Is everyone crooked?

RedAkston · Jan 31, 2009

First it's Obama's nominee for Treasury Secretary has tax problems. Why would anyone want a treasury secretary that can't pay their own taxes is beyond me, but the apologists came out of the woodwork to defend the indefensible anyway. Now, Obama's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services has not only tax problems (bigger than those of Timothy Geithner), but has also received speaking fees from health care groups who stand to profit from a universal health care plan if put into place by - you guessed it, Tom Daschle, the nominee himself.

When Bush put his people in place, they didn't have tax problems or serious conflicts of interest. But when Obama puts his people in place, they have both tax issues and conflicts of interest. Where are the throngs frothing at the mouth this time? Is it me or is the hypocrisy so thick that they can't see straight anymore?

Arch Enemy · Jan 31, 2009

No. You're right.

They just lost their credibility after they were appointed.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 31, 2009

P/N said:
First it's Obama's nominee for Treasury Secretary has tax problems. Why would anyone want a treasury secretary that can't pay their own taxes is beyond me, but the apologists came out of the woodwork to defend the indefensible anyway. Now, Obama's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services has not only tax problems (bigger than those of Timothy Geithner), but has also received speaking fees from health care groups who stand to profit from a universal health care plan if put into place by - you guessed it, Tom Daschle, the nominee himself.

When Bush put his people in place, they didn't have tax problems or serious conflicts of interest. But when Obama puts his people in place, they have both tax issues and conflicts of interest. Where are the throngs frothing at the mouth this time? Is it me or is the hypocrisy so thick that they can't see straight anymore?

Obama is a crap politician just like the rest. The writing was on the wall before the election and people were too hyped by populist propaganda to think.

Funny thing is I haven't heard a peep about this on the television news outlets.

Arch Enemy said:
No. You're right.

They just lost their credibility after they were appointed.

Sure and Obama's appointments lost credibility before they were nominated.

That is technically "change", not much "hope" though.

Arch Enemy · Jan 31, 2009

Sure and Obama's appointments lost credibility before they were nominated.

That is technically "change", not much "hope" though.
__________________

Agreed. We just have to sit tight and see.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

Arch Enemy said:
Agreed. We just have to sit tight and see.

Minor quibble:

We do NOT have to "sit tight and see." We can, as citizens, act. We can urge Senators to vote down Daschle's nomination; we can urge friends and relatives and coworkers to do likewise; we can remind Senators that their continuation in Washington ultimately rests with us, the voters.

"We the People" can take back the power that is our Constitutional right.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 31, 2009

celticlord said:
Minor quibble:

We do NOT have to "sit tight and see." We can, as citizens, act. We can urge Senators to vote down Daschle's nomination; we can urge friends and relatives and coworkers to do likewise; we can remind Senators that their continuation in Washington ultimately rests with us, the voters.

"We the People" can take back the power that is our Constitutional right.

I agree but ultimately its an exercise in futility.
No one cares enough to do anything. There are not enough educated people in this country.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

Harry Guerrilla said:
I agree but ultimately its an exercise in futility.
No one cares enough to do anything. There are not enough educated people in this country.

To recycle what is probably the most overused quote ever:

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

Even though Edmund Burke did NOT say these words, they still ring true, and should be especially true for Americans.

If "no one cares", we should persuade them to care. If "no one" is educated, we should educate them.

Civic engagement only becomes an act of futility when we cease to perform it.

Our Constitution begins "We the People...." Our laws and our government proceed from a call to civic activism; our laws have power and our government has potency because "We the People" gift them our power and our potency. If government mis-steps, it falls to "We the People" to administer the correction--and if some or even most among us choose to ignore that duty, it falls to the rest to remind them of that duty, and to encourage them to perform that duty.

That duty begins by engaging our elected representatives and reminding them daily from whence their mandate to govern comes.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 31, 2009

celticlord said:
To recycle what is probably the most overused quote ever:

Even though Edmund Burke did NOT say these words, they still ring true, and should be especially true for Americans.

If "no one cares", we should persuade them to care. If "no one" is educated, we should educate them.

Civic engagement only becomes an act of futility when we cease to perform it.

Our Constitution begins "We the People...." Our laws and our government proceed from a call to civic activism; our laws have power and our government has potency because "We the People" gift them our power and our potency. If government mis-steps, it falls to "We the People" to administer the correction--and if some or even most among us choose to ignore that duty, it falls to the rest to remind them of that duty, and to encourage them to perform that duty.

