The Real Daschle Problem

If Daschle “thought” it was being taken care of by his accountant, wouldn’t it have been prudent to pick up the phone and ask his accountant “Did you take care of it”? It seems like this is more than just a disconnect from the realities the rest of us face. His head wasn’t just stuck in the sand, it was stuck up in a place where the sun never shines. Before you assume the responsibilities in a position for the nation at large, you have to assume some responsibility for yourself. Tom might be embarrassed, but this sort of thing doesn’t go down very well with people who take care of everything on their own.

I think Obama’s very public, very scornful (and very justified) finger-wagging at bonus-taking executives is problematic with respect to Daschle’s nomination. I fully understand the underlying differences, but heaping public scorn on one millionaire who games the system leaves very little room to forgive another. It bothers me.

“more damaging, I think, than the initial reports.:”
.
How so? As far as confirmation? Or reputation? Or ammunition for the republicans who would rather discuss this than address health care?

P-NNTO: All of those things. Yesterday’s stories were about carelessness; today’s are about cluelessness.

Thanks for the reply. You have the expertise and that’s why I was curious if this would actually damage his chance at the job.
I wonder how many senators who vote against him because of this are in glass houses. Even an empty suit one term senator like Norm Coleman has money issues, to put it delicately.

If you want to be a schmuck that’s one thing. But you are giving ammunition to the other side to fire at President Obama!

While I agree in general with the premise that Daschle should have looked into the details sooner, I agree with him that the sum is “jawdropping.” If he owed $128,000 in taxes, the service was deemed to be worth somewhere around $350,000, right? How could he have guessed that? He said he thought a friend was doing him a favor, and why not? That’s actually a lot more like what the rest of us think than it seems you or shepherdwong are seeing.
.
So if our car breaks down and a friend lends us a car, do we report that as income at the rate it would have cost to rent a car? Writ large, that’s what Daschle had to do. Have none of us ever traded favors and not reported that as income? Every “housewife” understands that the tasks of keeping a home would cost any family a fortune if they were being paid for. So if you babysit for a friend and she in turn hangs your wallpaper are you claiming as income what you saved in paying a paper hanger? Various cities have tried to set up barter systems to save people money, and they tend to fail because the IRS treats barter as income, even though the rest of us don’t.
.
Put another way, it’s unlikely Daschle would have been using his friend’s car and driver if he’d realized it was income. I wonder how many of the senators sitting in judgment on this are thinking “aagh, what have I done that I need to count as income?” This seems a more defensible situation that Geithner’s, actually.

Maybe he can be in the cabinet of wherever Wesley Snipes is hiding.

Isn’t this something of a problem with the tax code, though? Does every little thing need to be subject to some sort of tax? A guy lets Daschle use his car and driver. Presumably, the guy paying the car and driver is paying his share if FICA taxes for the driver and the driver is paying taxes on his income. Why does Daschle need to be taxed on that?

If the driver is shuttling his employer around, the employer doesn’t pay any other taxes on it. The employer simply hired a driver. But does anyone else who gets a lift from this guys driver have to pay taxes? It’s absurd to me.

kathy: Daschle wasn’t involved in a friendly one time barter deal. He was provided with transportation and a driver for a very extended period of time. What did he give in exchange? The car was provided and the driver was being paid to take Daschle where he wanted to go when he wanted to go. I don’t see how this could possibly be regarded as anything other than goods and services rendered.

I have very little sympathy for the ignorance excuse. Transportation is one of the huge buckets you look at in tax preparation. Every single taxpayer knows they can get a deduction for work-related mileage and watches it like a hawk. It’s one of the first things you think about in terms of taxation. It’s laughable to claim that having your transportation expenses gifted wouldn’t come up in terms of taxation.

sacredh: And if daschle wasn’t doing anything in return, if there was no pro quid pro, (no barter) then how is it income? On the other hand, if it was a gift it violated the senate’s gift rules, which is what I’d rather see him held accountable for.
.
And “one time” doesn’t really enter into it, does it? I’m suggesting that we all excuse such things on the basis that they’re one time, or only occasional, but I don’t think the IRS sees it that way.

pourme – but how is the mileage deduction related to this?
.
If you carpool to work, with someone else driving, should you be counting that as income? Except for the quality of the ride and the fact that the owner of the car wasn’t going in the same direction, I don’t see what the difference is. If another senator was picking up Daschle in his chauffered car would Daschle have to count that as income?

Yeah but guys — isn’t a little absurd that somebody would have to pay so much money in taxes in exchange for a favor that can’t be monetized at all? Remember, the driver is already paying taxes, as is the driver’s employer. For the amount of money the IRS took from Daschle on this, Daschle could have taken a helicopter everywhere. The tax code is just absurd on this issue.

