Senate majority frustrated by a filibustering Republican minority.

      They start with preferred policy (Democratic Party is right) and then proceed from there.

      1. Maybe they start with the idea that the side arguing to withhold funding is the one to blame for a shutdown due to lack of funding?

        I mean, I’d think withholding funding and shutting down some government programs is a good thing, but I can see where the media is coming from there.

        1. Bzzt. The GOP is trying to fund DHS, and being blocked by the residual blue scum in the Senate.

          1. They’re trying to fund all it except X, the Dems want to fund it all including X.

            I wish they’d cut the budget in half mind you, but of course the party that wants to fund all of it except X is going to get the blame for a shutdown attributed to lack of funds.

            1. Except that the same argument gets used for “the agency wanted to program in an automatic increase of funds of 5%, and they want to only increase it by 3%.” Or when the Republicans want to force the DC Opportunity Scholarship program to be saved. Or in any other case.

              Your claim doesn’t hold water. The only consistent thing is that whenever the Republicans don’t vote for what the Democrats want, it’s obstruction, regardless of who has the majority.

              1. I think a situation like the GOP wanting to provide additional funds or oppose a Democrat proposed cut (imagine) would be the test of that. Do you know of such an example?

            2. X is not part of “it all” in this case, it’s something that’s been incoherently tacked on by a rogue executive.

            3. They’re trying to fund all of it except for disapproving of something that was changed by executive action. It seems entirely as legitimate as refusing to fund marijuana raids by the DoJ of state-legal operations.

              1. If there was an insistence by a party that they would not fund those DEA raids and the alternative proposal was to fund them and everything else the DEA budgeted and as a result the entire DEA shut down the fittest party would rightly get the blame for the shutdown. They’d also get my applause, but then I like shutdowns

  8. “That’s about as open an admission that federal employment is essentially a form of workfare as you’re likely to hear.”

    It’s almost like voters don’t actually listen to the words that are coming out of his piehole.

  9. Oh, by the way, “Kill Homeland Security” just added one more incident on the “Sovereign Citizen Violence” report. Nice one, Nick.

    1. I think whoever heads the department should be legally required to change their name to “Homeland Security” so all threats about killing it can be prosecuted as threats of violence against an individual as well.

  10. “Let’s Just Kill ‘Homeland Security'” Already!

    Yes.

  11. “Let’s Just Kill ‘Homeland Security'” Already!

    Why do you hate America and want the terrorists to win, Nick?

  12. “bomb squads in the state of Idaho.”

    To be fair, those potatos do look like bombs, if you squint just right.

    1. Malk is Dan Quayle?

      1. You say potatoe, I say fire a shotgun through the door!

      2. It is time for humanity to enter the solar system.

        /epic

  13. OT: Dear Prudence Why haven’t I encountered rampent sexism at my male dominated work place:

    Q. Excessive Feminists: I’m a woman in a very masculine scientific field, and I’ve found that many women involved in feminist circles want to hear about my experience. I absolutely agree that there are biases against women in the workplace and love a good discussion, but I have never really suffered from sexism. First, I’m young enough (27) that I’m not eligible for senior positions anyway, and second, I’ve never been flirted with in an inappropriate manner, or felt I wasn’t listened to. Maybe I’m just awesome at playing the man’s game (or in denial and don’t have an eye for sexism?). More probably, I landed in a great environment that just suffers from a dearth of females because there are too few candidates. But even quite reasonable and pleasant women get aggressive when I don’t have anything to contribute to their list of crimes committed by the patriarchy. I don’t want to lie, but I’m not sure how to handle inquiries when I can’t give them the story they want.

    1. Maybe I’m just awesome at playing the man’s game (or in denial and don’t have an eye for sexism?). More probably, I landed in a great environment that just suffers from a dearth of females because there are too few candidates.

      Or maybe you take responsibility for your own performance and do your job competently, rather than seeking out someone to blame for your failures.

    2. Does anyone still believe that questions for Prudie come from real people?

      1. absolutely not.

    3. “I absolutely agree that there are biases against women in the workplace…”

      Even though she’s never seen it and probably never will. “I just know it exists!”

    4. My wife hates the feminists who blabber about sexism everywhere. Her reasoning: it’s obvious women are the superior gender and it’s hilariously ridiculous that men think they are. Considering what she went through to give birth to our child, I agree.

      1. Should say “some men”

  14. “I have never really suffered from sexism.”…..Until……”women get aggressive when I don’t have anything to contribute to their list of crimes committed by the patriarchy.”

    I see. That is interesting.

  15. ‘Homeland Security” is eerily Superman-sounding. A choice bit of gubment psyops at work methinks.

  16. Ah, the creation of the DHS, sandwiched between NCLB and the Iraq War. If only we could get a GOP President so we could get back to those small government days of the GOP controlling all the branches!

