Another Tax Cheat Nominated to the Cabinet

[HollyS]

Date: 2/3/2009 1:15:41 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 2/3/2009 1:10:34 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 2/3/2009 12:56:36 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS
Anyone posted this yet? Is this the third person? I am losing count..More tax issues

It's that 'Transparency in Government' at work. The press has decided to vet these folks, since the administration doesn't seem able to do it!

Date: 2/3/2009 1:10:34 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 2/3/2009 12:56:36 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS
Anyone posted this yet? Is this the third person? I am losing count..More tax issues

It's that 'Transparency in Government' at work. The press has decided to vet these folks, since the administration doesn't seem able to do it!

The press? By chance do you mean 'the LIBERAL media'?

Well, sure. There are always going to be people in journalism who believe the truth is relevant, no matter their personal idealogies. Keith and Chris won't be among them, and it will probably take some no-name, no-big-deal reporters to do the right thing, but it'll happen.

People (politicians, celebrities, the semi-famous, and the infamous) forget . . . . they are more interesting when they're not being good little boys and girls. And they sell more copy. So digging will occur. Skeletons will be found.

I hope Mr. Obama doesn't have any surprises tucked away.

 

[Allisonfaye]

I would so love to have a discussion of something like this without it turning into a debate between Repbulicans and Democrats. Just a dream, I know.

He did withdrawal. I am glad. I think the cheats should face more dire consequences than the need to withdrawal from the nomination. What it makes me wonder is, for every person that gets nominated and cheats, how many are just cheating and we''ll never know because they are not under scrutiny.

 

[tradergirl]

and to put a final exclamation point on this sorry episode

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/02/022720.php

Next up on the firing line: Solis, the Labor Secretary nominee

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 2/3/2009 1:33:49 PM
Author: Allisonfaye
What it makes me wonder is, for every person that gets nominated and cheats, how many are just cheating and we''ll never know because they are not under scrutiny.

My hunch ... 75% of people who itemize. People are awful. People love to "get away" with whatever they can. And the tax laws are virtually impossible to navigate -- even with professional help. Notice not many other types of *criminals* get far along in the vetting process. Everyone can figure out drug bust = bad, hit wife = bad ... but tax scheming seems to be a whole different matter. Like its a game to outwit the IRS. Amongst tax preparers and anyone who itemizes. The *culture* needs to change. Hopefully this coverage will make people hesitate a bit before filing their "magical" returns. But what really needs to occur is a streamlining of the tax codes so people with fourth grade educations can understand them. That''s the level newspapers write to. That''s the level most other forms etc are developed for. Sigh. Kinda miss Huckabee.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 2/3/2009 1:50:23 PM
Author: tradergirl
and to put a final exclamation point on this sorry episode


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/02/022720.php


Next up on the firing line: Solis, the Labor Secretary nominee

I''m googling her, but not finding much right now. What did this one do?

 

[risingsun]

Date: 2/3/2009 1:33:49 PM
Author: Allisonfaye
I would so love to have a discussion of something like this without it turning into a debate between Repbulicans and Democrats. Just a dream, I know.

He did withdrawal. I am glad. I think the cheats should face more dire consequences than the need to withdrawal from the nomination. What it makes me wonder is, for every person that gets nominated and cheats, how many are just cheating and we''ll never know because they are not under scrutiny.

I couldn''t agree more! He should have and did withdraw. Now why couldn''t we have a discussion about it without the nasty comments. There are plenty of us would prefer it that way. Thanks for speaking up

 

[E B]

Date: 2/3/2009 2:22:43 PM
Author: risingsun

I couldn't agree more! He should have and did withdraw. Now why couldn't we have a discussion about it without the nasty comments. There are plenty of us would prefer it that way. Thanks for speaking up

Because some felt they needed to 'stick it' to us libs, even though most (all?) of us would agree- he needed to go.

 

[tradergirl]

Solis

Monday, February 02, 2009

Daschle — And Solis, Too [Byron York]

While everyone is looking at Tom Daschle''s tax problems (I am too, working on a story for tomorrow morning), a new issue has arisen concerning another Obama cabinet nomination, that of Rep. Hilda Solis to be Secretary of Labor.