That duty begins by engaging our elected representatives and reminding them daily from whence their mandate to govern comes.

I totally agree but at the same time being the lone voice of liberty in the middle of the mass of morons does nothing.

Ben Franklin surmised my current belief well.

Paraphrasing - The country that supports liberty, that is my home.

WI Crippler · Jan 31, 2009

celticlord said:
To recycle what is probably the most overused quote ever:

Even though Edmund Burke did NOT say these words, they still ring true, and should be especially true for Americans.

If "no one cares", we should persuade them to care. If "no one" is educated, we should educate them.

Civic engagement only becomes an act of futility when we cease to perform it.

Our Constitution begins "We the People...." Our laws and our government proceed from a call to civic activism; our laws have power and our government has potency because "We the People" gift them our power and our potency. If government mis-steps, it falls to "We the People" to administer the correction--and if some or even most among us choose to ignore that duty, it falls to the rest to remind them of that duty, and to encourage them to perform that duty.

That duty begins by engaging our elected representatives and reminding them daily from whence their mandate to govern comes.

In theory it sounds great, but you have to realize that the growing segment of "The People" want more government, and are willing to throw away their liberties(or rather "each others" liberties) for it. How can one educate somebody on the principles of liberty, when the education systems where most learning takes place are teaching the exact opposite? I'm not saying something outrageous like people are being propogandized into Marxism, but people are certainley more willing to allow the government to restrain liberty, in the name of safety, than ever before. All it takes is one incident, and people clamor for a new law that will try to prevent those incidents in the future. And its not just a Democrat problem either. Almost all in government, believe they are "protecting" us, with the passage of each new law.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

Harry Guerrilla said:
I totally agree but at the same time being the lone voice of liberty in the middle of the mass of morons does nothing.

I prefer the path of optimism, and that if I raise my voice, others will follow.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 31, 2009

celticlord said:
I prefer the path of optimism, and that if I raise my voice, others will follow.

Would you not agree that the next step of a government, that forms itself as a type of democracy, is a dictatorship?

We are in that transition in my opinion.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

WI Crippler said:
In theory it sounds great, but you have to realize that the growing segment of "The People" want more government, and are willing to throw away their liberties(or rather "each others" liberties) for it. How can one educate somebody on the principles of liberty, when the education systems where most learning takes place are teaching the exact opposite? I'm not saying something outrageous like people are being propogandized into Marxism, but people are certainley more willing to allow the government to restrain liberty, in the name of safety, than ever before. All it takes is one incident, and people clamor for a new law that will try to prevent those incidents in the future. And its not just a Democrat problem either. Almost all in government, believe they are "protecting" us, with the passage of each new law.

You are quite accurate in your assessment of our society. The main reason I pontificate endlessly on the power of "We the People" is to combat the creeping Marxist strains of thought corroding our politics. The more I can persuade even a few people to exercise not just their civil rights but also their civil responsibilities, the more hope there is that such evils can be overturned.

The contest of ideas is never over, unless we allow those with a temporary majority to bully us into silence.

WI Crippler · Jan 31, 2009

Harry Guerrilla said:
Would you not agree that the next step of a government, that forms itself as a type of democracy, is a dictatorship?

We are in that transition in my opinion.

I didn't think Bush would consolodate power as a dictator(as some conspiracy theorist nut-huggers believed he would) and I don't think Obama will either. I think a dictatorship is a ways off, so long as we keep the idea of Nazis being bad at the forefront of our culture :2razz:

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

Harry Guerrilla said:
Would you not agree that the next step of a government, that forms itself as a type of democracy, is a dictatorship?

We are in that transition in my opinion.

I agree that democracy can devolve into dictatorship.

I agree that there are elements of the demagogic mania surrounding our current President that portend a descent into dictatorship.

I do NOT agree that it necessarily must be so.

I do NOT agree that the transition cannot be resisted, and ultimately reversed.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

WI Crippler said:
I didn't think Bush would consolodate power as a dictator(as some conspiracy theorist nut-huggers believed he would) and I don't think Obama will either. I think a dictatorship is a ways off, so long as we keep the idea of Nazis being bad at the forefront of our culture :2razz:

I am less fearful of a Hitler than I am of a Stalin or a Mao--and it may be fairly said that our current President cultivates a cult of personality that is eerily Maoist in nature (as is the demonizing, vilifying, and even criminalizing of any who speak against his ideas and policies).

WI Crippler · Jan 31, 2009

celticlord said:
(as is the demonizing, vilifying, and even criminalizing of any who speak against his ideas and policies).