Wait a damn minute now. There is quite a bit of pooh poohing going on here that borders on hypocritical. This wasn’t Daschles homeboy lending him a car. He got a car and driver as a consequence of his job. Something that I would bet was included in any contract he signed for said job. And say he didn’t know the difference between when he was in Congress with a driver and car and in private business with a driver and car doesn’t speak well of his mental abilities. This guy phucked up plain and simple and there aint a chance in hell that if he had an R behind his name that the people trying dismiss this would be trying to make it seem like its no big deal. Primarily because it IS a big deal. At least with the Geitner situation the whole way he was paid was convoluted. But Tom Daschle in addition to having had to file taxes while he was in Congress also had to file financial disclosure forms every year and so its not like this guy didn’t have a clue about stuff like this. I am sorry but I refuse to turn into the bizzarro form of wingnut that excuses everything Democrats do while demonizing what Republican do. I think Daschle is the perfect guy for the job as far as his background but personally i believe his tax issues are a big issue and might just be enough to disqualify him.

kathy, that carpool question is really apt.

destor, those are very good questions.

The (tax) law is wrong so I don’t have to obey it? I used to know that as a typical Republican response.

This isn’t a debate over the fairness of the tax. It is what it is. This isn’t a debate over whether he owes the tax. He does. The mileage deduction is related because it illustrates the point: everyone — from the Secretary of HHS to you and me — knows that transportation expense is a key element of tax calculation. You don’t typically get to theorize about clarity and fairness as abstracts when you get caught. At least, most people don’t.

kathy: It’s the same principal that got Ted Stevens convicted in Alaska. Contractors worked on his home and charged him far less than “fair market value” for their services. It is viewed as income because the IRS sees it as what would it have cost Daschle if he had hired the car and driver himself. Since he didn’t pay anything out of his pocket, it has to be counted as income. Every politician in Washington knows the rules and Daschle’s assertion that it suddenly dawned on him that it might be viewed as income is jaw dropping in itself. I’m a diehard democrat and tend to give them the benefit of a doubt, but even I find his explanation indefensible.

I’m glad their parents haven’t woken hula and textee up yet. Without their histrionics interfering, this is an excellent discussion. Please keep it going.

also may be worth mentioning here that when daschle was in the senate, he was on the finance committee, which writes the tax law. also, that one of the reasons he lost his senate seat was the perception in SD that he had lost touch (his lifestyle became an issue in that race).

also, agree with commenters who argue this was a very different situation than borrowing a friend’s car.

OT, but since K-Tum is playing in the swamp, I would love to see her address (dead tree and blog) a point Steven Benen made a few minutes ago:
.
Perhaps the political world has been looking at this debate the wrong way. All week long, we’ve heard quite a bit about what’s incumbent upon Obama to satisfy Republicans’ demands, despite the GOP’s horrific failures at governing, and despite voters having thrown the minority party out on their asses. Maybe now would be a good time to turn the question around: what are Republicans going to do to play a productive role in the process? When will they move beyond Bush’s failed economic agenda and get serious about the crisis? Obama was prepared to make all kinds of compromises; what concessions are Republicans prepared to make? GOP leaders have acknowledged they can’t just be "the party of ‘no.’" So when might we see them start to say "yes"?
.
It seems the burden of proof is all out of whack here. It’s not the president’s responsibility to make the rejected (and dejected) minority party happy. It’s not Obama’s job to find out what unhinged, far-right Republicans want to be happy, and then deliver.

I’m sympathetic to the “rules are rules” argument, but I think this is a case where we might want to ask whether or not the rules should be as they are. I’m not so sure they should be.

KAREN’S ON CNN right now

KAREN’S ON CNN right now – talk about playing in the muck. I wonder how hard it will be to wash off?

KT – So did this just happen since he’s been out of the senate? If so it makes it even more surprising that this was deemed to be worth as much as $350,000.
/
Pourme – we all know about taking deductions for our car use. I doubt many of us are in the position of counting our car use as income.

wvng
.
I made that point the other day. Nobody has asked what the Republicans have compromised on. A compromise is a situation where two sides give up a little. What has the GOP given up? To hear them tell it they LOVE infrastructure spending now so you can’t say that. The Republican Governers want the money going to states as well. So when is somebody going to ask what exactly in the bill can the Republicans point to as a compromise like the Dems with the tax cuts and the removals of the family planning and national mall provisions. But you won’t hear anybody asking the question because we already know the answer and it goes against the “Obama’s failed bipartisanship” story line. Nope, much easier to cherry pick the bill and find something to get “outraged” over.
.
By the way I have my own ideas about what to do with the wingnut republican governers.
.
Check the video at the bottom of the prince of darkness making the same arguments 16 years ago against President Clinton’s stimulus plan and budget that the GOP is making today against Obama’s. Nice to know that you don’t even have to change the wording to the script to still be found credible by the media talking heads.

wvng – you’ve got that right – they’re talking about Limbaugh

Borrowing the computer in the CNN green room: as i’ve said before, i think last week’s back and forth meant absolutely nothing. the real place to watch is the senate and in conference. last week was the pre-game show.