Solis had a rough hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee when she declined to answer all sorts of seemingly noncontroversial questions about her positions on basic labor issues. (Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus wrote a frustrated account of the hearing, asking, "How can senators consent if they have no clue what policies they might be consenting to?") Now, some committee members want to know more about Solis'' relationship with a pro-labor group called American Rights at Work. On the group''s website, Solis is listed as a member of the board of directors, and she also served as Treasurer of the organization from 2004 to 2007. The question is whether Solis, who as a member of Congress is prohibited from lobbying Congress, fully disclosed her relationship with the group.

American Rights at Work is an important part of Big Labor''s push for the Employee Free Choice Act, known more accurately as card check. A recent account in the lefty journal In These Times says that, "Early this year, unions plan to present 1 million signatures in support of EFCA to Congress, and they are calling on allies from civil rights, environment, religious and other movements to broaden the campaign beyond labor. American Rights at Work, a labor-founded coalition, is playing a leading role in this effort."

No one is accusing Solis of concealing her connection with the group; it was common knowledge in the labor world, and she listed it in the paperwork she submitted for her confirmation hearing. But she did not list it on the disclosure forms she was required to submit to the House of Representatives. It was an unpaid position, so there is no problem with income. But there are questions about whether Solis, as Treasurer, played a de facto role in the group''s lobbying activity; if you''re a member of Congress, you''re not supposed to simultaneously lobby Congress. (Solis has told the Senate that she did not take part in the group''s lobbying activities.) In any event, you''re required to list your affiliation on disclosure documents, which Solis did not do. (On January 29, she filed amended disclosure forms with the House, listing her association with the labor group.) Some Senate Republicans don''t view this as a major issue with the Solis nomination, but they do want to know more about her specific activities for American Rights at Work.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 2/3/2009 2:40:18 PM
Author: tradergirl
Solis


Monday, February 02, 2009


Daschle — And Solis, Too [Byron York]


While everyone is looking at Tom Daschle''s tax problems (I am too, working on a story for tomorrow morning), a new issue has arisen concerning another Obama cabinet nomination, that of Rep. Hilda Solis to be Secretary of Labor.


Solis had a rough hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee when she declined to answer all sorts of seemingly noncontroversial questions about her positions on basic labor issues. (Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus wrote a frustrated account of the hearing, asking, ''How can senators consent if they have no clue what policies they might be consenting to?'') Now, some committee members want to know more about Solis'' relationship with a pro-labor group called American Rights at Work. On the group''s website, Solis is listed as a member of the board of directors, and she also served as Treasurer of the organization from 2004 to 2007. The question is whether Solis, who as a member of Congress is prohibited from lobbying Congress, fully disclosed her relationship with the group.


American Rights at Work is an important part of Big Labor''s push for the Employee Free Choice Act, known more accurately as card check. A recent account in the lefty journal In These Times says that, ''Early this year, unions plan to present 1 million signatures in support of EFCA to Congress, and they are calling on allies from civil rights, environment, religious and other movements to broaden the campaign beyond labor. American Rights at Work, a labor-founded coalition, is playing a leading role in this effort.''


No one is accusing Solis of concealing her connection with the group; it was common knowledge in the labor world, and she listed it in the paperwork she submitted for her confirmation hearing. But she did not list it on the disclosure forms she was required to submit to the House of Representatives. It was an unpaid position, so there is no problem with income. But there are questions about whether Solis, as Treasurer, played a de facto role in the group''s lobbying activity; if you''re a member of Congress, you''re not supposed to simultaneously lobby Congress. (Solis has told the Senate that she did not take part in the group''s lobbying activities.) In any event, you''re required to list your affiliation on disclosure documents, which Solis did not do. (On January 29, she filed amended disclosure forms with the House, listing her association with the labor group.) Some Senate Republicans don''t view this as a major issue with the Solis nomination, but they do want to know more about her specific activities for American Rights at Work.

Thanks for posting!

 

[DiamanteBlu]

Another one bites the dust ''cuz of tax issues: Nancy Killefer
Link - scroll about half way down for story.

 

[DiamanteBlu]

And, I betcha ya didn''t know that Geithner presided over the Wall Street collapse as regional Fed president. Linky. Oops.

