Yet another Obama Cabinet pick, Tom Daschle, in hot water for not paying his Taxes

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Oh, yes. This cabinet is SO corrupt!

There is going to be some corruption in government. You all know that. The difference is, it's a LOT less in the Obama cabinet than previously.

How many days as Obama been President, and he's already picked two complete wastes of skin as cabinet members?

Since it's Obama's cabinet, it's ok if there's "some" corruption in government, huh?

I do not really care if anyone pays their taxes. Taxes should be illegal, it is so wrong that our citizens are having our hard earned money stolen by our government to give to crooks and liars in the first place.

But what IS a bit, not surprising but actually expected, is his padding of his cabinet with Clinton cronies.

That said, I like the Clintons, Hill especially. And when Bill was President, I heard rumors Hill and Tom were close. Anyway, I see Clinton handwriting all over this appointment. Personally, and this is just my own specualtion, I think Obama and Hill had some kind of deal, where she dropped out gracefully and let him have the glory, if he appoints her chosen people to positions. (Biden is a Clinton cronie too.) Here are some random snippets that support a Clinton hand in the nomination, along with some information about Tom.

www.theage.com.au...

"She has earned praise for her performance in the Senate, and the Senate majority leader, Tom Daschle, recently appointed her head of the Senate Democratic Steering Committee, a position that gives Mrs Clinton a key role in developing the party's political agenda."

www.newsweek.com...

"Hillary's win could be a foothold for her husband in a city he can't bear to leave behind. "Her winning is his platform to come back to town," says one former aide. The ex-president won't be allowed in the Senate cloakroom, but, says Sen. Tom Daschle, "we fully expect he'll be visible and involved." Politics has always been a family affair for the Clintons. But as the president likes to say, for the first 26 years it was his turn. Now it's hers."

www.truthdig.com...

"She told me in a 2001 interview—around the time a supermarket tabloid floated a bizarre story that tried to link her romantically with former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle—that she was merely following motherly advice."

www.enquirer.com...

" Sens. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., placed holds on Mr. Schregardus after Ms. Boxer and three other committee Democrats — Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Ron Wyden of Oregon and Jon Corzine of New Jersey, voted against the nomination. "

www.dailykos.com...

"You know who else was instrumental in blocking the passage of the Big Brother Patriot Act? Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy.

Patrick Leahy, who was infamously told by Dick Cheney to "go #" himself, with Tom Daschle were the ONLY two politicians to be sent anthrax in the 2001 anthrax attacks.

The anthrax that was proven to be from our own military. "

www.boston.com...

"WASHINGTON -- Hoping to strike back at Republicans who mounted a yearslong effort to oust him from office, former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle is helping raise millions of dollars to form a new political advocacy group aimed at creating a clearinghouse of opposition-research information against all Senate Republicans."

Ironic....

www.mediaresearch.org...

"7) FNC's Trace Gallagher confirmed that Tom Daschle is correct about how a $25,000 waitress would get no tax cut, "but that's because she's not paying any federal taxes -- not a nickel." The rich would receive a big cut, but "that's because they're being leaned on the most by the federal government."



Like I said not surprising. I am beginning to wonder how many of his appointments are former Clintonites. Some change.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Really? Says who, just you?

It's not just me, no. There's always going to be some corruption in government, but George Bush's administration takes the cake.

Well,

now it's us telling you to wait - to see how badly this is going to turn out based on the first week(s) of "change".

Ok. I'll wait. I really don't have much of a choice, do I?

Originally posted by jerico65
Since it's Obama's cabinet, it's ok if there's "some" corruption in government, huh?

I didn't say that, dude. You did. I'm not saying it's ok at all. Re-read my post.

Originally posted by Uniceft17

Originally posted by lernmore
What happened to all those promises of change? He made it sound like he was going to clean house and get this country off to a "fresh start". I think America got duped.

Because a guy didn't pay his taxes? Grasping at anything you can get your hands on I can see.

Everyone went from complaining our President was the worst in US History, to him being a war criminal, etc, etc (Their is a huge list). To OMG he picked a guy who didn't pay his taxes on a limo, We got lucky compared to the alternative, don't take it for granted.

