Obama's Cabinet Picks Get Better And Better.

dxing · Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:41 pm

First we have a Secretary of State nominee that has absolutely no foriegn policy experience but plenty of opportunity for conflicts of interest.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/opini...irmation-war-in-gaza-and-more.html

Both seemed to suggest that Senator Clinton's record was (and could continue to be) in many ways compromised by conflicts of interests with the Clinton Foundation. Reports the AP: "The overlap of names on former President Bill Clinton's foundation donor list and business interests whose issues she championed raises new questions about potential ethics conflicts between her official actions and her husband's fundraising." Jeez.

Now we have a nominee to be Treasury Secretary who doesn't pay his taxes and employed a possible illegal immigrant. Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't even President Clinton chagrined enough at that kind of disclosure to withdraw Zoe Bairds name for consideration?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090114/...ca_st_pe/treasury_nominee_analysis

The disclosure Tuesday that his choice for treasury secretary, New York Federal Reserve chief Timothy Geithner, failed to pay $34,000 in taxes and employed a housekeeper without proper immigration papers was another jarring distraction just days before Obama's inauguration — and raises fresh questions about his team's judgment, vetting procedures and political sensitivities.

And all this follows the Bill Richardson problem.

This is ethical government? This is the proper vetting? Gee, where are all the stories about thiese folks as compared to Gov. Palin? It just gets better and better. Does anybody else question that this group is the best we can come up with?

Klaus · Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:21 pm

It is really funny watching partisans still covered from head to toe in the fallout of their own homemade disasters raising hell over real or imaginary smudges on other people's clothes... silly

luv2fly · Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:29 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 1):
It is really funny watching partisans still covered from head to toe in the fallout of their own homemade disasters raising hell over real or imaginary smudges on other people's clothes...

You hit the nail on the head.

Should we re-visit some of what/who W tried to shove down are throats! Let's be honest here neither side is with out its faults. So stop trying to make this out to be something that only plagues the Democrats shall we, or are we in for a long 4 years!

WellHung · Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:41 pm

Since you are so concerned with the quality of governance (odd I don't recall you posting similar whinefests regarding the current administration), I am sure The Office of the President-Elect would love to hear your insights.

http://change.gov/page/content/contact/

AGM100 · Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:48 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 1):
It is really funny watching partisans still covered from head to toe in the fallout of their own homemade disasters raising hell over real or imaginary smudges on other people's clothes..

What you may not recall is many of us blasting President Bush for his appointments as well. I know I was not happy with Gonzales ..for sure and the Supreme court nominyMeir's...

No , we may defend our guy .. but we let him know when we are not happy either.

I don't know Guitner , but hey if you don't know what taxes you are liable for..it sure does not offer much confidence . Not to mention Rangle not knowing he had to pay income tax on rental property ... what the hell he rights the tax laws ? WTF are we doing ?

Don't get me started on Hillary ... I saw the item yesterday on the $20K donation to the Clinton library by Merck? Then Sen Clinton writes a letter to the FDA chair and pleads for approval of Merck's new drug . But I am sure its all just a big misunderstanding.

Dont get me wrong , there is plenty of corruption on both sides ... non of us should be defending them.

mt99 · Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:58 pm

Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
Now we have a nominee to be Treasury Secretary who doesn't pay his taxes

Well i guess Obama will have a bit of Joe the Plumber in his cabinet...

max550 · Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:16 pm

Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
Now we have a nominee to be Treasury Secretary who doesn't pay his taxes

He did pay the taxes, in full plus interest, as soon as he found out he hadn't paid enough. We'll see how it all shakes out, but from what I've read so far it looks like an honest mistake, since the IMF didn't take taxes out of his paycheck.
This is something that was known by the Obama team when they chose him and they seem to think they can get through it, unlike the case of Bill Richardson. We'll have to wait and see once more details come out.

planespotting · Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:21 pm

Ahh but a closer look at the information available reveals much about the level and severity of Mr. Geithner's transgressions (as in, they don't amount to anything more than misunderstandings and bad paperwork) ...

From the NY Times article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/14/us/politics/14geithner.html

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 ...

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.