 

[tradergirl]

Oh yes, we know

He''s in the pocket of Goldman Sachs too. Amazing how the populist crowd who seems to make up much of the Obama supporter group doesn''t seem to care.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/3/2009 2:28:43 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 2/3/2009 2:22:43 PM

Author: risingsun


I couldn''t agree more! He should have and did withdraw. Now why couldn''t we have a discussion about it without the nasty comments. There are plenty of us would prefer it that way. Thanks for speaking up

Because some felt they needed to ''stick it'' to us libs, even though most (all?) of us would agree- he needed to go.

Actually, nobody mentioned "liberals'' here...Except, liberals!

Having issues with tax evaders holding cabinet positions is NOT "sticking it to the libs".

And by the way, I know plenty of Dem''s personally who are just as unhappy and perplexed by the choice of Geithner, et. al...

This is an issue that should rile every tax paying citizen...no matter what side you''re on.

 

[E B]

Date: 2/3/2009 5:58:08 PM
Author: beebrisk

Actually, nobody mentioned 'liberals' here...Except, liberals!

Oh, come on. "Can't you just FEEL the change?" (pg. 1) and "...isn't it amazing how the media and Democrats want to give this sleazeball a pass..." (pg. 2) isn't meant to stir the 'libs' up? Not that there's anything wrong with it, necessarily, especially as it isn't getting to anyone. We all seem to be in agreement about this, at least.

Date: 2/3/2009 5:58:08 PM
Author: beebrisk

This is an issue that should rile every tax paying citizen...no matter what side you're on.

That's all I was saying.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/3/2009 6:06:31 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 2/3/2009 5:58:08 PM

Author: beebrisk


Actually, nobody mentioned 'liberals' here...Except, liberals!

C'mon. There's obviously an attempt to 'lib bate' with comments like 'Can't you just FEEL the change?' and '...isn't it amazing how the media and Democrats want to give this sleazeball a pass...' Not that it's getting to anyone, as we're all in agreement about this.

Date: 2/3/2009 5:58:08 PM

Just because someone comments or criticizes the administration or it's choices, doesn't mean they are "lib bating". It simply means they are commenting and criticizing the administration or it's choices. It's not an attack on a group of people with a particular ideological viewpoint.

And honestly, if it is? What would you call the last 8 years? Was it "Conservabating"?
Pun Intended.

 

[E B]

Date: 2/3/2009 6:15:39 PM
Author: beebrisk

Just because someone comments or criticizes the administration or it's choices, doesn't mean they are 'lib bating'. It simply means they are commenting and criticizing the administration or it's choices. It's not an attack on a group of people with a particular ideological viewpoint.

I don't really understand why we're discussing this, to be honest. risingsun asked why we couldn't discuss the topic without the nasty comments (even though we were all on the same page), and I gave her my opinion as to why. It's why we can't rationally discuss most topics- people (on a message board, especially) love to snark and both sides are guilty of this. Having different ideological viewpoints is the reason for the discussions, not the reason they fail.

 

[Allisonfaye]

Date: 2/3/2009 1:52:10 PM
Author: decodelighted

Date: 2/3/2009 1:33:49 PM
Author: Allisonfaye
What it makes me wonder is, for every person that gets nominated and cheats, how many are just cheating and we''ll never know because they are not under scrutiny.

My hunch ... 75% of people who itemize. People are awful. People love to ''get away'' with whatever they can. And the tax laws are virtually impossible to navigate -- even with professional help. Notice not many other types of *criminals* get far along in the vetting process. Everyone can figure out drug bust = bad, hit wife = bad ... but tax scheming seems to be a whole different matter. Like its a game to outwit the IRS. Amongst tax preparers and anyone who itemizes. The *culture* needs to change. Hopefully this coverage will make people hesitate a bit before filing their ''magical'' returns. But what really needs to occur is a streamlining of the tax codes so people with fourth grade educations can understand them. That''s the level newspapers write to. That''s the level most other forms etc are developed for. Sigh. Kinda miss Huckabee.

