Didn't Senator Obama campaign against Bush-era policies? Didn't Senator Obama and his supporters, Randi Rhodes being one of them, claim that "we are the ones we've been waiting for; we are the change that we seek"?
For the past two years, President Obama has had the political luxury of being president while his beloved progressive-wing of the Democrat party controls both houses of Congress, thus making him, arguably, the most powerful person in the world. Instead of dismantling TSA/Homeland Security, Obama, Pelosi and Reid have supported, verbally and financially, the government agencies and policies you describe as right-wing Nazi. In fact, earlier this week, President Obama defended these agencies by stating their actions are necessary, and Pelosi promised she will fly commercial in the future (but, of course, not now). Why no venom for the political party that has the power to shut down these 'right-wing' agencies, but, instead, perpetuates their existence?
I certainly agree with your dislike of neo-conservative laws, and there is no doubt in my mind that former-President Bush deserves credit for the implementation of TSA/Homeland Security. However, former senate-majority leader (D) Tom Daschle's only publicly-stated concern about the creation of these agencies was whether or not the workforce would be unionized. Daschle even had a catchy little phrase that he and top Democrats repeated frequently during the build-up of these government agencies: "First you unionize, then you nationalize!"
What I take from Daschle's mindset was that he, like Presidents Bush and Obama, had no problems with this increase in the size-and-scope of government and had no concerns for what TSA/Homeland Security would predictably become. By supporting the creation of these 'right-wing' agencies, Daschle knew he could manipulate this expansion of government to benefit his pocket, his vote tally, his party, and the Democrat party's ability to use these agencies as a kickback mechanism, all-the-while publicly decrying the influence of greed, corruption and self-interest in politics.
As a Libertarian, not a right-wing Libertarian or a progressive Libertarian or a Green-Libertarian or a Left Libertarian, I find it too easy, on any given day, at any given moment, to find serious faults with the actions and propositions of BOTH major parties, not one or the other. Is it really some right-wing prude's fault that prostitution is a crime in San Francisco? Is it really some right-wing knuckle-dragger's fault that marijuana is illegal in San Francisco? Is it really some neo-conservative brown-shirt's fault that San Francisco's City Hall pumps out volumes of laws that fleece the poor while touting fair trade? Is Dick Cheney really the mastermind behind the conspiracy that is pushing industries and jobs out of California? Is Dubya really forcing the TSA on Obama from the Crawford Ranch? Don't Democrats and Randi Rhodes-types who vote deserve some of the credit, at least half, for these problems?