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.

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.

An oversight, yes ... Egregious? Flagrant? Outlandish? I think not.

As for the illegally employed housekeeper?

(Also from the referenced Times article)

The woman was in the country legally and was authorized to work when Mr. Geithner and his wife hired her in 2004, but her employment authorization expired three months before she quit working for them.

Okie · Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:39 pm

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
We'll see how it all shakes out, but from what I've read so far it looks like an honest mistake, since the IMF didn't take taxes out of his paycheck.

The IMF did reimburse him for his FICA & taxes, he determined to put that money in his account and not pay the taxes. That is standard contract labor language at the IMF to reimburse contractors country of origin taxes. That is not an oversight.*

What is missing here is the President Elect to stand up here and pull the plug on this guy and send the right message.*

Okie

planespotting · Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:24 pm

Quoting Okie (Reply 8):
The IMF did reimburse him for his FICA & taxes, he determined to put that money in his account and not pay the taxes. That is standard contract labor language at the IMF to reimburse contractors country of origin taxes. That is not an oversight.*

As the article I quoted points out, more than half of all Americans working for an international company fail to do this exact thing (pay FICA on their own).

slider · Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:43 pm

Quoting DXing (Thread starter):
This is ethical government?

It was an “honest mistake” right?

Isn’t it funny how many of the oligarchs and elitists in government have illegal housekeepers and nannies and all have paperwork or tax issues?

It’s an integrity issue—I don’t give a crap about paying it up and fixing the ‘administrative oversight’ or whatever other double-speak they call it. He may actually be quite qualified for the position as well. But integrity matters. He screwed that up—how can he be trusted to a cabinet position? Anyone for that matter?

ER757 · Wed Jan 14, 2009 9:55 pm

If you liked the Clinton administration's cabinet members and advisors, you'll like Obama's. It's a lot like "Clinton 3.0"
If you didn't care for them, then you'll have lots of things to gripe about.

ikramerica · Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:28 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 2):
Should we re-visit some of what/who W tried to shove down are throats!

Doesn't matter. We all know those people were bad (right?)?

But the new "change" dude had promised us a difference. Instead, we get a retread of every party hack around, many with no experience at all in what they are being chosen for.

It used to be that you paid back political hacks with ambassadorships. Now it's cabinet posts?

For a government of change, this one seems really, really, really… familiar? Wink

Aaron747 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:20 am

Geithner must go. This is the first real strike against Obama's judgment if he doesn't kick the guy out the door before Tuesday.

seb146 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 12:59 am

O..
M..
G..

Let's see. Hillary is a diplomat. She has been around the world and knows what is going on. While her husband was president, she traveled across the globe and met people instead of baking cookies at home. But, her last name is Clinton, so she is despised? I like Condi. A bit brash for my taste, but she is a diplomat, also. However, Condi is part of the Bush regime.

The nominee for treasury secretary didn't pay taxes because he was employed by an international company. As stated before, it is up to the individual employee to pay Social Security taxes. They were payed PLUS INTEREST.

Perhaps the right would be happier with all these cabinet positions being recess appointments?

Mir · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:04 am

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
He did pay the taxes, in full plus interest, as soon as he found out he hadn't paid enough. We'll see how it all shakes out, but from what I've read so far it looks like an honest mistake, since the IMF didn't take taxes out of his paycheck.

I have my concerns over some of Obama's nominees (Hillary), but as it stands now Geithner isn't one of them.

-Mir

PSA727 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:10 am

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
He did pay the taxes, in full plus interest, as soon as he found out he hadn't paid enough. We'll see how it all shakes out, but from what I've read so far it looks like an honest mistake, since the IMF didn't take taxes out of his paycheck.

He paid the taxes after he was chosen to be the nominee because somebody else flagged the error. I actually don't think he paid any fines because the statute of limitations had passed. But don't forget that his housekeeper's legal status to work in the U.S. had expired. Talk about outsourcing American jobs! And btw, he will be in charge of the IRS.... Bravo!!!

What about his International Socialist (oops...recently removed herself from the International Socialist Group) nominee for EPA, Carol Braunner. I bet American manufacturing companies are gonna just love her to bits.