When you find something substantial worth talking about i'll be here.



[edit on 2/1/2009 by Uniceft17]

[edit on 2/1/2009 by Uniceft17]

[edit on 2/1/2009 by Uniceft17]

[edit on 2/1/2009 by Uniceft17]

Uh, simple point which you obviously missed. Not paying taxes = against the law.

Also, Daschle obviously had no intention of reporting this until he had to - IE when he was vetted for a cabinet position. These guys think they are above the very government they serve and you want to give him a pass, along with Geithner?

****snip****



Mod Edit: to remove insult directed at a fellow member.

Please review the following in order to prevent future action against your ATS account:


Civility and Decorum are Required

General ATS Discussion Etiquette

*Please do not alter or remove this text*


[edit on 2/2/2009 by kinglizard]

Originally posted by centurion1211
Some of us have been pointing this kind of thing out for months now.

What? No defenders of obama and daschle on here yet.

Could it be that they are starting to realize the error of their vote?

Or can it be that they've just folded their tents and are giving up the debate?

The voters of South Dakota kicked daschle out for a reason some years ago. But then obama chose to 'resurrect' him (something only a 'messiah' can do) as part of obama's 'change' promise

. But picking corrupt and crooked politicians to run the government is not change.

As we've been saying ...

[edit on 1/31/2009 by centurion1211]

Ya mate, would be a solid position for you if you were not a BUSH/Cheny apologist.

Doesn't mean yer guys don't suck just as much! sorry

vini shilli peachy

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Oh, yes. This cabinet is SO corrupt!

There is going to be some corruption in government. You all know that. The difference is, it's a LOT less in the Obama cabinet than previously. No one claimed perfection. But it's a HUGE CHANGE from the Bush years. You don't even want to start comparing the level of sickening, illegal and immoral corruption that happened during the last administration.

If you expect a 100% pristine government with Obama, you're going to be drastically disappointed. I (and other Obama supporters) had no such unrealistic expectations.

I KNEW IT! I KNEW IT! I KNEW IT! In your own words you have EXPOSED yourself, BH as a BIASED supporter of Obama.

Your new president's cabinet is being stocked with proven criminals and you're willing to give Obama a pass "because of the last administration". It IS against the law not to pay your taxes just because you damn well don't feel like it - don't even bother debating that. So now it's okay to break laws because of what we had the last 8 years.

You've just proven yourself BIASED and in my opinion, UNAMERICAN. And hopefully people will realize that everything you post from here on out caters to your sickening bias of a perfect Obama administration that only exists in your mind.

Originally posted by sos37

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You've just proven yourself BIASED and in my opinion, UNAMERICAN. And hopefully people will realize that everything you post from here on out caters to your sickening bias of a perfect Obama administration that only exists in your mind.

Come on were all biased one way or another.

Obama and Bush are men... I think Bush should be hanging from a tree and Obama is moving to my list slowly but surely.

reply to post by mopusvindictus

Whats the big deal about this? The tax code is retarded anyway, it's far too complicated, too many things to deal with.... Tax on a rental limo what? The whole point of getting a Limo is to forget your worries for 30 minutes back and forth while transporting yourself...

Well, that defense might be ok for someone not in Congress, but remember, Daschle and his friends in Congress CREATED all of the complicated nuances in the tax code!

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
reply to post by mopusvindictus

 

Whats the big deal about this? The tax code is retarded anyway, it's far too complicated, too many things to deal with.... Tax on a rental limo what? The whole point of getting a Limo is to forget your worries for 30 minutes back and forth while transporting yourself...

Well, that defense might be ok for someone not in Congress, but remember, Daschle and his friends in Congress CREATED all of the complicated nuances in the tax code!

Good point and he should be required to square up.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

If you expect a 100% pristine government with Obama, you're going to be drastically disappointed. I (and other Obama supporters) had no such unrealistic expectations.

BH, what is wrong with trying to get there.
Look, I don't blame Obama for picking these people, because he couldn't possibly know about all his nominees' tax situations. However, once they were uncovered during the vetting process, I think it would have been best to go to choice "B", don't you? That would have sent a clear signal that he will not tolerate dishonestly or obfuscation. His failure to do that, IMO, does not mesh with his rhetoric, that he will not tolerate corruption in his administration.

