Hump Day

Happy Groundhog Day! Here's what's going on this morning.

Meanwhile, Michael Chertoff is about to be confirmed to head up the Dept. of Homeland Security. Most people agree that he's a highly qualified choice and will be a staunch defender of the ol' Homeland - or, the US of A, as I like to call her. Homeland just sounds so...Nazi-esque. Here's the part of the article that disturbs me, however:

Despite the questions, Chertoff is likely to be confirmed because Republicans
control the Senate.

When did debate and background checks become a mere formality for a rubber-stamp approval process for partisan loyalists? Isn't the point of a confirmation hearing to ensure that qualified candidates for the position (one would assume they're qualified or they shouldn't be up for the job in the first place) don't have any troubling bits of background or conflicts of interest? Isn't the point of a confirmation hearing to make sure we actually do get the best person for the job? Now, Chertoff is a perfect example of a qualified candidate who looks to be a solid pick, but who has a few unanswered questions that need answering.

In the ideal world, Senators (from both sides of the aisle) would use the confirmation hearing as a chance to clear up these questions, clarify Chertoff's positions, and ultimately decide whether he will be the best choice for the job of securing America. We're not talking about a sales job here - we're talking about National Security. And, in my opinion, when it comes to national security, you can't be too careful, even with the most seemingly qualified individual.

Now, Chertoff has a broad range of support from Democrats and Republicans alike. I would hope that - if he is confirmed - he is confirmed because he is the best person for the job. Not because "the Republicans control the Senate."