U. S. Politics II

[DanteGabriel]

[quote name='AndyP' post='1650544' date='Jan 15 2009, 17.48']To what point, so people can have more bad feelings about each other, this issue is a piffle. If your going to dredge up Bush is a jackass every time someone on team Obama gets criticized then we will never move forward. Your no different than Dirjj bringing up Clinton every time someone took a swing at Bush. That wasn't a valid defense then, nor is this now. Like I said unless something more comes up (like evidence showing intent of evade paying taxes) this isn't an issue. If people are going to have a knock down drag out fight over something at least do it for something important. Frankly DG, your smart enough.[/quote]
I'll address criticisms of Obama and his administration as they come up, on the merits of each criticism. If it's this kind of crap, I feel no problem throwing Bush's enormities right back. And since we've still got a few days left in the Reign of Bush the Lesser, I think the Bush stuff at least has a little more currency than the eight-year-old specter of Bubba Clinton.

Conservatives, expect to have Bush and the utter, disastrous failure of his freebooting right wing policies thrown back in your faces for at least a decade. There's no disowning him now.

[Annelise]

Re: new WH correspondents...

[quote]That change we keep hearing about won’t be restricted to the president’s quarters.

When incoming press secretary Robert Gibbs approaches the podium in the White House Briefing Room, a new cast of notebook-clutching, laptop-tapping reporters will be there to greet him as the five biggest news networks are all switching up their chief White House correspondents to cover the 44th president.

The new faces will be Chuck Todd (NBC), Jake Tapper (ABC), Chip Reid (CBS) and Ed Henry (CNN). Although Fox News hasn’t named a replacement for Bret Baier — who just took over “Special Report” — the betting money in Washington is on correspondent Major Garrett, who covered the Obama campaign. While all the correspondents played significant roles during the 2008 election, their White House experience varies from several years to none at all.

With surveys showing the public believes Barack Obama received easier coverage during the campaign, coupled with lingering criticism of how the White House press corps dropped the ball as the Bush administration made the case for invading Iraq, the incoming group has a few hurdles to overcome.

“No reporter should be there thinking they need to win a popularity contest with the public,” said Sam Donaldson, the veteran newsman who’s sparred with a few White House press secretaries.

“I’ve found that if you do your job right, you earn the respect of the people in the White House, including the president,” Donaldson added, “even if you ask him an uncomfortable question.”

With Obama inheriting two wars and an economic meltdown, there should be no shortage of tough questions to ask. Here's a look at the reporters who will be asking them:[/quote]


Oh look, it's my congressman... heh, I thought about this too when I saw the final results on election night... his was the closest race in the state that still resulted in a Republican win.

[quote]Roll Call’s Shira Toeplitz reports today that one of the most vulnerable Republican members in 2010 is Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.), who only won 51 percent of the vote against an underfunded Democratic opponent in 2008.

And he appears to recognize he's facing a tough race, casting a surprising vote in support of SCHIP legislation expanding federally-funded health care for children.

Per House Race Hotline’s Tim Sahd (subscription only):

The biggest "aye" surprise came from Thad McCotter (R-MI 11). Yes, that's the same McCotter who heads the conservative GOP Study Cmte and who blogged during the '07 S-CHIP vote that GOPers should battle Dems on the bill, and if they didn't, the party would "not only lose the next election. It will lose its soul." So what changed? In '08, McCotter took just 51% against a Dem who raised just $29K. And he sits in a CD that Pres-elect Obama surely won.[/quote][url="http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/"]http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/[/url]

[Lord O' Bones]

[quote name='DanteGabriel' post='1650524' date='Jan 15 2009, 14.34']I'm going to keep reminding him about what kind of a disaster he voted for.[/quote]
As I recall, he voted for Obama.

[Annelise]

[quote name='DanteGabriel' post='1650557' date='Jan 15 2009, 17.59']Conservatives, expect to have Bush and the utter, disastrous failure of his freebooting right wing policies thrown back in your faces for at least a decade. There's no disowning him now.[/quote]

Just sig that, and save yourself some typing.

[Cuellar]

I voted for and supported Obama... and I will say this tax thing is bullshit.

I can understand if you're working for burger king and forget to pay some taxes from your job washing cars on the weekend... but if you work at the IMF, chances are you're highly educated in finance. How do you achieve one of the highest financial posts in the land when you royally fuck up your taxes this badly, and still expect anyone to take you seriously? Worse, I think he was outright evading taxes.... therefore he would be a horrible TREASURY SECRETARY.