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:18 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 13):
Geithner must go. This is the first real strike against Obama's judgment if he doesn't kick the guy out the door before Tuesday.

And let us not forget that he was the one who argued to let Lehman brother's fail which started the domino effect we are still feeling now. As far as his Social Security and Medicare taxes he owed, he payed them though only after being nominated. So this begs the question: If the Treasury secretary can get away with it, why shouldn’t we try?

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 16):
What about his International Socialist (oops...recently removed herself from the International Socialist Group) nominee for EPA, Carol Braunner. I bet American manufacturing companies are gonna just love her to bits.

And more of the Socialist global warming tripe

Elite · Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:23 pm

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
He did pay the taxes, in full plus interest, as soon as he found out he hadn't paid enough.

If it was a honest mistake - and he didn't do this just to cover it up - then its alright.

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
This is something that was known by the Obama team when they chose him and they seem to think they can get through it, unlike the case of Bill Richardson.

The Obama team knew about Bill Richardson... Richardson told them. And how could your team not find out something about your nominee, such as a grand jury investigation?

dxing · Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:54 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 2):
So stop trying to make this out to be something that only plagues the Democrats shall we,

Why? You personally spent a lot of time making it out to be a problem that only plagued the GOP. Shoes on the other foot now, lets see how it fits.

Quoting WellHung (Reply 3):
I am sure The Office of the President-Elect would love to hear your insights.

I can say I have one advantage over the current nominee, I've paid all my taxes on time. I've never felt the need to have domestic help so I guess I'm ahead of him on that score as well.

Sooooooo.......

Quoting Max550 (Reply 6):
He did pay the taxes, in full plus interest, as soon as he found out he hadn't paid enough.

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 7):
An oversight, yes ... Egregious? Flagrant? Outlandish? I think not.

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 9):
As the article I quoted points out, more than half of all Americans working for an international company fail to do this exact thing (pay FICA on their own).

Quoting Elite (Reply 18):
If it was a honest mistake - and he didn't do this just to cover it up - then its alright.

What you are all saying is that we can't find someone just as qualified as this individual who has paid all his taxes on time and has not hired domestic help with immigration problems? Not one single person? In the whole country?

Quoting Slider (Reply 10):
It’s an integrity issue—

Bingo.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 14):
She has been around the world and knows what is going on.

Yes, she's been under sniper fire while exiting an aircraft and used her esp powers to direct all the heads of state to a peaceful conclusion of the troubles in Northern Ireland!

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 14):
While her husband was president, she traveled across the globe and met people instead of baking cookies at home.

So if that is the qualification Laura or Barbra Bush should be equally qualified for the post.

Mir · Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:07 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
What you are all saying is that we can't find someone just as qualified as this individual who has paid all his taxes on time and has not hired domestic help with immigration problems? Not one single person? In the whole country?

I'm sure you could find someone like that. But they might not be the right person for the job. If Obama believes that Geithner is, then an honest mistake in his taxes (something that a lot of people make) shouldn't be a stumbling block.

That assumes, of course, that it is an honest mistake - any solid evidence of intentional wrong-doing, and the nomination should be withdrawn.

-Mir

luv2fly · Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:09 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 2):
So stop trying to make this out to be something that only plagues the Democrats shall we,

Why? You personally spent a lot of time making it out to be a problem that only plagued the GOP. Shoes on the other foot now, lets see how it fits.

Seems to me and everyone on this board that the election is over and most people, including me have moved on, not all though by the looks of your posts. Bitter party of one you table is now ready, bitter party of one.

planespotting · Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:49 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
What you are all saying is that we can't find someone just as qualified as this individual who has paid all his taxes on time and has not hired domestic help with immigration problems? Not one single person? In the whole country?

No - we're not saying that. In fact, that's a completely ridiculous thing to take away from our posts. Despite the fact that taking massive leaps in logic is an oft-used tactic among non-liberal arguers, it doesn't make it right.