Whoa, when did it become illegal to be critical of Obama? Cause I need to go back and erase some posts I made.

(And I'm willing to erase other peoples for them, for $2 a post)

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 31, 2009

WI Crippler said:
I didn't think Bush would consolodate power as a dictator(as some conspiracy theorist nut-huggers believed he would) and I don't think Obama will either. I think a dictatorship is a ways off, so long as we keep the idea of Nazis being bad at the forefront of our culture :2razz:

I'm not so sure about people realizing what they are doing until its to late.

I'm not trying to be an alarmist but at times I think America has seen its finest days already.

celticlord said:
I agree that democracy can devolve into dictatorship.

I agree that there are elements of the demagogic mania surrounding our current President that portend a descent into dictatorship.

I do NOT agree that it necessarily must be so.

I do NOT agree that the transition cannot be resisted, and ultimately reversed.

I think you are right and I agree.

The one group who could have the most impact doesn't do much.

The Libertarian Party could have jump both McCain and Obama and would have demolished them. They didn't even try hard.

celticlord · Jan 31, 2009

P/N said:
Now, Obama's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services has not only tax problems (bigger than those of Timothy Geithner), but has also received speaking fees from health care groups who stand to profit from a universal health care plan if put into place by - you guessed it, Tom Daschle, the nominee himself.

Health care groups paid Daschle $220K
Amazingly, it seems the President has not even deigned to award Daschle with a waiver of his Executive Order banning lobbyists; apparently a gentleman's agreement that Daschle will recuse himself from any work with a conflict of interest is sufficient.:roll:

He also became an adviser to the law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird, which paid him $2.1 million in wages last year and also provided him a 401k and profit sharing plan worth between $100,000 and $250,000, according to the report.

In his three years at the firm, it’s earned more than $16 million lobbying on behalf of some of the health care industry’s most powerful interests before the department he’s in line to lead. Though Daschle himself did not register to lobby for the firm, he has advised the firm’s clients on health care issues, according to the firm’s website.

celticlord · Feb 1, 2009

P/N said:
Now, Obama's nominee to head the Department of Health and Human Services has not only tax problems (bigger than those of Timothy Geithner), but has also received speaking fees from health care groups who stand to profit from a universal health care plan if put into place by - you guessed it, Tom Daschle, the nominee himself.

Part of the fun in reading these threads is the additional reading and research one is inspired to do on various topics--in this case, Tom Daschle.

Some more facts regarding Daschle's tax issues:

He took his time correcting the tax deficiency

Although Daschle had known since June 2008 that he needed to correct his tax returns, he never expected the amount to be such a "jaw-dropping" sum and "thought it was being taken care of" by his accountant, spokeswoman Jenny Backus said.

Click to expand...
He took his time telling the President

Thomas A. Daschle waited nearly a month after being nominated to be secretary of health and human services before informing Barack Obama that he had not paid years of back taxes for the use of a car and driver provided by a wealthy New York investor.

Click to expand...
No one will say what he did at InterMedia Partners

In a 2005 book, Hindery called the absence of an efficient health-care system for poor families "disgraceful." He did not respond yesterday to an e-mailed request that he explain what Daschle did for the company in exchange for years of limousine service and a million-dollar annual fee. Alan J. Sokol, a senior partner in the firm, said that Daschle did "a lot of helpful work" for the firm but declined to say what it was.

Click to expand...

The man who would be HHS Secretary and new "health czar" essentially has been less than forthcoming about his tax delinquencies, accrued at what is beginning to sound like a phony job at which he did no real "work".

This is not "change we can believe in." This is the nepotism, cronyism, and corruption for which Chicago is justly infamous. This, it seems, is the "Chicago way."

conquer · Feb 1, 2009

WI Crippler said:
Whoa, when did it become illegal to be critical of Obama? Cause I need to go back and erase some posts I made.

(And I'm willing to erase other peoples for them, for $2 a post)

Please make a special discount for me, I have too many of those posts...

conquer · Feb 1, 2009

celticlord said:
Part of the fun in reading these threads is the additional reading and research one is inspired to do on various topics--in this case, Tom Daschle.

Some more facts regarding Daschle's tax issues:

He took his time correcting the tax deficiency

He took his time telling the President

No one will say what he did at InterMedia Partners

The man who would be HHS Secretary and new "health czar" essentially has been less than forthcoming about his tax delinquencies, accrued at what is beginning to sound like a phony job at which he did no real "work".