kathy, if they are talking about Limbaugh as the de facto head of the repuglican party, that is a very very very good thing. I’ve been in pure heaven watching one repuglican after another crawling to him after making the mistake of saying he wasn’t their god.
.
Democracy Corps has a favorability poll on Rush Limbaugh and other conservative luminaries that shows conclusively that being in the tank for Limbaugh is a losing strategy. But they just can’t quit him.
.
And the radio spots pressuring Repuglican senators to support the stimulus plan are more gold, like this one in PA: The announcer goes on to say: “Will our Senator, Arlen Specter, side with Rush Limbaugh too” –interrupted by Limbaugh’s “I hope he fails!” interjection — “or will he reject the partisanship and failed economic policies of the past, and stand up for the people of Pennsylvania?”

sgw – great post, and nice cherry on the bottom.

kathy: a full-time car and driver is very, very expensive, which daschle surely knew. this was also provided by the head of a company for whom daschle had been consulting–and paid for that work. so it does have the feel of a fringe benefit. i’m still not clear on how long daschle had this arrangement, but my impression is that it was for years.

KT: Borrowing the computer in the CNN green room: as i’ve said before, i think last week’s back and forth meant absolutely nothing. Perhaps true in the substance of the resulting bill. But absolutely not true regarding the media narrative about what is going on. If a beltway CW sets in that failing to get House repub votes was an Obama failure (as your stablemate Mark “Drudge rules my world, Mr Hewitt” Halperin said) then that will be an ongoing problem.

Yes it’s a problem. Receiving the services of a car and driver is no different than receiving the services of contractors.
.
This quote is breathtaking: The committee report said Mr. Daschle had told the committee staff that “in June 2008, something made him think that the car service might be taxable, and he disclosed the arrangement to his accountant.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/us/politics/31daschle.html?_r=1
.
Sure. If I were offered a job tomorrow for 35 thousand a year, plus the services of a car and driver, it would never cross my mind that paying taxes on the 35 thousand wasn’t enough.
.
Can anyone imagine the IRS or any regular person in touch with the rules of “real life” believing that?

rose83: True enough. But this is what’s wrong with the IRS regs — the taxes on the fringe benefit are so onerous that you couldn’t accept a job with a 35K base pay and unlimited use of a car and driver because you wouldn’t be able to make enough money to pay taxes on the car and driver. Unlimited car and driver is a nice perk but you can’t spend it. It shouldn’t be taxed at the level it’s being taxed.

kathy: a full-time car and driver is very, very expensive, which daschle surely knew. this was also provided by the head of a company for whom daschle had been consulting–and paid for that work. so it does have the feel of a fringe benefit. i’m still not clear on how long daschle had this arrangement, but my impression is that it was for years.
.
I believe it started in 2006. The NY Times article I linked to has a lot of info. And yes, the “I didn’t know it was compensation” excuse is very weak. I doubt anyone would take that defense seriously in my 35 thousand a year plus car and driver hypothetical.

My old firm used to provide a car service if you worked after eight in the evening and dinner too. I worked with many smart people but I doubt they looked at this as income. I telecommute so was always jealous about the dinner thing because I still had to cook when I worked late. You think I can report them and get a few bucks under the whistle blower provision? (in case you missed it yes it was my attempt at snarkicity)

Dee
.
You do understand that the car and driver was not for just going to and from work right? Come on now, like I said would we be doing all this rationalizing or railing against the tax code if it was say Lindsey Graham who had to pay back taxes or for a better analogy if it was Newt Gingrich.
.
Yeah I can just see all the posts defending Newt and pointing out how innocent of a mistake it was.

Thnks wvng

Is Daschle a committed, serial tax cheat or merely an utterly incompetent fool? How about both?

rose83: True enough. But this is what’s wrong with the IRS regs — the taxes on the fringe benefit are so onerous that you couldn’t accept a job with a 35K base pay and unlimited use of a car and driver because you wouldn’t be able to make enough money to pay taxes on the car and driver. Unlimited car and driver is a nice perk but you can’t spend it. It shouldn’t be taxed at the level it’s being taxed.
.
I disagree. People who make 35 thousand a year have no “right” to jobs that also provide a car and driver. The numbers don’t add up at that salary level, which is fair. The whole tax system would collapse and become even more unfair than it is if these kind of alternative forms of compensation were taxed at vastly different rates. That would allow transparent tax avoidance mechanisms.

Oh oh, textee’s mother woke it up. Time for a new thread.

wvng
.
Here is what I said on friday
.
Greg

Here is the thing, when you think about it Republicans can’t really say they have “compromised” on anything because according to them they now endorse infrastructure spending. Rep King of NY actually said we need MORE infrastructure spending. The aid to states goes to many states with Republican governers so I doubt if they could say they “compromised” over that. So what exactly if someone asked them could they point to as something they “compromised” on? Man I would love for that question to be asked.

KT:
.
Excellent post. Thank you so much!

I believe Daschle calculated that the car/driver was 20% business related and 80% personal use. I’m not sure which news service I saw that on. I’ll defend politicians if they can pass my BS test. If I can get through their explanation/excuse without thinking/saying BS, I’ll give it a shot. As soon as I read “It suddenly dawned on me”, he failed the BS test.