We were saying that basically, the fact that he overlooked paying his FICA taxes for two years and had a maid whose immigration papers lapsed for 90 days during the period he was employed with her does not make him unqualified for the position of SecTreas, nor does it show in anyway that he is a reckless, unthoughtful or uncaring individual, regarding taxation, immigration, or otherwise.

The main point to realize is that all nominees for cabinet positions are like the rest of us - we're human. We make mistakes from time to time. Prohibiting an otherwise ultra-qualified candidate from a position of great importance based on past minor transgressions (for which he has clearly made up for by paying the money owed with interest) would be completely stupid.

dxing · Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:50 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 21):
Seems to me and everyone on this board that the election is over and most people, including me have moved on, not all though by the looks of your posts.

I'll remember that next time a Gov Palin thread starts. BTW in this thread there have been several references to Bush administration appointees so looking back is not limited to one side.

Eric Holders conformation hearings are underway and we shall see what he has to say about the Marc Rich and Falin group pardons. Another shining example of the best we can do?

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:53 pm

Quoting Planespotting (Reply 22):
We were saying that basically, the fact that he overlooked paying his FICA taxes for two years and had a maid whose immigration papers lapsed for 90 days during the period he was employed with her does not make him unqualified for the position of SecTreas, nor

Overlooked is a nice word. I would want to know how a reputed financial wizard could have overlooked his Self-Employment Tax liability for four years. He had signed a document from his employer at the time, the International Monetary Fund, certifying "that I will pay the taxes for which I have received tax allowance payments." So if he "overlooks" something like this who knows what else he might "overlook"

luv2fly · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:00 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 23):
I'll remember that next time a Gov Palin thread starts. BTW in this thread there have been several references to Bush administration appointees so looking back is not limited to one side.

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 2):
Should we re-visit some of what/who W tried to shove down are throats! Let's be honest here neither side is with out its faults. So stop trying to make this out to be something that only plagues the Democrats shall we, or are we in for a long 4 years!

Hello! I pointed that out in the second reply. Welcome to yesterday.

And yes I might join in a bash Palin thread, though to be honest I do prefer more of a challenge. To attack Palin is like shooting fish in a barrel, you just can't miss, that is how dumb she is. There is a difference between joining a thread and starting them and that difference is.

max550 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:08 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 23):
Eric Holders conformation hearings are underway and we shall see what he has to say about the Marc Rich and Falin group pardons. Another shining example of the best we can do?

Obviously it doesn't matter to you what he says, you've already made up your mind.
I don't know about Eric Holder, the pardons do bother me a bit, but I'll wait to see what he has to say before I make up my mind whether he should be AG or not.
You've made it quite clear that you don't like Obama's cabinet no matter who he chooses. Since you seem to know better than he does, who do you suggest for these positions?

dxing · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:09 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 25):
So stop trying to make this out to be something that only plagues the Democrats shall we, or are we in for a long 4 years!

Many on the left have not stopped intoning that it is only a GOP problem for the past 8 years, so as I said:

Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
Shoes on the other foot now, lets see how it fits.

Evidently is must be rubbing the wrong way already. Too bad.

luv2fly · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:12 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 27):
Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
Shoes on the other foot now, lets see how it fits.

Evidently is must be rubbing the wrong way already. Too bad.

I wear a size ten if you care to buy me a pair.

dxing · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:35 pm

Quoting Max550 (Reply 26):
You've made it quite clear that you don't like Obama's cabinet no matter who he chooses.

I question the integrity of the people he has chosen as well as the experience of his choice for Secretary of Sate. My question remains, is this the best he can do given the rhetoric of the campaign?

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:41 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 29):
question the integrity of the people he has chosen as well as the experience of his choice for Secretary of Sate. My question remains, is this the best he can do given the rhetoric of the campaign?

The question is for who is this cabinet better for? Obama or Bill Clinton. So much for change. Same old retreads

Starbuk7 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 16):
He paid the taxes after he was chosen to be the nominee because somebody else flagged the error. I actually don't think he paid any fines because the statute of limitations had passed. But don't forget that his housekeeper's legal status to work in the U.S. had expired. Talk about outsourcing American jobs! And btw, he will be in charge of the IRS.... Bravo!!!

