Another Obama Cabinet nominee with tax problems: Tom Daschle

elprincipe

elprincipe

CAGiversary!
Feedback
60 (100%)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100096749&ft=1&f=1012

So let me get this straight. Your VP is on record saying paying taxes is "patriotic," yet you nominate two tax cheats for your Cabinet, including one for TREASURY secretary? The more things change, the more they stay the same: different rules for the politically well-connected (see also: bailout, stimulus, Bill Clinton, Scooter Libby, ethanol, etc etc).

EDIT: Oh, this gets even better: he didn't pay Medicare taxes. The HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES nominee, who is expected to work on Obama's health care plan. Wow.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/30/AR2009013003793.html?hpid=topnews
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here we go, more details:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...01/31/AR2009013102021.html?wprss=rss_politics

He had known since July 2008 there was a problem, didn't pay up until Jan. 2, and didn't even tell Obama's people (who failed to detect this problem) until Jan.4. The article also details all the money he's gotten from the health care industry over the past few years. We're going to trust this guy to make health care policy? Please say it ain't so.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']For real. Let him stay in whichever Dakota he's from.[/quote]

I believe it's South Dakota, and I agree with you completely.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']its hard to pick a clean cabinet when all of washington is corrupt[/quote]

Then don't pick politicians. Pick people.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Then don't pick politicians. Pick people.[/QUOTE]

No Democrat or Republican will ever do this. They must pick politicians out of their own party, just as Darth Vader must obey his master.
 
I'm definitely disappointed with this revelation. I doubt it will prevent Daschle from being confirmed, but it's another small black-eye that, while not note-worthy alone, can grow into bigger concerns down the road.

Lest we forget -- we can have a "clean" cabinet secretary who is totally inept as his job/political hack (IE. Alberto "Gonzo" Gonzales), or someone less than spot-free but worthy of the spot. Which means that Daschle will have to work that much harder to prove that he was the right choice for the position despite his past.
 
[quote name='Ecofreak']Lest we forget -- we can have a "clean" cabinet secretary who is totally inept as his job/political hack (IE. Alberto "Gonzo" Gonzales), or someone less than spot-free but worthy of the spot. Which means that Daschle will have to work that much harder to prove that he was the right choice for the position despite his past.[/QUOTE]

Oh, no doubt about it. While not a Cabinet secretary, someone like Michael Brown fits this bill perfectly: no allegations of corruption, but positively inept.
 
how about if any elected official is caught "forgetting" to pay taxes, they are banned from holding office, now and forever. There would be a 48 hr grace period in which previous cheats could come out of the closet and still hold office as long as they paid a larger delinquency fee.
 
[quote name='vherub']how about if any elected official is caught "forgetting" to pay taxes, they are banned from holding office, now and forever. There would be a 48 hr grace period in which previous cheats could come out of the closet and still hold office as long as they paid a larger delinquency fee.[/QUOTE]

That would probably be necessary since we don't want to have to hold too many special elections at once in such a poor economic climate that Congress and the current/past presidents have created.
 
[quote name='vherub']how about if any elected official is caught "forgetting" to pay taxes, they are banned from holding office, now and forever. There would be a 48 hr grace period in which previous cheats could come out of the closet and still hold office as long as they paid a larger delinquency fee.[/QUOTE]
I would support something like that, except my own years long brawl with the IRS (in which they were unable to provide any supporting evidence of my perceived liability) has essentially put me in the same boat with these jerkoffs that dodge taxes on purpose if my story was run by a media outlet.

I think a law that required an audit of all federal political office holders each year would be very beneficial not only to cleaning up the dodging these assholes do, but the perception of dodging.

Daschle should be shown the door. Period.
 
IRS.jpg


Pay your damn taxes, people.
 
Heh, this is expected of him. The man Obama chose to fix our health care system turns out to be a guy who doesn't support Medicare AND helped create this sorry state US health is in now.

The Pres should've chose Clinton for this job instead.
 
[quote name='detectiveconan16']Heh, this is expected of him. The man Obama chose to fix our health care system turns out to be a guy who doesn't support Medicare AND helped create this sorry state US health is in now.

The Pres should've chose Clinton for this job instead.[/QUOTE]

He already put her in charge of foreign policy. Remember? The one major substantive area they strongly disagreed on?