I think Obama should dump Dascle.

1) What he did was wrong
2) He lied by ommission by not telling Obama for months
3) If you read Glen Grenwald, Daschle is very cozy with health care lobby and been sucking that teat so long it is unlikely he will enact progressive change

sgw, kathy, et al. Whoever is subjecting themselves the the cable teevee onslaught this morning (I have a weak stomach). What frame are they using to discuss the House vote? Are they using “the dems failed to compromise with the nice repuglicans who’ve only ever wanted whats best for America?” If so, is anyone pushing back, or are the “liberal guests” just nodding politely?

ROSE83: you’re very smart and you make a great point. There are sticky issues if alternative forms of compensation were taxed at different levels. But it does seem to me that the value of a service is different than the value of cash basically because of liquidity. You can do whatever you want with cash, not so with a service. That’s why cash is king on the value scale.

And yeah, the problem is, if you lower the perks taxes companies will just do everything for their execs and pay them a token salary… but maybe it can be better honed? Like, if 75% of your living expenses are taken care of by perks, the perks are taxed at income but if only 25% are, the perks aren’t taxed as high (or even at all)? The IRS does recognize that some transfers of wealth shouldn’t be taxed after all, like gifts under $15,000.

wvng
.
Its Superbowl Sunday so I refused to subject myself to that today. I will let you know tomorrow but I can tell you what the preliminary framing of it was yesterday. Get this, the republicans are saying THEY were bipartisan because some blue dog dems voted against the measure too. So Heath Shuler et all are proving that its the Dems that are partisan and the Republicans are bi partisan. Seriously
.
You can’t make this kind of stuff up.

Wvng: I repeat: The House vote this week was not at all significant, which is one reason that Obama pretty much gave the Republicans a pass when he met with them. (In essence, judging from the reports coming out of that closed-door session, he was telling them to keep an open mind about whatever they see coming out of the Senate.) And it’s also why he pretty much let Obey do what he wanted to do. That’s MY frame, and I’m sticking to it.

While I fully and enthusiastically support the policy initiatives related to executive bonus and pay, I did not like the public scorn Obama heaped on them from the Oval Office. I just don’t like the President so aggressively denouncing non-criminal behavior. Your mileage may differ. Now, we have Daschle — “at a time like this” — driving around in a limo — supplied by “fat cats” — arguably “at taxpayer expense” to the extent he owed taxes for the service. I get they are very different circumstances, but now that public scorn is White House currency, I wonder if the administration will get out its wallet for Daschle?

K Tizzle
.
So now you are jumping on the “Obey disOBEYED President Obama” bandwagon now too?? My thats fascinating. I wonder what will be said if the Senate bill isn’t much different from the House bill. Will anybody come back and admit they were wrong and that in point of fact the Republicans were acting as obstructionists? Oh and KT maybe you hadn’t heard but it probably doesn’t matter what happens in the Senate either because you already have Republicans pledging to filibuster the bill. How do you love that?

sg: i’m making no prejudgments here. i WANT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS. i think you guys should too, rather than getting all worked up and declaring winners and losers and heroes and villains at this point. obama showed in the campaign that he understands timing, when to engage and when not to.

SG– I get it I just don’t think it’s important. I know we wanted to get my old boss a car and driver because she couldn’t anywhere on time I don’t she would have thought of that as income any more than the use of the company car. I don’t think perfection is possible and if the job was head of IRS I’d be more worried. Tell me Dascle participated in some sort of health care scam then attention would be warrented. As long as they can get the job I want done…
.
I agree that if this was about a rethug my response would be different but not because the infraction is important but because I’d be looking for any reason to reject them because I don’t like their philosophy.

KT, I think you might have noticed a difference in attitude amongst democrats when one of their own screw up, and when the Republicans do it.
.
Or maybe it’s just me. Daschle needs to withdraw his name.

Something else to consider is that the Senate is NOT the House. Snowe, Dukakis, possibly McCain and a long shot Gregg might be unwilling to stand with their own party. 60 votes isn’t that much of a stretch. If Gregg is seriously considering the Commerce job, backing the filibuster would be a deal breaker.

K Tizzle
.
Is that really true though? I mean I havent declared winners or losers yet and I think I would be hard pressed other than a few commenters who ALWAYS pick winners and losers normally with President Obama being on the losing side, to find many comments framed that way. Also the heros and villans meme isn’t what we are doing here, at least I know its not what I am doing. We are just pointing out that the Republicans aren’t negotiating in good faith. Now you can say we are labeling them villans but here is the problem with that. If you do so that makes it easier to dismiss our concerns when the truth is we are probably right. So by framing it as though we are calling them villans makes it a situation where most journos would be markedly less motivated to investigate and see if our arguments have merit.
.
Now is stating that President Obama let Obey do anything he wanted to do not making a statement inferring that Obey overreached? If that wasn’t your intentions then I apologize but I would love to get some clarity on what that statement meant.

sgw, on your point that the republicans are saying THEY were bipartisan because some blue dog dems voted against the measure too, I received an email from my republican Congresswoman who told me that: As you may know, I joined with a bipartisan coalition of my Republican colleagues and a collection of Democratic representatives in opposition to this plan because I believed it lacked focus and fell short of the demands of our economy.
.
Utterly predictable, and too many in the media eat it up.