So, does this mean that if he was never nominated that he would have NEVER paid his taxes??

seb146 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:44 pm

Quoting Windy95 (Reply 30):
The question is for who is this cabinet better for? Obama or Bill Clinton. So much for change. Same old retreads

What could Bill get out of it? All these righties are just upset because, first off, Obama won, and, second, Obama is picking left-leaning people instead of far off righties. How much experience did Brownie have that he was appointed to FEMA? How much experience did Rumsfeld have that he was appointed to Secretary of Defense? How much experience did Roberts have that he was nominated for Chief Justice before he had even been confirmed? For that matter, how much military experience did W and Cheney have when they were selected the first time to be president and VP? But, that's okay, we were told. Nothing wrong with those picks, we were told. Good, solid picks, we were told. You lefties worry too much, we were told. Now, the shoe is on the other foot and the Obama administration is already the worst in history in the minds of a lot of righties. The man hasn't even been sworn in, and already they have been crucified.

Besides, you righties forget: your boy W stacked the Supreme court, so you all have nothing to worry about. Your corporate... excuse me... "conservative" values will be in place for years to come.

Aaron747 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:55 pm

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
How much experience did Roberts have that he was nominated for Chief Justice before he had even been confirmed?

Nominations always come before confirmation.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
For that matter, how much military experience did W and Cheney have when they were selected the first time to be president and VP?

Get your facts straight - Cheney had already been the Secretary of Defense, during wartime. Not only that, he was Chief of Staff for President Ford, which means he sat in all Cabinet meetings and got the gist of all of Ford's daily intelligence briefings. As for W - well we all know that pathetic story.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
Now, the shoe is on the other foot and the Obama administration is already the worst in history in the minds of a lot of righties.

You really have a bizarre flair for hyperbole.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
Your corporate... excuse me... "conservative" values will be in place for years to come.

Living in dreamland dude - corporations own your party too.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
What could Bill get out of it?

A lot of great new connections for his organization thanks to wifey being back in the foreign relations loop.

luv2fly · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:03 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 33):
Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
What could Bill get out of it?

A lot of great new connections for his organization thanks to wifey being back in the foreign relations loop.

Isn't that how politics are supposed to work? Or are you just mad that the Democrats are at the front of the line. Can we say Cheney and Haliburton....

AGM100 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:09 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 34):
Cheney and Haliburton....

At least they provide a hard service to their clients ... not just a bunch of Charity bilking . Bill takes charity donations then invests the money in sovereign type wealth funds ... its really not that much different than Madolf for all intents and purposes. The only difference is that Bill clients are not really expecting a return in cash ... only in access.

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:32 pm

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
What could Bill get out of it? All these righties are just upset because, first off, Obama won, and, second, Obama is picking left-leaning people instead of far off righties.

But he is picking Bill's left leaning people. Does that not bother you when he was running on change and as a Washington oustsider being new to Washington. When Obama won I was willing to support and give him the benefit of the doubt. But he tossed it all right out the window with all of these ex-Clintonites. They must be holding something on him.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
How much experience did Rumsfeld have that he was appointed to Secretary of Defense?

You have to be kidding. Other than being Secretary of Defense under President Ford from 1975 to 1977. Rumsfeld was White House Chief of Staff during part of the Ford Administration, and also served in various positions in the Nixon Administration. Rumsfeld served four terms in the United States House of Representatives, and served as [/]United States Ambassador to NATO[/b]. Rumsfeld was an aviator in the United States Navy between 1954 and 1957 before transferring to the Reserve. So not much experience

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
For that matter, how much military experience did W and Cheney have when they were selected the first time to be president and VP?

Cheney a former wartime Sec Def and Bush who sepnt more time in the Military that Clinton, Gore and barry combined.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 33):
Living in dreamland dude - corporations own your party too.

I will never understand that argument. Both sides are embedded to big business.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 35):
At least they provide a hard service to their clients ... not just a bunch of Charity bilking . Bill takes charity donations then invests the money in sovereign type wealth funds ... its really not that much different than Madolf for all intents and purposes. The only difference is that Bill clients are not really expecting a return in cash ... only in access.

mariner · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 35):
Bill takes charity donations then invests the money in sovereign type wealth funds ... its really not that much different than Madolf for all intents and purposes. The only difference is that Bill clients are not really expecting a return in cash ... only in access.