    1. you really should look back at the comment section when George Bush was President.

      1. I was just making a statement about how GOP control is, in my experience, hardly associated with any limiting of government at all, not a comment about anyone here.

        1. GOP-controlled govt is only limited when it’s compared to govt where you guys have control of any branch.

          1. “You guys?” I’m not a Democrat. I only mentioned the GOP above to mock their rhetoric. I’m not sure if it’s better or worse that the Dems don’t even make a pretense of small government.

            1. If every time we go to lunch, we have a choice of McDonalds or Subway, and every day at 11:30 AM you complain about how much Subway sucks, it’s pretty hard to believe you don’t favor McDonalds.

              1. Turd Sandwich or Giant Douche?

              2. I thought you hated McDonalds.

                1. Tulpa told us he was fat once, I think. No way he hates McDonald’s.

                  1. That’s likely true. But he spent hours one day arguing that he was too good for it.

                    1. Just like he was too good for tenure?

              3. If Subway makes a claim they’re healthy and I’m mocking that claim you’d be silly to conclude that I find McDonalds, making no such claims, to be healthier

          2. GOP has been worse since LBJ. Dems were worse 1932-68.

            Basically we’re fucked either way.

            1. I’ll fix this for you: every administration is the worst until the next one, regardless of party. That’s been my, albeit limited, experience.

              1. Bush I was better than Reagan. Carter was light years better than Ford/Nixon.

    2. No Bo. You don’t get it. DHS, TSA, NCLB and the Iraq War were all Obama’s fault since he didn’t repeal them.

      1. He didn’t have to repeal shit to end the Iraq War.

        DHS and TSA abuses increased on his watch, too.

        1. “DHS and TSA abuses increased on his watch, too.”

          I think Obama deserves 100% responsibility for any programs he continued under his administration.

          Having said that, do you have a measurement about that claim? Curious.

          1. I’ve had my privacy forcibly violated by nudie scans hundreds of times under B.O., zero times under Bush.

            1. You prefer the groping?

            2. So you’re a prude worried about what lame x-rays might reveal.

              Even the sickos at TSA don’t get off on stick figures.

              1. They’re not X-rays, idiot, they’re microwaves.

                I’m just sick of finding post-it notes with agents’ personal phone numbers in my carry-on.

        2. By the way, I’m stealing your screen name to use as a joke in conversations. And when someone asks me, “did you just think of that?” I’ll smile a silent, humble smile.

          1. I’m looking at Kahlua Akbar, in case it wasn’t clear.

      2. . DHS, TSA, NCLB and the Iraq War were all Obama’s fault since he didn’t repeal them.

        None of those things have been laid at O’s doorstep

        PRISM can and should be since its vast expansion, exposee, and putative defense has been under his admin

        so should libya, syria, etc

    3. As awful as they were, NCLB and SarbOx are dwarfed by Obamacare and Dodd-Frank.

      And your guy continued the Iraq War (which he made his name opposing) for as long as he could until the Iraqi govt forced him to give it up.

      1. Why stop with NCLB and Sarbanes-Oxley? Add McCain-Feingold, AUMF, PaTRIOT Act, FISA kill act, Medicare Part D Welfare, American Home Downpayment Act, TARP and a few others I can’t think of now.

        1. McCain-Feingold which Obama supported and decried the overturning of.

          AUMF which Obama supports and is using as his grant of authority in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and wherever the hell else he feels like

          PaTRIOT Act which Obama has favored extending twice

          FISA kill act, Medicare Part D Welfare, American Home Downpayment Act, TARP which Obama voted for in the Senate

          1. Good points all. Carrying on these programs is as bad as starting them.

          2. Obama joined the Senate in 2005 therefore could not have voted for the worst of the Bush bills.

            Anyway, it is the fault of the POTUS who signed them and not a successor.

            I hate Medicare but I don’t blame Reagan for it. Yet Reagan did nothing to repeal it.

            1. Obama joined the Senate in 2005 therefore could not have voted for the worst of the Bush bills.

              Surprising, then, that you chose to list several post-2005 bills or extensions of bills.

              1. I was merely pointing out that Bush the Lesser was Mr. Big Government and the GOP happily obliged.

                Clinton was a libertarian in comparison. And Obama is easily better.

  17. Good God Almighty! Why has no oone said squat about ALT TEXT?!?

    Good one. Go check it out, right here on Reason, no need to clicky elsewhere.

  18. HitNMyths 2 hours ago
    I’m fine with eliminating DHS as long as it’s coupled with the repeal of the Patriot Act and Citizens United. These three actions would increase the security of our nation immensely

    Drewand 3 hours ago
    Well let’s see we haven’t really had any terrorist attacks (foriegn) since 911 and so I think that DHS has done a pretty good job. What is the alternative? Privatize TSA and other so-called non-essential departments? Oh yeah that works really well. I know lets stop fighting futile wars and bring our armed forces home to defend the boarder, airports and sea ports, no? Then I don’t understand the necessity to do away with DHS. Security carries some costs and resposibilities if you feel like the security we’ve enjoyed since 911 is unneccessary than good luck.