Case in point about the power of words and framing. Over and over Republican talking heads have asserted that the New Deal didn’t work because of government spending. Other than “librul bloggers” how many articles have you seen examining that statement that has been repeated over and over again in the MSM. Once its put out there and then repeated and never rebutted it becomes cemented as fact and again few journos wants to look for information thats contrary to the “accepted facts”. See also WMD in the run up to the Iraq war.

perhaps the most pathetic thing here is the knee-jerk attempts to defend Daschle (and Obama, by extension) with arguments like “If my care is in the shop and I borrow my neighbor’s car, do I have to pay taxes on it?”
_
That isn’t what is at issue here. Daschle’s car wasn’t “in the shop”. He was given a “luxury item” of considerable value, and failed to report it. If Daschle had been handed $350K, there would be no question of his tax liability, and to pretend otherwise is nonsense.
_
But what I find most interesting is Karen’s assessment that its not the infraction, but the failure to tell Obama, that is the problem. This is really sad insofar as its all about “old” politics — its not what you’ve done wrong, its how much of an embarrassment you are, that determines how much “damage” you’ve sustained.

KT: i’m making no prejudgments here. i WANT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS. i think you guys should too, rather than getting all worked up and declaring winners and losers and heroes and villains at this point. If the rest of the media was taking your approach, I would say fine and sit back and wait to see what happens. But when a significant number of msm opinion setters frame this as Obama not being bipartisan enough, and when they repeat it again and again, then I have already seen one result of the process that is not relevant to the ultimate result of the stimulus bill negotiation, but is highly relevant to the public’s perception of what has occurred. The media is not a passive bystander in all this, it drives perceptions. As dday noted recently:
.
The result of the recent conservative dominance on cable, even if not a lot of people are watching, is a growing amount of misinformation delivered to the public, over the course of many years. One of the reasons we focus on this and think it’s so important is that progressives are cutting through 30 years’ worth of rhetoric designed to push conservative movement ideas into the mainstream. And without a sustained effort to demystify those ideas, they will hold in the minds of the public EVEN IF the result of those ideas has been disaster. Republicans destroyed the country and people fully understand that, and yet their ideas haven’t been invalidated. See this Rasmussen poll.

I agree with pluk #61.

It’s funny we object so much to the main stream media’s tactics of manipulating, trivializing and misinforming the public. but I noticed that no one has made the point or at if they did I missed it when reading the thread that this whole notion of one disqualifying action and you should withdraw your name is a media creation. It was the original definition of gotcha journalism. While it may have started with some pretty serious actions (namely Watergate) it has since morphed into a standard of perfection that anyone who makes a mistake, a misjudgment, wrongly interprets that has not amounted to criminal behavior is out. Sorry but but I don’t really care if its Dems or Republicans I think I’m on record that I think all zero tolerance policies are a bad idea including nanny gate that was specifically used to disqualify women.
.
Reporters get kudos for being able to take someone down with a story. Which is why they go after personally embarrassing things that are trivial compared to what’s really going on and frankly, I don’t want to play this game.
.
They used to say that it wasn’t the act that did you in it was the cover up. Well I guess that’s not true anymore. It seems even when you come clean yourself and bring it to the attention of the authorities and rectify the situation we still want to tar and feather you and drive you out of town on a rail.
.
Last word on this: If we continue to make perfection the standard we will end up with a bunch of people who have never done anything (good or bad), never stood for anything, never fought for anything, never experienced anything and quite frankly never learned anything that wasn’t printed in a book.

.
I’d love to see some mainstream journos do this much hyperventilating about the bushies torturing prisoners and spying on their colleagues.
.

ROSE83: you’re very smart and you make a great point. There are sticky issues if alternative forms of compensation were taxed at different levels. But it does seem to me that the value of a service is different than the value of cash basically because of liquidity. You can do whatever you want with cash, not so with a service. That’s why cash is king on the value scale.

And yeah, the problem is, if you lower the perks taxes companies will just do everything for their execs and pay them a token salary… but maybe it can be better honed? Like, if 75% of your living expenses are taken care of by perks, the perks are taxed at income but if only 25% are, the perks aren’t taxed as high (or even at all)? The IRS does recognize that some transfers of wealth shouldn’t be taxed after all, like gifts under $15,000.
.
It just seems that any of these measures would further complicate the tax code. Facilitating non-monetary forms of compensation doesn’t seem worth the sacrifice of simplicity.
.
Dee, I agree with your opposition to zero-tolerance policies, but surely you think that there are some disqualifying offenses. There’s a huge gap between what Dashchle did and perfection. Geithner’s mistake was very different.