Originally posted by sos37
In your own words you have EXPOSED yourself, BH as a BIASED supporter of Obama.

I don't even know what you mean by that. Of course I'm biased toward Obama. I support him and I voted for him. Why else would I vote for him if I wasn't biased? We ALL have bias. I have never claimed to be free of bias.

Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result. ...

I am NOT "giving Obama a pass". I'm simply saying that I don't (and never have) expected perfection OR to agree with him on everything he does. Don't you remember me saying that?

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

. So now it's okay to break laws because of what we had the last 8 years.

No, I have NEVER said it's okay and it's not okay with me. You are assuming that because I point out that Bush was exponentially worse that I approve of Geithner OR Daschle. I do not. I have never said I do. That's YOUR assumption.

UNAMERICAN.

Oh, please!

And hopefully people will realize that everything you post from here on out caters to your sickening bias of a perfect Obama administration that only exists in your mind.

Show me where I have claimed "a perfect Obama administration". I have always said that he's not perfect - he will do things I disagree with. I've said he's a man, and a politician! Your assumptions are in your mind. If you would read what I SAY instead of what you want to hear, perhaps you wouldn't be so confused about it.

You have had full opportunity to see what I have said about Obama as a man, not perfect, and even not what I really want for this country, but because I saw him as the best choice we have, you have fabricated that I think he's perfect. You are WRONG. And that's YOUR problem.

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
BH, what is wrong with trying to get there.

Nothing! I absolutely agree we should try to get there.

(And thank you, ProfEmeritus, for asking for clarification instead of making unfounded assumptions.)

However, once they were uncovered during the vetting process, I think it would have been best to go to choice "B", don't you?

Yes, I do. And in fact, I don't think Geithner OR Daschle should be (or should have been) confirmed. That's my personal stance.

That would have sent a clear signal that he will not tolerate dishonestly or obfuscation. His failure to do that, IMO, does not mesh with his rhetoric, that he will not tolerate corruption in his administration.

I agree. It would have sent that signal. But I think the TRUTH is that he WILL tolerate some. Clearly.

And that's what I've been saying. I have always said that I don't expect him to be perfect. I would LOVE it if he took a firm stance against corruption in government and disallowed ANYONE who has ever done anything illegal in his cabinet. But I also think if he did that, he would be 4 years trying to fill it.

It's like this... (please allow a diet analogy) The Bush administration gorged on pizza, McDonald's and cookies every meal, every day. We all know that's not healthy and a steady diet of pizza, McDonald's and cookies will lead to a totally unhealthy person. Obama is having one pizza, one meal at McDonald's and 2 cookies every month. The food is still crap, but the overall person is going to be a lot healthier. He still shouldn't eat crap, but he's going to be a lot better off than the guy who gorges on it every day.

The Bush administration gorged on corruption every day. Obama has some, but MUCH less. That's all I'm saying. Change is a process.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

Democrats don't really have any standards to live up to, so they get a pass. Its the medias job to flesh this stuff out, but they're doing their best to cover it up and report it as little as they can. They did the same thing with Timothy Geithner and so he breezed through confirmation.

We tried to warn you all that a democrat controlled media, congress and white house would be a very bad thing and now you're going to see why!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Oh, please!

Was it not Biden who said its patriotic to pay your taxes??



[edit on 2-2-2009 by Cio88]

Originally posted by Cio88
Democrats don't really have any standards to live up to, so they get a pass. Its the medias job to flesh this stuff out, but they're doing their best to cover it up and report it as little as they can. They did the same thing with Timothy Geithner and so he breezed through confirmation.

We tried to warn you all that a democrat controlled media, congress and white house would be a very bad thing and now you're going to see why!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Oh, please!

Was it not Biden who said its patriotic to pay your taxes??

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Cio88]

Yep, it sure was. It was also Obama who made the statement saying that anyone who doesn't want to pay an "increase" in their taxes is selfish.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And BH, don't even bother to try backpeddling, you CLEARLY indicated that you didn't see the big deal in all of this because of what we had in the last administration.