    1. So the sock wants the BoR repealed. Figures.

    2. Does Drewand suddenly expect Mexico or Canada to begin an invasion? Are the Soviets going to sneak into Seattle in cargo ships? How is ‘defending the boarder, airports and sea ports’ with military units a logical strategy?

    3. “Repeal” Citizens United? Wouldn’t that entail repealing the first amendment?

  19. periscope 6 hours ago
    We desperately need two new Constitutional amendments.

    ONe is to make clear that “corporations are not people,” and that “money isn’t free speech,” thereby making the billionaire buying of elections in America thanks to the Citizens United abomination no longer legal.

    The other is to limit the power of the Congress so that they cannot shutdown the government, by refusing to pay the bills.

    We do not elect a Congress to wreck government, but to improve upon it.

    What we’ve seen with Republicans, is that they use their congressional power to take the American people’s government hostage to their own corrupt goals of enriching the rich, and persecuting the poor without limitations.

      1. Because I hate you. Specifically you. I hate you.

    1. I am always amazed at how stupid people are.

      1. then you’ve not been paying close attention.

    2. Something tell me that in this person’s fantasy world, “unions” are going to still be people, and “union money” is still going to equal free speech. Just a feeling.

    3. Now, if a person were intelligent, they could, say, look at the money Democrats threw at seats they lost in 2014 and come to the conclusion that maybe money doesn’t magically twist elections in favour of unpopular candidates.

  20. Don’t do it to yourselves, people. I know how it feels to watch that blender going and imagine how cool it would be would happen if you put your hand in that blender, but trust me. It’s not worth it.

    1. Thirteen year old girl.

    2. Sage advice, Mr. Warts, sage advice.

    3. Why? Is he…

      Oh. Yes he is.

      1. It, James, it.

        Let’s not give it anymore credit than it deserves.

  21. ALT TEXT: Larry, Curly, Moe

  22. hippyhay73 3 hours ago
    The DHS was Karl Roves brainchild and was used to keep the public scared and dependent upon the government (republicans) to protect us from the man in the turban. Remember the color code they used to show how close we were to an eminent attack. Whenever Bush was on TV or giving one of his BS speeches about the Al Qaeda/ Iraq connection, the color code was always set at yellow, meaning that things were cool and under control. But, whenever John Kerry gave a speech or was on TV, the broadcast was interrupted by the news channels because homeland security had raised the security level to red or orange because there might be a bomb in the New York subway. Or a suspected terrorists was spotted in some international airport and it was possible he might be coming to America. You see how they kept us scared and at the same time they didn’t give the democratic candidate any free air time. The headlines were always about just how close we came to another attack, and thank god George Bush was in charge, and now was not the time to change our “commander in chief”. It was pure “Goebels” type propaganda. Straight from the white house!!!

    It’s amazing, the competence this species of conspiracy theorists thinks the christfascists have.

    1. Since the goddamn thing has been seemingly stuck on orange for years what this guy is suggesting is an awfully neat trick.

    2. I thought it was Joe Lieberman’s idea?

  23. We should at least change its name to something less fascist.

    1. You have now written two things today that were not completely idiotic. Congratulations! I think ‘m beginning to like you.

      1. Yea, that was pretty good. But a fascist by any other name..

    2. No, it should be $hit-canned.

  24. “Unidentified” is that guy from The Onion.

  25. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I’ve been doing,,,,,,,,,
    http://www.work-mill.com

  26. If it deals with “revenues” such as Customs, and the Coast Guard (originally the Revenue Service), put it back in Treasury; all the LE efforts should go to Justice; Immigration should be at State; and DHS should just close up shop.

  27. Can’t you see the WARNING SIGNS America ? ALL the Jewish Member of Congress are pressed to come to the Defense of the Funding for Home Land Security ! Can’t you see the Zionist Strong Hold in U.S. Security is threatened ! They burrowed in and thought they OWNED the USA.
    The SAME plan that Zionist are using to Destabilize the Middle East and break it up into Small Powerless Nation State CAN BE USED ON THE USA ! Hell we already have States so damn greedy they want to succeed.
    Even Jews hate the Zionist ! Wake up Americans your Country is being Invaded by Religious Zealots and helped by Wealth Worshiping Christians. SAVE THE USA kick the Zionist out. Read the 1982 Zionist Plan it was published in Israeli Mags ! Read it; these Wars are all going according to that plan, even False Flags like Benghazi meant to sucker the USA back into War !!

  28. I just got paid usd6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that’s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over usd 9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,,,,,,
    http://www.work-mill.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.