Now if he was ambassador to Denmark, I honestly wouldn't care too much that he was a scumbag (or idiot), but this is TREASURY SECRETARY we're talking about. Any financial blemish on your record and you should not be considered under any circumstance.


For me the real disappointment with Obama is how he basically brought on all of the usual suspects into his cabinet and every other position. He doesn't really have any fresh blood or new perspectives coming in.

[Shryke]

[quote name='Cuellar' post='1650692' date='Jan 15 2009, 20.15']For me the real disappointment with Obama is how he basically brought on all of the usual suspects into his cabinet and every other position. He doesn't really have any fresh blood or new perspectives coming in.[/quote]

Where would this new blood come from?

[Frog Eater]

When I was watching MSNBC last night, I thought they were telling me that he neglected to pay social security and medicare for his housekeeper, who's status expired 3 months before she left his employ. When I heard that, I could not care less.

However, after reading these articles, what is really happening is completely different, and may indeed be a big deal. Everyone knows that FICA is taken from your paycheck. Even the guy flipping Whoppers at Burger King knows that FICA is taken. But not a guy who works at the IMF? I KNOW he was evading taxes. People at his level have accountants, CPA's. He knew better.

But I also heard that this guy is the only one in Washington that fully understands TARP. So maybe Washington is stuck with him.

[Watcher]

I hope some of Bush's cronies to go to jail for their crimes. I'd love Bush and Cheney to be sitting behind bars but I really doubt that will ever happen. At the least I'd like a lot of the documents, e-mails and such things to be made public.

Any guesses when the first Supreme Court Justice retires after Obama is sworn in?

[Celtigo]

[quote name='Watcher' post='1650797' date='Jan 15 2009, 22.02']I hope some of Bush's cronies to go to jail for their crimes. I'd love Bush and Cheney to be sitting behind bars but I really doubt that will ever happen. At the least I'd like a lot of the documents, e-mails and such things to be made public.

Any guesses when the first Supreme Court Justice retires after Obama is sworn in?[/quote]

Stevens is likely packing his bags as we speak.

[Ser King]

The failure of the Bush presidency lies not in a failed execution of policy but in the policies themselves and the neoconservative ideology that informed them.

[Ormond]

I haven't been reading this thread lately, but I accidentally ran across this article about George W/'s legacy from [i]The Economist[/i] and found it so interesting I thought I would share it:

[url="http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12931660"]http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstate...ory_id=12931660[/url]

[Anya, Vengeance Demon]

[quote name='Frog Eater' post='1650743' date='Jan 15 2009, 21.08']People at his level have accountants, CPA's. He knew better.[/quote]

As far as we know, Geithner [url="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/politics/14geithner.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper"]got bad advice from his CPA[/url]. And once again, this isn't exactly uncommon for Americans who work for international organizations. In 2007, up to half of all American employees at international organizations misfile their taxes for exactly this reason. Why would they all spontaneously try to keep their Social Security and Medicare taxes? Is it a conspiracy?

[DanteGabriel]

If you can stomach it, the [url="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/01/remarks_by_the_president_in_farewell_address_to_th.php"]full text[/url] of Bush's farewell address to the nation.

ETA: Chris Matthews called it a view of the presidency like "every kid gets a trophy who participates."

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

DG,

[quote]Conservatives, expect to have Bush and the utter, disastrous failure of his freebooting right wing policies thrown back in your faces for at least a decade. There's no disowning him now.[/quote]

In all sincerity, I'd be disappointed if you let those of us who support or have supported Bush off the hook.

:)

(That said it's still not relevant to this nomination.)

Harry,

From the article you linked:

[quote]The underpayments all involve Mr. Geithner’s income as a senior official at the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2003, including a small payment in 2004 after he had left. Mr. Geithner worked there after leaving the Treasury, where he had risen to under secretary for international affairs in the Clinton administration, and before becoming president of the New York Fed, a post that has put him at the center of the economic crisis.

The I.M.F., as an international organization, does not withhold payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare from its American employees’ paychecks. Those workers are required to pay the roughly 15 percent tax themselves, as if they were self-employed.