We itemize and not only do we do it honestly, we always get a message from Turbo Tax saying that based on our return, we pay way more taxes than the ''typical'' taxpayer in our bracket. We did get audited once over some options that we cashed in but DH just made a mistake on the software. We had the tax amount correct.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 2/3/2009 6:20:09 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 2/3/2009 6:15:39 PM
Having different ideological viewpoints is the reason for the discussions, not the reason they fail.

Couldn''t agree more. Really!

 

[risingsun]

Date: 2/3/2009 6:20:09 PM
Author: EBree

Date: 2/3/2009 6:15:39 PM
Author: beebrisk

Just because someone comments or criticizes the administration or it''s choices, doesn''t mean they are ''lib bating''. It simply means they are commenting and criticizing the administration or it''s choices. It''s not an attack on a group of people with a particular ideological viewpoint.

I don''t really understand why we''re discussing this, to be honest. risingsun asked why we couldn''t discuss the topic without the nasty comments (even though we were all on the same page), and I gave her my opinion as to why. It''s why we can''t rationally discuss most topics- people (on a message board, especially) love to snark and both sides are guilty of this. Having different ideological viewpoints is the reason for the discussions, not the reason they fail.

EBree~it''s like banging your head against a wall

There are many well-spoken posters who are on "both sides of the aisle." Then we have a small, but vocal, group of folks who are here to stir the pot. When confronted on their behavior, they strike back with more verbiage...and around it goes

 

[E B]

Date: 2/3/2009 6:44:34 PM
Author: risingsun

EBree~it's like banging your head against a wall

There are many well-spoken posters who are on 'both sides of the aisle.' Then we have a small, but vocal, group of folks who are here to stir the pot. When confronted on their behavior, they strike back with more verbiage...and around it goes

Very true. I find it funny that some of the more 'frequent' pot stirrers are the first to point fingers at the other side while refusing to acknowledge their own past and present behavior. I just got sick of their bullying, and it's all because I have an unpopular opinion! I'm innocent of any stirring, your honor! Truth is, few of us can say we're completely innocent. I know I'm not.

 

[decodelighted]

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is taking responsibility for mistakes in the handling of the tax controversy that led to Tom Daschle''s withdrawal as President Barack Obama''s nominee to be health and human services secretary, saying: "I screwed up."

The president did a series of back-to-back television interviews in which the subject of failed nominees was a top subject.

Obama told NBC "I''m frustrated with myself" for unintentionally sending a message that there are "two sets of rules" for paying taxes, "one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks."

"I take responsibility for this mistake," he told Fox News.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 2/3/2009 7:54:36 PM
Author: decodelighted
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is taking responsibility for mistakes in the handling of the tax controversy that led to Tom Daschle''s withdrawal as President Barack Obama''s nominee to be health and human services secretary, saying: ''I screwed up.''

The president did a series of back-to-back television interviews in which the subject of failed nominees was a top subject.

Obama told NBC ''I''m frustrated with myself'' for unintentionally sending a message that there are ''two sets of rules'' for paying taxes, ''one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks.''

''I take responsibility for this mistake,'' he told Fox News.

I''m liking him more and more every day.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 2/3/2009 7:54:36 PM
Author: decodelighted
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is taking responsibility for mistakes in the handling of the tax controversy that led to Tom Daschle''s withdrawal as President Barack Obama''s nominee to be health and human services secretary, saying: ''I screwed up.''


The president did a series of back-to-back television interviews in which the subject of failed nominees was a top subject.


Obama told NBC ''I''m frustrated with myself'' for unintentionally sending a message that there are ''two sets of rules'' for paying taxes, ''one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks.''


''I take responsibility for this mistake,'' he told Fox News.

Sending my

to Obama for this one. Thanks for posting deco!

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 2/3/2009 8:20:36 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS

Date: 2/3/2009 7:54:36 PM
Author: decodelighted
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is taking responsibility for mistakes in the handling of the tax controversy that led to Tom Daschle''s withdrawal as President Barack Obama''s nominee to be health and human services secretary, saying: ''I screwed up.''


The president did a series of back-to-back television interviews in which the subject of failed nominees was a top subject.


Obama told NBC ''I''m frustrated with myself'' for unintentionally sending a message that there are ''two sets of rules'' for paying taxes, ''one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks.''