I understand you dislike Mr. Clinton, but the work the Clinton Foundation has done, especially among poor and destitute, is really quite important.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 33):
A lot of great new connections for his organization thanks to wifey being back in the foreign relations loop.

Would you say the same if it was a male politician and his wife under review?

No one was bothered about Theresa Heinz's fortune when her husband was running for President.

Anyhoo, the Committee has voted 16-1 in her favor. Senator Vitter (who's own background with a prostitute ring is less than savory) was the dissenting voice.

No surprise. I thought she aced the hearing with a remarkable display of knowledge.

mariner

slider · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:45 pm

Quoting Mariner (Reply 37):
No one was bothered about Theresa Heinz's fortune when her husband was running for President.

Yeah, there were a lot of concerns about Tah-ray-za and the money. It was not only part of a running joke, but another sad example of a wealthy bureaucrat seeking power. Plus, she was a whack-job.

luv2fly · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:49 pm

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 35):
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 34):
Cheney and Haliburton....

At least they provide a hard service to their clients ...

When is warmongering and profiteering a service?

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:51 pm

Quoting Mariner (Reply 37):
No one was bothered about Theresa Heinz's fortune when her husband was running for President.

I thought it was only the conservative reepublicans that are rich?

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 39):
Quoting AGM100 (Reply 35):
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 34):
Cheney and Haliburton....

At least they provide a hard service to their clients ...

When is warmongering and profiteering a service?

Didi you call it the same thing when they received contracts from the Clinton administration in Bosnia? How many great jobs and Americans do they employ?

mariner · Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:53 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 38):
It was not only part of a running joke, but another sad example of a wealthy bureaucrat seeking power.

She's wealthy - but no means is she a bureaucrat and she wasn't running for power. And since he was a politician running for office for some years before he married her, I can't see how it applies. confused

mariner

windy95 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:06 pm

Quoting Mariner (Reply 41):
She's wealthy - but no means is she a bureaucrat and she wasn't running for power. And since he was a politician running for office for some years before he married her, I can't see how it applies

"Teresa Heinz Kerry's charitable giving to political groups, which are shaping the American future like the ACLU, which lobbies against Republican judicial appointments, or United for Peace and Justice, which is the umbrella group that organized the demonstrations against the war in Iraq and the protests against the Republican National Convention in New York. These are political stances"

"Teresa Heinz Kerry, all by herself, presides over greater assets involved in the funding of shadow political activities than the three chief conservative foundations – Scaife, Olin and Bradley – combined. While, these conservative foundations have combined assets of $809 million"

"Mrs. Kerry’s political investments and the range of left-wing agendas she supports. Directly or indirectly, Teresa Heinz Kerry has sponsored a political spectrum that includes violent anarchists, anti-free market socialists, anti-Homeland Security activists, racial dividers, open borders agitators, pro-terrorist radicals and a range of honors and tributes that includes a memorial to an environmentalist whose misguided reforms have led to the unnecessary deaths of tens of millions of African children. Mrs. Kerry’s beneficiaries are in the forefront of the attacks on the Patriot Act, for which her husband voted; they are organizers of the demonstrations against the war in Iraq that her husband supported and the disorderly protests at the Republican convention to nominate his opponent. And they are behind the campaign to open America’s borders and remove existing border controls, and thus to weaken homeland security in the War on Terror. "

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...D8FE97-6214-408B-A133-9F47DDCBC83F

Sounds like a lady with a political agenda. You do not have to be a poloticain to make law in this country. And as first lady she would have had even more power. She wera the pant's in this power couple.

mariner · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:18 pm

Quoting Windy95 (Reply 42):
Sounds like a lady with a political agenda.

Gosh, I hope so. Be a shame to see all that money go to waste.

But it wasn't a major campaign issue in the way that the Clinton Foundation money is an issue with Mrs. Clinton.

You might just as say that the wealthy Barbara Bush greased the wheels for her husband - or her son.