[b]However, the I.M.F. does pay its American workers an amount equal to an employer’s half of the payroll taxes, with the expectation that they will use that to pay the I.R.S. The organization also gives them quarterly wage statements that include United States tax liabilities.[/b]

Mr. Geithner fully paid his state and federal income taxes. In failing to pay his payroll taxes, he in effect kept the money the I.M.F. had contributed toward his liability. However, Mr. Geithner’s accountant told him he was exempt from self-employment taxes, according to Obama transition officials.

As Obama officials pointed out, and I.R.S. documents attest, the failure to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes is common among Americans who work for international organizations, including foreign embassies. A 2007 I.R.S. notice reported that up to half of such employees incorrectly file their tax returns. [emphasis added][/quote]

Look I don't think it's a conspiracy. However, I have to wonder if a bunch of IMF employees didn't independently or amongst themselves say, "You know the IMF is an international organization with diplomatic immunity. I wonder if the IRS [i]can[/i] subpoena our wage information...?" That or they are like Einstein and can do high end mathmatics but have a hard time with simply things like wage tax calculations. Either way it doesn't reflect favorably upon someone who is nominated to be the Treasury Secretary and I'm bothered by that.

The other thing that bothers me is that not infrequently when someone gets "bad advice from a CPA" they end up hounded by the IRS or in jail. This man did something most would regret for the rest of their lives and is being nominated to run the agency that will make those people suffer.

[Guy Kilmore]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1651188' date='Jan 16 2009, 06.51']The other thing that bothers me is that not infrequently when someone gets "bad advice from a CPA" they end up hounded by the IRS or in jail. This man did something most would regret for the rest of their lives and is being nominated to run the agency that will make those people suffer.[/quote]
I don't know where this issue falls on the spectrum of bad behavior from the IRS. We recognize that driving above the speed limit is against the law. I am willing to bet that most of us do it or have done it, either accidently or on purpose. Whichever, we recognize that there are degrees to accountiability given the situation. I don't think someone getting a speeding ticket prevents them from working with the Transit Authority.

I do not know where this falls on the spectrum of bad behavior in the IRS's eyes and its code. From this articles and the ones I read, it isn't a big deal if the person who has been involved is notified and they correct it. It also seems to be something that is common and if the IRS had a huge issue with it they are aware of it and have opportunity to do something about it. It sounds like some of your beef should be how the IRS is handling this issue.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Guy,

Maybe. It just sort of grates to hear how Mr. Geithner’s mistakes are poo-pooed while others, who don't have the money he had to pay the fines and penalites, get to live with the IRS in their wallet for years on end.

[Guy Kilmore]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1651247' date='Jan 16 2009, 08.04']Guy,

Maybe. It just sort of grates to here how Mr. Geithner’s mistakes are poo-pooed while others, who don't have the money he had to pay the fines and penalites, get to live with the IRS in their wallet for years on end.[/quote]
I don't neccessarily disagree. It just seems like you are tarring Mr. Geithner, and the others who this type of issue is a common occurance, for the IRS not going after him tooth and nail. He has no control over that, his responsibility is to accept the consequence as determined by the regulatory agency. If the consequence is not steep enough, that is not his fault.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Guy,

Maybe not. But it bother's me that he's being nominated to be the chief administrator of the IRS. He may be the best person for the job but that doesn't make me feel any more comfortable having someone who forgot to pay his taxes for four years in that position.

[Watcher]

[quote name='Ormond' post='1650817' date='Jan 15 2009, 21.23']I haven't been reading this thread lately, but I accidentally ran across this article about George W/'s legacy from [i]The Economist[/i] and found it so interesting I thought I would share it:

[url="http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12931660"]http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstate...ory_id=12931660[/url][/quote]

That's a good article. I think even before 9/11/2001 his administration was reflecting his stubbornness and how he was going to govern.

So is it time to start ridiculing his interviews from the past couple of weeks? Or could we start a thread dedicated to his complete failure* the day after he leaves office?


*I will give him credit for safeguarding 195,000 miles of Pacific Ocean

[G'Kar]

From George Bush's farewell adress:

[quote]There is legitimate debate about many of these decisions. But there can be little debate about the results. America has gone more than seven years without another terrorist attack on our soil. This is a tribute to those who toil night and day to keep us safe -- law enforcement officers, intelligence analysts, homeland security and diplomatic personnel, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces.[/quote]

Should George Bush get credit for this? Are we safer at home seven years later?