Once its put out there and then repeated and never rebutted it becomes cemented as fact and again few journos wants to look for information that’s contrary to the “accepted facts”.
.
Now here SG we are in absolute agreement.
.
In fact just this morning I heard a conservative pundit imply that the CBO report says that 64% of the money in the stimulus plan will be spent after the first eighteen months and I believe it says the opposite (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). Yet, the reporter felt compelled to immediately clarify what CBO stood for (adding to the pundits credibility) not the erroneous fact being offered as truth.

Over $100,000 in back taxes that just “occured” to you six months ago to me is not a trivial thing. And I always say this, if you lie about one thing then what haven’t you lied about. If he lied by ommision to the Obama transition team then what else is he hiding or did he lie about. Now you may say thats harsh or over the top but if you are dealing with the law once you lie on the stand everything else you testified to can impugned. And if its good enough for the courts its good enough for me.

I agree with pluk #61.…
_
…said wvng as he watched Satan putting on his ice skates!

Tumulty:

I couldn’t have put it better myself.

The Democrats are in charge, and suddenly establishment Washington is shocked — Shocked! — to discover there’s lobbying going on!

Dee
.
Yep its the exact opposite. And here is the problem. Our Democratic surrogates PHUCKING SUCK!!! Ron Christie’s crosseyed ass keeps repeating that same bullsh*t assertation and whomever they pair him up with never busts his ass. They move on to a different subject or attack him on something else. But if it keeps getting repeated over and over its accepted as fact. Especially when that bufoon can actually sound like he knows what he is talking about.
.
You know many people have talked about David Gregory’s assertation that its not the job of journos to call someone a liar but I am officially calling bullsh%t on that AGAIN. From the earliest days of this country we relied on journalists to bring us the TRUTH. And if that meant calling a lie a lie thats what was expected. Its the whole reason that they are specifically protected under the constitution so that if in their search for truth they run up against the powers that be they can’t be intimidating into not publishing the truth. Its why people bought news papers and magazines because they wanted to know what was really going on. Its why you had watergate springing out from by Bernstein and Woodward.
.
That journalists now want to abdicate their responsibility to make sure they are putting out the truth and the facts is just reprehensible on so many levels and really and truly makes me want to push for legislation stripping them of their constitutional protections in cases where they obviously make little to no effort to verify their “facts”

KT, Good job not letting Howie Kurtz drag you into the Repub weeds on the Ledbetter law. I really appreciated your pointing out that all the Repub points (OMG, frivilous lawsuits!!) had been aired many times before and the point is that this is now law. I note he immediately went on to somthing else when you wouldn’t play.
.
As to Daschle, I would have known that the car and driver were taxable income. Maybe the difference is that I do my own taxes. Perhaps another is that I don’t have a job that puts me in that rarified atmosphere.

Actually I don’t rose, the reason that I’m more concerned about Geitners mistake than Daschle’s is because treasury is the head of IRS and its a competency issue which I believe is relevant.
.
Daschle’s use of a car service is like the example of my boss who we wanted to get a car and driver just to get here where she needs to be on time with out all of the constant hassle we endured by have to re-fax things, re-fed-ex things etc. when she didn’t get to where she was supposed to be. But the IRS would look at this as a perk and expect her to pay taxes on it when we looked at it as a business expense that reduced overhead.
.
Now I’m not saying this was Daschle’s circumstances, but I don’t assume that there are no circumstances possible that might have led him to misinterpret his responsibility here. Nor do I believe that once understood this was such a heinous act that he should be excluded from public life and the Obama administration should be denied his particular talents and experience in an important aspect of governing.
.
Obama said that he won’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, yet we do it all the time. I still think Edwards would have been a great guy to work on poverty issues but that’s not going to happen because of something he did that has nothing to do with his job. Obviously, someone will say it goes to judgement but that’s msm crap to justify their nosy, gossipy preference for peeping in peoples’ bedrooms just like they did in high school.
.
I think about Bill Clinton and clearly his horn dog judgement was pretty appalling but it did not impact his economic judgment in the least. We can go back through out history find a bright line between public greatness and personal shortcomings.
.
Lastly, as someone who does a great deal of travel for my job, it is possible to be so damn busy going from appointment to appointment, or meetings, or speaking engagements, or conferences etc. that you don’t know which way is up or down and have to delegate everything to assistants, accountants, etc.

pluk, I also agree with what J-LA #65 said, which makes me either relentlessly pragmatic or hopelessly fickle in my affiliations.
.
As for Dashle, I would hate to lose him as HHS director, because he clearly has vast, practical knowledge concerning both the substance and the politics of health policy. But I also agree that his tax issue is a problem. Perhaps this is an opportunity for a teachable moment.

sgw: From the earliest days of this country we relied on journalists to bring us the TRUTH. That would be the cue for KT to rightly point out the storied history of remarkably, astonishingly, egregiously biased journalism throughout much of the history of this country.
.
But that doesn’t mean we should not rail against it, or hold the media’s feet to the fire and push them to fulfill their constitutional responsibility. That is OUR job.