...

...

...

Yeesh.
 
Obama did admit to screwing up on Daschle. Besides, do you think he sits around and analyzes everyone's tax returns (or lack of) when he's putting together a cabinet? I bet half the people McCain would've picked would be in the same predicament but we'll never know.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
IRS.jpg


Pay your damn taxes, people.[/QUOTE]

worst gimmick ever.

[quote name='depascal22']I bet half the people McCain would've picked would be in the same predicament but we'll never know.[/QUOTE]

and if he did thered be a thread about it thats 3 times as long complaining about how terrible mccain is.
 
You don't really expect us to take you seriously when you're implicating that our President is a terrorist with that little cartoon you have there do you?

For all your bluster about the country, you have just as much desire to divide and separate all of us as any of the assholes on talk radio.
 
[quote name='depascal22']You don't really expect us to take you seriously when you're implicating that our President is a terrorist with that little cartoon you have there do you?[/quote]I'm pretty sure it's meant to be ironic. Or satirical. Or... something.
 
[quote name='depascal22']You don't really expect us to take you seriously when you're implicating that our President is a terrorist with that little cartoon you have there do you?

For all your bluster about the country, you have just as much desire to divide and separate all of us as any of the assholes on talk radio.[/QUOTE]

as far as my sig goes, get a sense of humor. its a joke. if anything its more of a jab fox news than obamas.

youre the one that brought up a hypothetical situation about mccain, im just playing along.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Besides, do you think he sits around and analyzes everyone's tax returns (or lack of) when he's putting together a cabinet?[/QUOTE]

Uh, didn't he continue his support for the tax cheats even after the stories broke?
 
[quote name='rickonker']Uh, didn't he continue his support for the tax cheats even after the stories broke?[/QUOTE]
Yes. Just like Bush I and II, Clinton, and Reagan. I don't remember any before that.

Given the fact that every single president has had problems of some similar sort or another with multiple appointees, is it really reasonable to expect them to vet these people back to their conception? No tax accountant could have "found" Daschle's omission. I point this out just to frame the reference. Given that, it is reasonable to expect the president to throw each person under the bus that has something like this in their past, even if the person really is the best person for the job? I'm not saying Daschle was the best for the job, but I question this deep seated need to smash the president with shortcomings of his picks when it seems pretty explicitly clear that this wasn't an anticipated issue and when the president feels that this is the best person for the job. Does it show good judgment on Obama's part? No. Is he going to get it all right all the time? No.

Is this a trivial thing in the great scheme of it? Hell yea. Petty as fuck.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Yes. Just like Bush I and II, Clinton, and Reagan. I don't remember any before that.[/quote]

Yeah.

Is this a trivial thing in the great scheme of it? Hell yea. Petty as fuck.
Click to expand...

Maybe it just seems trivial because you're used to it now.
 
[quote name='rickonker']Maybe it just seems trivial because you're used to it now.[/QUOTE]
Nah. It's cause you can't get to that level of office without somehow being a scumbag. And Daschle is definitely a scumbag.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Nah. It's cause you can't get to that level of office without somehow being a scumbag. And Daschle is definitely a scumbag.[/QUOTE]

Well that's my point. If all the others weren't scumbags, I doubt you'd call this trivial. But of course they are, so you did.
 
[quote name='rickonker']Well that's my point. If all the others weren't scumbags, I doubt you'd call this trivial. But of course they are, so you did.[/QUOTE]
Well, that's the whole point of the coming of Obama right? :D
 
[quote name='depascal22']Obama did admit to screwing up on Daschle. Besides, do you think he sits around and analyzes everyone's tax returns (or lack of) when he's putting together a cabinet? ...[/QUOTE]

Yes, it's called VETTING. They have an entire staff dedicated to it along with the power of the most overreaching bureaus of the federal government. If Bush makes a call like this it's called buffoonery for a week on every talk show on television. Because a Democrat is in the White House, it's an oversight or unimportant misstep and we won't hear about it ever again. Hell, in 2 more years, Daschle will be able to take some other position without anyone even bothering to question his integrity.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Yes. Just like Bush I and II, Clinton, and Reagan. I don't remember any before that.