Except that they were both wealthy as well. As Mrs. Clinton now is.

And remembering what Richard Nixon said about Barbara Bush, you might just as well say that she influenced the first President Bush's decisions.

Or even her son's decisions.

confused

mariner

AGM100 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:21 pm

Quoting Mariner (Reply 37):
I understand you dislike Mr. Clinton, but the work the Clinton Foundation has done, especially among poor and destitute, is really quite important.

I am totally biased I will admit it. I do like hippy libs . ... The minute I saw that picture of him and Hillary at Cambridge from the 60's I knew he was not like me or my family. While my uncles and father were in the mud , he was smoking dope and kissing ass on the enemy. Sorry , you can disregard any of my comments as 100% biased.

slider · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:36 pm

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...the_geithner_grossup_grossout.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...eithner_should_not_be_secreta.html

“We are asked to believe that a man of supposedly great financial sophistication couldn't understand a tax liability that tens of millions of Americans (including me) must pay every quarter.”

The comment in the latter article is also illuminating in the contrast to Joe the Plumber—remember how he was crucified for the outstanding lien he had that he wasn’t even aware of? That was a normal guy just asking a question to The Obamessiah.

But a simple tax problem overlooked by a man who is supposed to be smart? Ordained as brilliant? This doesn’t even remotely pass the sniff test.

AGM100 · Thu Jan 15, 2009 6:53 pm

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 39):
When is warmongering and profiteering a service?

I guess I do ... that's it. Safe to say The Clinton foundation will not be planning , financing , organizing and operating oil fields that better the life of the citizens of a country. They will be handing out foundation food kits ..that will only create a continued dependent society. Dependent of course on the government who's name the Clinton Foundation chooses to empower with the people. See how it works?

Quoting Slider (Reply 45):
We are asked to believe that a man of supposedly great financial sophistication couldn't understand a tax liability that tens of millions of Americans (including me) must pay every quarter

Oh that little hick-up ?.... and that is what it is ... Love Harry.

mariner · Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:00 pm

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 44):
Sorry , you can disregard any of my comments as 100% biased.

No worries. I got that already. Smile

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 46):
They will be handing out foundation food kits ..that will only create a continued dependent society.

For which I guess many of those with HIV/AIDS (pandemic in Africa) might be grateful, not just for the food kits, but for the medicines.

Just a guess.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 46):
See how it works?

You mean like Barbara Bush and what she did with her donation for post-Katrina relief?

mariner

WellHung · Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:04 pm

Quoting DXing (Reply 19):
I can say I have one advantage over the current nominee, I've paid all my taxes on time. I've never felt the need to have domestic help so I guess I'm ahead of him on that score as well.

I am assuming you have already made your concerns and resources available to THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT-ELECT prior to continuing your diatribe here. Kindly share your correspondence with the transition team.

Regarding your taxes/help, you have not been properly vetted here. I can't just take your word for it.

But, since you claim to be "ahead" on at least two scorecards, I am sure THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT-ELECT would love to hear from you regarding a position in the administration (assuming the proper background checks and disclosures check out):

http://change.gov/page/s/application

I don't think they consider "lack of domestic help" in considering applicants. If you send additional comments to them here:

http://change.gov/page/content/contact/

On why those who have not retained domestic assistance are "ahead" of those who have hired help, perhaps they will take that "accomplishment" into account for you and future applicants. Otherwise they might think you're a poor sap who can't afford it. Or just a slob.

But remember, the THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT-ELECT is the decider. Your scorecards may not be valid.

[Edited 2009-01-15 11:08:39]

dxing · Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:07 pm

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 32):
What could Bill get out of it?

The question should be what [i]will[/] Bill get out of it?

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 33):
A lot of great new connections for his organization thanks to wifey being back in the foreign relations loop.

And there's your answer.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 37):
No surprise. I thought she aced the hearing with a remarkable display of knowledge.

Knowledge of what? We must have watched different hearings because all I heard was a laundry list of things she wants to do and what was particularly interesting was how it was described as "her" state department. Not the Obama administration foreign policy.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net