Dee, I think the fact that the IRS instituted a settlement program for the World Bank employees indicates it was a very understandable mistake. Daschle, OTOH, was just plain stupid if he really thought that he didn’t have to pay taxes on a car and driver. So either he’s stupid or dishonest or (most likely) so out of touch with his finances that he literally lost track of over a hundred thousand dollars of tax liabilities.
.
And I 100% agree about the irrelevancy of sex scandals. I even felt the same way about McCain. But cheating on your taxes is relevant in a way that cheating on your spouse isn’t.

SG — I get the whole lie train of thought. (My grandmother always said if you’ll lie you’ll cheat and if you’ll cheat you’ll steal) But, but how is it a lie to Obama when he brought it to their attention and not the other way around. Like I said earlier if its not the act but the cover up that’s the more egregious error, why are we reacting as if this is somehow part of the cover-up to congress or the Obama administration because the media didn’t know about it?

Paul L has a very good point here.
.
Karen seems to be implying that the problem is with the Obama team not knowing in time to construct plausible rhetorical defenses.
.
I guess this is because of her ambiguous use of the term “damaging”, as in:
.
Today’s stories…are in many ways more damaging, I think, than the initial reports.
.
Damaging to whom or what, exactly?
.
Damaging in terms of the Obama Administration’s reputation (with the political press corps) for being “disciplined”?
.
Damaging to Daschle’s chances at appointment confirmation?
.
Damaging to Barack Obama?
.
How? Why? What? How so?

One point that I have not heard addressed nearly enough, in either the Geithner or Daschle – or ex-Raytheon lobbyist Defense nominee whose name escapes me – is where the heck are any Subject Matter Experts who are without sin supposed to come from? Yes, we want to reduce the influence of lobbyists, and I would love to have leaders who can navigate the freaking tax code better than I can – but, where are they? It’s as if we are creating a new Holy Mother of God Church, and nobody can get in who ever committed a freaking sin.

As for Dashle, I would hate to lose him as HHS director, because he clearly has vast, practical knowledge concerning both the substance and the politics of health policy. But I also agree that his tax issue is a problem. Perhaps this is an opportunity for a teachable moment.
_
I’m actually less concerned with the tax issue (given the complesity of the tax code) than the fact that Daschle accepted a gift worth hundreds of thousands of dollars from someone who he says he “did a lot of work for” but won’t say what that work was…and his financial ties to the health care industry. The latter means that advocates of single-payer are not even being given a fair hearing.

Rose83 — Sorry but you seem to be more offended by the amount than the act. We have been dismissing scale here but it is relevant. Having your friend or better yet your dad come over as a weekend warrior to help redo the house is fine as long as his labor doesn’t go over the equivalent of $15,000 (the gift allowed by one individual to another per year right — I thought it was 10,000 but I guess that went up under Republicans)
.
Just because the rule Daschle broke is different from the rule Joe blow broke or that you or I may have unintentially broke doesn’t lessen the fact that we all broke a rule. Just because the amount of money in Daschle’s rule breaking is far more than the money involved in any of the other examples still doesn’t make his rule breaking more heinous. In fact, unless it’s a criminal activity, and it is not being classified as such and neither would ours if we came forward to amend our taxes, it is exactly the same. By the way it is a quite common occurrence which is why they have a form to do it already to go and everything.
.
There are very few Americans who could survive the absolute perfect standard on their taxes. When the last time you shopped on line and didn’t have to pay sales tax because there was no brick and mortar store in your state but sent your state finance department the sales tax they were owed?
.
Raise your hand if you pay FICA for a regular baby sitter.
.
Raise your hand if as a waitress you claimed every single penny in tips.
.
Raise your hand KT if every item in your travel reimbursement couiol dpass muster in an audit.
.
Come on people, its hypocrisy and doesn’t matter to me if it’s our or theirs hypocrisy is exactly that. Holding someone else to a standard for which we could not live up to ourselves.

oops “couiol dpass” could pass preview is my friend well not really in this case its actually a hindrance.

Raise your hand if you have been in Congress for years and are about to be nominated to head what will be perhaps the biggest fight in our generation over universal healthcare.

A new marketing opportunity / slogan for DC tax accounting firms:
.
We guarantee an embarrassment-free vetting process!