Given the fact that every single president has had problems of some similar sort or another with multiple appointees, is it really reasonable to expect them to vet these people back to their conception? No tax accountant could have "found" Daschle's omission. I point this out just to frame the reference. Given that, it is reasonable to expect the president to throw each person under the bus that has something like this in their past, even if the person really is the best person for the job? I'm not saying Daschle was the best for the job, but I question this deep seated need to smash the president with shortcomings of his picks when it seems pretty explicitly clear that this wasn't an anticipated issue and when the president feels that this is the best person for the job. Does it show good judgment on Obama's part? No. Is he going to get it all right all the time? No.

Is this a trivial thing in the great scheme of it? Hell yea. Petty as fuck.[/quote]

Come on, speedracer. You understand as much as any of us the need to manage expectations. Obama image post-election was an impossible standard to meet. If this was any other politician we would just chalk it up to "politics".

If I am shaking my head at anything, it would be the apology. Obama has more intimate knowledge of Tom Daschle than Dashle's wife. He just didn't think his past would be a big issue.
 
So who's he going to put up as a SC nominee? Obviously going to be a woman. And most likely crazy as hell.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']So who's he going to put up as a SC nominee? Obviously going to be a woman. And most likely crazy as hell.[/QUOTE]

Crazy woman you say?

HugoChavesAndCindySheehan.jpg


Sorry, just the first thing that came to mind. I don't suppose level1 is a woman?
 
[quote name='paddlefoot']Come on, speedracer. You understand as much as any of us the need to manage expectations. Obama image post-election was an impossible standard to meet. If this was any other politician we would just chalk it up to "politics".[/quote]
Well the big question is how long he gets a pass on this kind of stuff. On a positive note, an attentive electorate is hoping for more than we've seen so far. Also, the dude hasn't been there for a month yet.
If I am shaking my head at anything, it would be the apology. Obama has more intimate knowledge of Tom Daschle than Dashle's wife. He just didn't think his past would be a big issue.
Click to expand...
So if I want a guy to work for me, and he hasn't paid taxes on a gift that is impossible to "vet" (the vetters aren't from the NSA guys), and he happens to "forget" to mention it... I mean, how do you handle something like that? Did it happen like that? I'd like to think so. Eithier way, good riddance to bad garbage. Maybe the next pick won't be a scumbag.

I personally believe that a president should be given his cabinet as they desire them, unless the picks are egregiously bad. Tax dodgers are pretty hard to justify.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Well the big question is how long he gets a pass on this kind of stuff. On a positive note, an attentive electorate is hoping for more than we've seen so far. Also, the dude hasn't been there for a month yet.

So if I want a guy to work for me, and he hasn't paid taxes on a gift that is impossible to "vet" (the vetters aren't from the NSA guys), and he happens to "forget" to mention it... I mean, how do you handle something like that? Did it happen like that? I'd like to think so. Eithier way, good riddance to bad garbage. Maybe the next pick won't be a scumbag.

I personally believe that a president should be given his cabinet as they desire them, unless the picks are egregiously bad. Tax dodgers are pretty hard to justify.[/QUOTE]


The funny thing is that Daschle didn't have to bow out. He could have just sailed through a confirmation and it would have just blown over since every comment by his Senator buddies was of sympathy and how he's such a good guy. I mean seriously, what kind of backlash would the American people really have generated? None, I say.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']The funny thing is that Daschle didn't have to bow out. He could have just sailed through a confirmation and it would have just blown over since every comment by his Senator buddies was of sympathy and how he's such a good guy. I mean seriously, what kind of backlash would the American people really have generated? None, I say.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely correct. I guess one tax cheat in the Cabinet is enough. Maybe if Geithner wasn't in charge of the IRS they could have had two.

You know, Geithner's tax problems are probably worse than Daschle's. Daschle could claim he didn't know about the liablity (although this is disturbing from someone who sat on the Senate Finance Committee - you know, the one that writes tax laws?), but Geithner actually signed acknowledgements every year that he owed U.S. tax when getting reimbursed for those taxes by the IMF.
 
[quote name='rickonker']Future generations are going to laugh at us for putting up with scumbags like Geithner.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but at this point we're still in the 'crying' phase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top