The Republican Thread

[lostfan]

I don't know anyone who believed Bush was worse than Hitler or who blindly supported Iran. Where do you meet people like that?

I've heard of people who think Bush is worse than Hitler, yeah. Sometimes it's hyperbole but it's hard to tell.

[mr_genius]

Basically what has happened is the hangover from binging on George Bush hate has set in. People are now in complete denial or ashamed about the absurdity of the ideas they supported and the accusations they leveled. Now they wish to put it behind them as they plead for national unity.

 

Honestly that’s fine with me, but there is no reason for people to get so sensitive when certain segments of the Democratic party get some ribbing about their actions while intoxicated.

Edited January 13, 2009 by mr_genius

[southsider2k5]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090113/ap_on_...tters___dollars

 

So no one had any comment on this? I was curious if anyone would say anything. I think it is very interesting that this stuff has come up with Richardson and now Clinton within a couple of weeks of Blago getting indicted for the same type of stuff, and being investigated for it for a very long time. It kinda goes back to my point about how many people Blago pissed off to get indicted for this stuff, while in other people's cases it is a minor mention on a back page somewhere that no one really cares about. This is happening all around us in both parties. It is happening at the highest levels of our government, and it is glossed over.

[EvilMonkey]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090113/D95MGFTO1.html

 

May belong in the cabinet thread instead, but just imagine if this were to be you or me?

 

WASHINGTON (AP) - President-elect Barack Obama's choice to run the Treasury Department and lead the economic rescue effort disclosed to senators Tuesday that he failed to pay $34,000 in taxes from 2001 to 2004, a last-minute complication in an otherwise smooth path to confirmation.

 

On one hand we're assured he's brilliant and possesses a steel-trap mind for finance.

 

On the other hand, he "forgot" that he had to pay taxes in America.

 

 

[mr_genius]

So no one had any comment on this? I was curious if anyone would say anything. I think it is very interesting that this stuff has come up with Richardson and now Clinton within a couple of weeks of Blago getting indicted for the same type of stuff, and being investigated for it for a very long time. It kinda goes back to my point about how many people Blago pissed off to get indicted for this stuff, while in other people's cases it is a minor mention on a back page somewhere that no one really cares about. This is happening all around us in both parties. It is happening at the highest levels of our government, and it is glossed over.

 

I was going to post about it but got side tracked. It's more examples of pay-to-play politics, and the truth is Blago isn't really that much worse than any of many of his colleagues. It's why this new 2 trillion in 'emergency relief' spending is going to be a train wreck. Imagine the campaign bribes that are going to be paid back with this massive spending package.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090113/D95MGFTO1.html

 

May belong in the cabinet thread instead, but just imagine if this were to be you or me?

 

 

 

On one hand we're assured he's brilliant and possesses a steel-trap mind for finance.

 

On the other hand, he "forgot" that he had to pay taxes in America.

Yeah, I have to say, to me that should be a game changer. You want to be SecTreas, but you managed to "forget" to pay $34k in back taxes over 5 years? And hire an illegal alien?

 

End of interview.

 

[lostfan]

Yeah, I have to say, to me that should be a game changer. You want to be SecTreas, but you managed to "forget" to pay $34k in back taxes over 5 years? And hire an illegal alien?

 

End of interview.

Sir, I'm fully qualified for this job, I'm sure you've gone over my impressive resume and that the references I've provided have verified everything I've told you.

 

Oh, I forgot to tell you, I accidentally f***ed a 14 year old boy a couple hours before this interview. Is that bad?

Edited January 14, 2009 by lostfan

[Balta1701]

Yeah, I have to say, to me that should be a game changer. You want to be SecTreas, but you managed to "forget" to pay $34k in back taxes over 5 years? And hire an illegal alien?

 

End of interview.