My bias, on the other hand, lies with the United States of America, not to your president and certainly not to some two-bit hack Senator who neglected his obligations as an American citizen to pay his taxes.

Un-American, AND disgusting.

Originally posted by sos37
And BH, don't even bother to try backpeddling, you CLEARLY indicated that you didn't see the big deal in all of this because of what we had in the last administration.

I don't think it IS a big deal. It's a blemish on the Obama administration. It's something I disagree with. But it's certainly not going to bring him down or ruin the whole thing. It's not the end of the world, as some here are making it out to be. It's not like lying to start a war, torturing prisoners or propositioning kids. It's "small stuff". I don't approve of it. It's NOT okay or excusable. But all this false outrage is ridiculous.

And I'm not backpeddling. You're the one who stepped in it with your unfounded accusations. I proved you were mistaken about my position. If anyone needs to backpeddle, it's you.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by sos37
And BH, don't even bother to try backpeddling, you CLEARLY indicated that you didn't see the big deal in all of this because of what we had in the last administration.

I don't think it IS a big deal. It's a blemish on the Obama administration. It's something I disagree with. But it's certainly not going to bring him down or ruin the whole thing. It's not the end of the world, as some here are making it out to be. It's not like lying to start a war, torturing prisoners or propositioning kids. It's "small stuff". I don't approve of it. It's NOT okay or excusable. But all this false outrage is ridiculous.

And I'm not backpeddling. You're the one who stepped in it with your unfounded accusations. I proved you were mistaken about my position. If anyone needs to backpeddle, it's you.

Uh, no. I'm not taking the low road that you took. I don't feel the need to backpeddle, thanks, because I know I'm correct on this issue. My allegations aren't unfounded and my opinions about you are MY opinions; but judging by the number of stars in that response, I'd say there are more than a few people who agree with me.

"False outrage"??? You can't be serious. You know maybe it was a fluke when it happened once with Geithner over $36,000. MAYBE. But here we go again with Daschle.

If Obama emerges from that Senate Finance Committee meeting today, ready to go ahead with the nomination of Daschle despite this information, he will have proven that this was NOT a fluke and that he is willing to accept CONFIRMED criminals in his cabinet. How can anyone respect that unless you have no respect for the law?

If he does the right thing and gets rid of Daschle, then I'll give him credit for doing the right thing.

[edit on 2-2-2009 by sos37]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Why do you deflect to the fact this is "Far better then the previous cabinet"

It doesn't matter .. if we have to pay taxes and the such .. the same rules should apply. Stop being the mouth service for this crook.

Not only am I getting tired of this lip service.. But a lot of other people are getting tired as well.

Which side are you on?

Buyer's remorse anyone?

Originally posted by Cio88
Why do you deflect to the fact this is "Far better then the previous cabinet"

While I am talking about the previous cabinet, I am not deflecting. I have been absolutely clear about how I feel about this appointment. I believe I can talk about both.

It doesn't matter .. if we have to pay taxes and the such .. the same rules should apply.

I agree. If you had read my posts, you'd see that I agree.

Which side are you on?

What are the sides?

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

And that's what I've been saying. I have always said that I don't expect him to be perfect. I would LOVE it if he took a firm stance against corruption in government and disallowed ANYONE who has ever done anything illegal in his cabinet. But I also think if he did that, he would be 4 years trying to fill it.

You know, when I read, I have to agree, you're right. It probably would take 4 years. I concede the point.
Thanks for replying.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Which side are you on?

What are the sides?

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

Yeah, I'm sure this is all real funny to you. You don't seem to care that the candidate you polticized and ran your mouth hard for is turning out to be less-than respectable.

I think this story says it all:

Obama 'absolutely' stands by Daschle at HHS
www.msnbc.msn.com...

even though a poll right beside this story shows that with a response of more than 20,000 to date, 83% say to find a new nominee (www.newsvine.com...)

Yeah, BH, your man, Obama, is certainly showing his true colors (no pun intended). He's no champion of change the way he sold his campaign to the American people - he's a con artist and a typical politician standing behind the corrupt and quickly becoming corrupt himself.