''I take responsibility for this mistake,'' he told Fox News.

Sending my

to Obama for this one. Thanks for posting deco!

Def going to Ditto....but I''ve been thinking about it and it''s a little troubling, too. I mean, the decisions are only going to get harder from here on out. But I DO commend him for taking some responsibility.

 

[tradergirl]

Only problem with turning this into a lovein for Obama because he "took responsibility" is that again, he''s getting a pass for (take your pick)

1. Thinking the American public is too stupid to understand or care about these issues

2. Thinking his buds in Congress and the press will let this slide through anyway

3. Having an incompetent vetting system and transition team who let their ideology override every other factor. My god, when I think back on all the crap that got piled on McCain and his people for the "vetting" of Sarah Palin.

None of them are particularly positive.

 

[tradergirl]

From Politico this a.m.

Public polls indicate that that series of personnel decisions, each made in isolation, had begun to reach a politically dangerous critical mass.
A daily Rasmussen Reports poll of presidential approval on Tuesday showed 37 percent of the nation’s voters strongly approved of Obama’s leadership, the lowest rating since Election Day.

 

[zhuzhu]

Date: 2/4/2009 6:30:34 AM
Author: tradergirl
From Politico this a.m.


Public polls indicate that that series of personnel decisions, each made in isolation, had begun to reach a politically dangerous critical mass.

A daily Rasmussen Reports poll of presidential approval on Tuesday showed 37 percent of the nation’s voters strongly approved of Obama’s leadership, the lowest rating since Election Day.

I am sure this made your day.

We all know how much you hate Obama; but come on, just because we disagree with your sentiment does not make us "Obama lover".

 

[E B]

Date: 2/4/2009 6:30:34 AM
Author: tradergirl

A daily Rasmussen Reports poll of presidential approval on Tuesday showed 37 percent of the nation’s voters strongly approved of Obama’s leadership, the lowest rating since Election Day.

Eh, it's only down a few points from the start of polling. And for the rest of the numbers for today for anyone who's curious (and not just feeding on sensationalism), from Rasmussen:

Strongly Approve- 39 percent
(Approve Total- 62 percent)
Strongly Disapprove- 21 percent
(Disapprove Total- 36 percent)

Gallup has him at a 65 percent approval rating, only down three points from the first poll (taken after the first three days in office).

 

[tradergirl]

Zhuzhu: Yes, it made me happy but not for the reason you think. It''s proof that the American public is coming out from the spell finally and seeing this guy for who he really is.

And I don''t hate him. I''m sure if I had lunch with him, I''d find him very pleasant and interesting to talk to. What I hate are his policies.

And again, I''d compare my reaction to the gleeful piling on all of you all did during the fall on every tiny problem Sarah Palin ever had. Thread after thread after thread mocking and dissing her. It cuts both ways.

 

[zhuzhu]

Date: 2/4/2009 6:04:17 PM
Author: tradergirl
Zhuzhu: Yes, it made me happy but not for the reason you think. It''s proof that the American public is coming out from the spell finally and seeing this guy for who he really is.


And I don''t hate him. I''m sure if I had lunch with him, I''d find him very pleasant and interesting to talk to. What I hate are his policies.


And again, I''d compare my reaction to the gleeful piling on all of you all did during the fall on every tiny problem Sarah Palin ever had. Thread after thread after thread mocking and dissing her. It cuts both ways.

I am not here to defend for "who he is" as you have clearly made up your mind and there is really no point in discussing differed opinions any further.

I can not speak for anyone else here on PS, but there is no question in my mind the Sarah Palin does not even hold a candle to Obama as a president/VP candidate. Was it a "likable thing" to do when we criticized her attitude and lack of knowledge earlier? of course not to those of you who support her. The difference here is that they were "candidates" in Fall, and it was our job as voters to assess their capability/credibility to lead this country out of the shit hole. This time around Obama is ELECTED as OUR President. He has been in office for less than a month and I find it sad that biases against him come before actual result can be seen.

You obviously have a lot of prejudices possibly because some policies of his hurt your profitability, however his job is to improve the condition of this country, not your asset profile alone; and I am sorry that you feel like a victim because of what.

May peace be with you.