So, on both issues, it turns out it's actually quite a bit more complicated than presented here. On the immigrant housekeeper, when she started working for him, she was a legal immigrant. She had the appropriate immigration documents. Those documents expired for a period of 3 months, probably due to her simply not handling the documentation application request properly. She left after those 3 months to have a baby. In other words, the only way for him to know that she had an immigration issue would be to repeatedly conduct immigration sweeps of everyone he meets or to take down all of the details from her identification documents upon hiring her so that he knows whether or not her papers are expiring and constantly keep tabs on that (something that no business in the country wants to be doing - does your business know whether or not your drivers's license is expired after you've been officially hired?)

 

Secondly, the mistake he made - failing to pay the Social Security and Medicare taxes, is a common mistake made by employees of some organizations like the IMF, because the IMF pays your federal taxes through standard withholding but does not withhold social security and medicare taxes, and as such, the employee is expected to calculate and pay them on his or her own.

The tax issue relates to Mr. Geithner's work for the International Monetary Fund between 2001 and 2004. As an American citizen working for the IMF, Mr. Geithner was technically considered self-employed and was required to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for himself as both an employer and an employee.

 

The IMF and World Bank reimburse employees, including U.S. citizens, for their U.S. income taxes, and make payments on a quarterly basis to cover those liabilities. They don't, however, make contributions toward Social Security and Medicare taxes, which individuals are expected to pay on their own.

 

In 2006, the IRS audited Mr. Geithner's 2003 and 2004 taxes and concluded he owed taxes and interest totaling $17,230, according to documents released by the Senate Finance Committee. The IRS waived the related penalties.

 

During the vetting of Mr. Geithner late last year, the Obama transition team discovered the nominee had similarly failed to pay the same taxes for 2001 and 2002. "Upon learning of this error on Nov. 21, 2008, Mr. Geithner immediately submitted payment for tax that would have been due in those years, plus interest," a transition aide said. The sum totaled $25,970.

 

The Obama team said that Mr. Geithner's taxes have been paid in full, and that he didn't intend to avoid payment, but made a mistake common for employees of international institutions. That characterization was contested by Senate Finance panel Republicans, who produced IMF documents showing that employees are repeatedly told they are responsible for paying their payroll taxes.

The "Immigrant" problem is bunk and shouldn't be a knock on him. He did his due diligence. The tax problem I could see being an issue...in the sense that I don't like my SecTreas making careless mistakes...but it's at least a complicated one.

[NorthSideSox72]

So, on both issues, it turns out it's actually quite a bit more complicated than presented here. On the immigrant housekeeper, when she started working for him, she was a legal immigrant. She had the appropriate immigration documents. Those documents expired for a period of 3 months, probably due to her simply not handling the documentation application request properly. She left after those 3 months to have a baby. In other words, the only way for him to know that she had an immigration issue would be to repeatedly conduct immigration sweeps of everyone he meets or to take down all of the details from her identification documents upon hiring her so that he knows whether or not her papers are expiring and constantly keep tabs on that (something that no business in the country wants to be doing - does your business know whether or not your drivers's license is expired after you've been officially hired?)

 

Secondly, the mistake he made - failing to pay the Social Security and Medicare taxes, is a common mistake made by employees of some organizations like the IMF, because the IMF pays your federal taxes through standard withholding but does not withhold social security and medicare taxes, and as such, the employee is expected to calculate and pay them on his or her own.

The "Immigrant" problem is bunk and shouldn't be a knock on him. He did his due diligence. The tax problem I could see being an issue...in the sense that I don't like my SecTreas making careless mistakes...but it's at least a complicated one.

OK, forget the immigration issue, that makes sense.

 

But the tax issue is still 100% intact. People who make that kind of money are well aware of what taxes are withheld and not, and/or they have people to manage those things. And even so, ignorance is not a defense for breaking the law - this is a maxim that has always held fast. Plus, we aren't talking about someone who is applying to be some civil servant in a low level job - this is the Secretary of the TREASURY. Treasury, as in, kind of has to do with money. So basically, my opinion on the tax matter hasn't changed. Its a huge red flag, and it would fully disqualify him in my view.

 

[southsider2k5]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090113/D95MGFTO1.html

 

May belong in the cabinet thread instead, but just imagine if this were to be you or me?