This is not "change we can believe in." This is the nepotism, cronyism, and corruption for which Chicago is justly infamous. This, it seems, is the "Chicago way."

After watching how the current politicians are free of charge by their tax evasions, I strongly think that it was an injustice to send Al Capone to prison for the same reason.

StandUpChuck · Feb 1, 2009

WI Crippler said:
In theory it sounds great, but you have to realize that the growing segment of "The People" want more government, and are willing to throw away their liberties(or rather "each others" liberties) for it. How can one educate somebody on the principles of liberty, when the education systems where most learning takes place are teaching the exact opposite? I'm not saying something outrageous like people are being propogandized into Marxism, but people are certainley more willing to allow the government to restrain liberty, in the name of safety, than ever before. All it takes is one incident, and people clamor for a new law that will try to prevent those incidents in the future. And its not just a Democrat problem either. Almost all in government, believe they are "protecting" us, with the passage of each new law.

Unless it's a law pertaining to suspected terrorists. Then everyone is afraid that our civil liberties are being infringed upon. :roll:

Hatuey · Feb 2, 2009

P/N said:
When Bush put his people in place, they didn't have tax problems or serious conflicts of interest.

Seriously?

* In 2002, Judicial Watch, a public action law firm, filed suit on behalf of shareholders against Halliburton, its current and former directors, and its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen LLP and Arthur Andersen Worldwide, for alleged accounting irregularities, said to be profit inflation by accounting for cost overruns as revenue. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigated the same issue. Halliburton counters that the practice was approved by its accounting firm, Arthur Andersen, and conforms to generally accepted accounting practices. In August, 2004, Halliburton paid a $7.5 million fine to settle the issue.

* In April 2002, KBR was awarded a $7 million contract to construct steel holding cells at Camp X-Ray.[15]

* From 1995–2002, Halliburton Brown & Root Services Corp was awarded at least $2.5 billion but has spent considerably less to construct and run military bases, some in secret locations, as part of the Army's Logistics Civil Augmentation Program. This contract was a cost plus 13% contract and BRS employees were trained on how to pass GAO audits to ensure maximum profits were attained. It was also grounds for termination in the Balkans if any BRS employee spoke of Dick Cheney being CEO. BRS was awarded and re-awarded contracts termed "non-competitive" due to BRS being the only company capable to pull off the missions. DYNACORP actually won the competitively let 2nd contract but never received any work orders in the Balkans. [12]

* In November 2002, KBR was tasked to plan oil well firefighting in Iraq, and in February 2003 was issued a contract to conduct the work. Critics contend that it was a no-bid contract, awarded due to Dick Cheney's position as Vice President. Concern was also expressed that the contract could allow KBR to pump and distribute Iraqi oil.[16] Others contend, however, that this was not strictly a no-bid contract, and was invoked under a contract that KBR won "in a competitive bid process."[17] The contract, referred to as LOGCAP, is a contingency-based contract that is invoked at the convenience of the Army. Because the contract is essentially a retainer, specific orders are not competitively bid (as the overall contract was).

* In May 2003, Halliburton revealed in SEC filings that its KBR subsidiary had paid a Nigerian official $2.4 million in bribes in order to receive favorable tax treatment.[18][19]

* As of 2003, Halliburton was still operating in Iran. CNN, in a report entitled "US companies are operating in Iran despite sanctions," reported that a Halliburton spokesperson told the news agency that HPS helps Iran build large oil rigs in the country's south.

This is a joke right?

RedAkston · Feb 3, 2009

Hatuey said:
Seriously?

This is a joke right?

Cheney wasn't "put in place", he was elected as the Vice President of the United States, or maybe you forgot that part (my money is on you being intellectually dishonest though). And under Clinton, Halliburton did very well too (as per your quote dating "from 1995-2002"), but we'll just strike that up to you being intellectually dishonest, err I mean forgetful. As usual Hatey, you follow the liberal playbook of deflect, deflect, deflect. Do you care to comment about the original topic or are you OK with Obama's nominees not paying their taxes and having a conflict of interest?

obvious Child · Feb 3, 2009

P/N said:
Is it me or is the hypocrisy so thick that they can't see straight anymore?

This may sound a bit jaded, but if they can do the job well, does it matter if they are crooked?

Wow. Batman Begins feeling there. You know, how everyone is bad.

Is everyone crooked?

Master of Shenanigans

Familiaist

Familiaist

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Tart with a Heart

Rule of Two

Master of Shenanigans

Equal Opportunity Hater