 

 

 

On one hand we're assured he's brilliant and possesses a steel-trap mind for finance.

 

On the other hand, he "forgot" that he had to pay taxes in America.

 

Sec Commerce-Pay for Play

Sec State-Pay for Play

Sec Treas- Tax evader, possible immigration violator.

 

lol. So much for surrounding himself with better people. This is the ethics and change we have all been waiting for, right? Not to mention everyone who made fun of the Palin vetting process, probably needs to grab a second plate for the crow they are eating now.

[Texsox]

So, on both issues, it turns out it's actually quite a bit more complicated than presented here. On the immigrant housekeeper, when she started working for him, she was a legal immigrant. She had the appropriate immigration documents. Those documents expired for a period of 3 months, probably due to her simply not handling the documentation application request properly. She left after those 3 months to have a baby. In other words, the only way for him to know that she had an immigration issue would be to repeatedly conduct immigration sweeps of everyone he meets or to take down all of the details from her identification documents upon hiring her so that he knows whether or not her papers are expiring and constantly keep tabs on that (something that no business in the country wants to be doing - does your business know whether or not your drivers's license is expired after you've been officially hired?)

 

Secondly, the mistake he made - failing to pay the Social Security and Medicare taxes, is a common mistake made by employees of some organizations like the IMF, because the IMF pays your federal taxes through standard withholding but does not withhold social security and medicare taxes, and as such, the employee is expected to calculate and pay them on his or her own.

The "Immigrant" problem is bunk and shouldn't be a knock on him. He did his due diligence. The tax problem I could see being an issue...in the sense that I don't like my SecTreas making careless mistakes...but it's at least a complicated one.

 

My employer asks for my insurance and driver's license every year. It is a condition of employment. If you are driving for the company, you can bet they check on a regular basis. Salespeople, delivery drivers, truckers, etc. It is routine.

 

It is required of employers to track the legal status of their employees. They have to have a system in place to know when Visas and work permits expire.

 

When you hire someone you are required to have copies of their employment documentation. Usually Social Security card and driver's license. It's the law and again routine. I am required to do it for the summer staff I hire for 4 weeks out of the year.

[lostfan]

You say that like it's a universal thing though. There is no such requirement where I work. I verify my eligibility to work in the U.S. when I got hired (like everyone does). After that, that's it, they don't ask again.

[NorthSideSox72]

Sec Commerce-Pay for Play

Sec State-Pay for Play

Sec Treas- Tax evader, possible immigration violator.

 

lol. So much for surrounding himself with better people. This is the ethics and change we have all been waiting for, right? Not to mention everyone who made fun of the Palin vetting process, probably needs to grab a second plate for the crow they are eating now.

I'd suggest those are three different issues, only one of which is a vetting one - Commerce (Richardson). They failed to recognize the problem there. It may turn out to be nothing, but he's under investigation.

 

With Treas, I'm frankly very disappointed with the fact that the FOUND those tax irregularities in the vetting process, but decided to proceed with him anyway. Really poor judgement.

 

As for State, I am not sure there is really any fire there, to be honest. And this coming from someone who really dislikes Hillary Clinton.

 

[Texsox]

You say that like it's a universal thing though. There is no such requirement where I work. I verify my eligibility to work in the U.S. when I got hired (like everyone does). After that, that's it, they don't ask again.

Sorry, I should have added more detail.

 

It depends on the documents that you used to establish your right to work. If it was your Social Security card and Driver's license, that established your right to work for an indefinite time. If you present any documents that establish a temporary right to work, then the employer is required to follow up when your status is scheduled to change.

[Cknolls]

The only question I would ask Geithner is: How much counter-party risk exposure did JPM and GS have to BSC,AIG, and LEH? Methinks mucho on the former no mucho gusto on the latter. Hence, the LEH failure.

[southsider2k5]

I'd suggest those are three different issues, only one of which is a vetting one - Commerce (Richardson). They failed to recognize the problem there. It may turn out to be nothing, but he's under investigation.

 

With Treas, I'm frankly very disappointed with the fact that the FOUND those tax irregularities in the vetting process, but decided to proceed with him anyway. Really poor judgement.

 

As for State, I am not sure there is really any fire there, to be honest. And this coming from someone who really dislikes Hillary Clinton.

 

With Hillary, these types of allegations have been floating around for a very long time. They finally got their records released and there was a direct link with certian companies receiving favorable actions after giving money to Bill's fund. That is pretty much the definition of pay for play.

[Texsox]

With Hillary, these types of allegations have been floating around for a very long time. They finally got their records released and there was a direct link with certian companies receiving favorable actions after giving money to Bill's fund. That is pretty much the definition of pay for play.

 

Which has always troubled me. Wouldn't you want to do business with those people that share your ideals? The same people that would naturally support you? Basically we want the GOP to support Dem businesses and vice versa, Doesn't make sense.

 

If you are an ag business, needing guest workers, would you donate to me, or one of our pro-border wall types? Now once I am elected, wouldn't I also support a guest worker program, as I have stated here forever? The someone looks back and sees someone donated and then received favorable actions and believes it was pay to play?

 

I understand the dangers, but this area is always less cut and dried than first glance.

[southsider2k5]

Which has always troubled me. Wouldn't you want to do business with those people that share your ideals? The same people that would naturally support you? Basically we want the GOP to support Dem businesses and vice versa, Doesn't make sense.

 

If you are an ag business, needing guest workers, would you donate to me, or one of our pro-border wall types? Now once I am elected, wouldn't I also support a guest worker program, as I have stated here forever? The someone looks back and sees someone donated and then received favorable actions and believes it was pay to play?

 

I understand the dangers, but this area is always less cut and dried than first glance.

 

They are charging a sitting governor with this, amongst other things. If we say it is illegal in Rod Blago's case, why isn't it illegal when the future Secretary of State does it?

[Texsox]

They are charging a sitting governor with this, amongst other things. If we say it is illegal in Rod Blago's case, why isn't it illegal when the future Secretary of State does it?

 

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Clearly there is a point where it crosses the line. Perhaps they both crossed the line.

 

Separate thought. Where should the line be drawn? I would be considered a pro immigration candidate. Wouldn't my campaign attract individuals and businesses that are also pro-immigration? If I then work to pass, or by executive decree, support pro-immigration policies, is it fair to look at my donor list and make a pay to play accusation?

[NorthSideSox72]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Clearly there is a point where it crosses the line. Perhaps they both crossed the line.

 

Separate thought. Where should the line be drawn? I would be considered a pro immigration candidate. Wouldn't my campaign attract individuals and businesses that are also pro-immigration? If I then work to pass, or by executive decree, support pro-immigration policies, is it fair to look at my donor list and make a pay to play accusation?

Its definitely not black-and-white, usually. I mean, with something as outright illegal as Blago's dealings, its simple. But as you say, some of these linkages are natural and legal, and others are in a grey area where they may potentially affect policy, but that may be linked to natural policy already in place.

 

[Cknolls]

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/20...on_inauguration

 

 

I'm sure we'll here the same outrage about Obama's innaugural cost which will exceed both of Bush's combined.

[mr_genius]

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/20...on_inauguration

 

 

I'm sure we'll here the same outrage about Obama's innaugural cost which will exceed both of Bush's combined.

Oh of course you will

[BigSqwert]

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/20...on_inauguration

 

 

I'm sure we'll here the same outrage about Obama's innaugural cost which will exceed both of Bush's combined.

 

What outrage? The article you linked has this as a header: The D.C. press corps failed to ask hard questions about the inauguration's huge cost

 

So for you outrage = one article by a Salon.com writer?

[kapkomet]

What outrage? The article you linked has this as a header: The D.C. press corps failed to ask hard questions about the inauguration's huge cost

 

So for you outrage = one article by a Salon.com writer?

Thanks for making the point.

[BigSqwert]

Thanks for making the point.

So Cknolls point is that there wasn't enough outrage at the cost of Bush's inauguration?