Hey It’s Super Bowl Sunday! Not to change the subject but what the heck…. Thought I’d give the nation a little flavor for the pre-game atmosphere. Took a drive down into Tampa last night just to get a feeling regarding the happening. About 9:30 pm: The NFL Live experience a huge number of tents erected on former game parking spaces was busy, but slowing down. People could bring their kids to these interactive events to kick a field goal, throw a pass over outstretched arms to a receiver, push a blocking sled, etc. Play video games, watch a band, a sport auction, see some historical memorabilia etc. Of course earlier in the day this was a nightmare to get to. But near the end of the night just slightly busy. The stadium was awash in lights and flashing colored light under near the top of the stadium. Concrete vehicle blockers set up near the stadium. This morning no traffic can drive on the adjoining streets to avoid car bombs I guess.
Dale Mabry was packed east of the stadium with the Tampa’s nude bars well packed. We are famous for adult entertainment strip clubs and during Superbowl week Tampa leaves them alone, and everyone can get a lap dance. Tampa doesn’t want to arrest any out of town celebrities, NFL players, corporate CEO’s, politicians, movie stars, etc. Funny how the rules are different for the upper crust in America? Lots of tailgating events along the roadside at the local hotels and restaurants. Just a sea of parked cars along the highway.
For you that are not aware just south of Tampa in the Riverview area is the winter carnival headquarters. Thus there were carnival vendors also parked along the highway on property selling their corn dogs, cotton candy and even some dunking tanks and carnival games. Not so classy, but so Tampa.
Headed over the the Channelside district near the Tampa docks. This is an entertainment section that was supposed to take off with movie theaters, restaurants, nightclubs. etc. Except it hasn’t. However for Super Bowl weekend it is hopping. The traffic is diverted from the side of Channelside buildings allowing pedestrian access and probably helping out security. There were a couple of special VIP parties in or near Channelside. Traffic was bumper to bumper and this is where many young Tampa locals congregated. Here were many more carnival vendors and many more dunk tanks. Most of the dunk tanks were not busy yet, this is an event best played by seriously inebriated people. So around midnight they should be very busy. Saw many Steelers fans, not so many Cardinal fans. Channelside will stay busy the next two weekends for the Gasparilla pirate festival and the nighttime Ybor City pirate parade. Then Channel side returns to a hardly visited entertainment district
Next weekend is our famous Gasparilla pirate festival where many of the young maidens of Tampa willingly expose their breasts to Tampa’s usually quite drunk and wealthy and connected Pirate crews parading along the waterfront for the privilege of obtaining some plastic beads. You can usually tell those who are the best at this ritual as they end up covered in beads. During the day event on Saturday afternoons this often happens in full view of families. I think this is probably considered a rite of passage training for young girls in Tampa to teach them how to behave when they become of legal age and can therefore ask for the beads in this very traditional Tampa method. Now the night parade in Ybor City is even wilder. More exposures, they had to establish a family viewing section outside Ybor because it got too wild in Ybor. Sometimes the flashing is more than just breasts -usually from the balconies above the parade route—pretty much Tampa’s New Orleans Mardi Gras. This event is quite crowded and can get pretty rough. The last time I went there (seven years ago or so) two people got stabbed during the parade. Ybor is NOT a great place to be after about 1 am. But we have Goth clubs, gay clubs, rock clubs, hip hop clubs, lots of bars and some good restaurants.

Anyway on to the Superbowl eve night. Ybor was packed. Most of the out of town fans seemed to be here. Ybor used to be a sleepy little town with Italian and Cuban influences. The original Columbian Restaurant is here- eat there if you come to Tampa. It was home to many artists and was quite bohemian, then the entrepreneurs moved in and forced out the artist and tried to make Ybor Florida’s New Orleans. Every storefront became a club, bar or restaurant. Over the years many of the clubs have closed. So about every other storefront is empty. However on Super Bowl eve it is packed. They blocked off most of 7th Avenue to allow pedestrian traffic and the road was really wall to wall people for about 10 blockss. Many of the hottest VIP parties Maxim’s, ESPN were in this area. The celebrities are not walking the streets they come up in limos and quickly run into the clubs. Of course no locals allowed in the special high profile VIP events – unless you were a really hot female then you could probably talk your way in – all are by invitation only. If you are from out of town you will believe Ybor is New Orleans every night. It isn’t just another hardly visited entertainment area. For the out-of-towners they will believe Tampa to be a really happening area.. it isn’t! It’s just blue collar with beaches. Go Steelers!

My opinion exactly SG but probably not in the way you meant it. Right now I think the anti-universal health care forces are salivating at the idea that might take out a key player with this tax trivia (sorry SG but in the grand scheme of things and the level of corruption that is in politics this is trivia). Daschle talks pretty softly but he carries a pretty significant stick. Now the choice is ours, We can stick with philosophical purity and send in a second stringer or we could let Daschle plead his mea cuppa and move on with the agenda.
.
and BTW pluk you can relax a little. With so many heavy weights in congress who believe in single payer system the likelihood that it wouldn’t be considered because Daschle worked in a health care industry that has objections to the single payer model is unlikely.

“where most of our leaders haven’t a clue how the other 99.9% of us think and live”
.
Hey, I thought that’s what David Broder was for.

Dee
.
Which “heavyweights” in Congress believe in single payer? Because President Obama doesn’t even endorese a single payer sytem.

@pluk: I think my post raised three issues, not one. 1. failure to come forward 2. financial ties to the industry 3. cluelessness/out of touch

sg and dee: i think the chances of single payer getting serious consideration in this congress are nil.

Hey Karen…why no stories in the media about journalists being targeted by the NSA?

SG/KT — John Conyers and if they want him to back off the the Bush adminstration they’re going to have to give him something don’t you think?

@KT–pluk: I think my post raised three issues, not one. 1. failure to come forward 2. financial ties to the industry 3. cluelessness/out of touch
.
KT, failure to come forward to who the media?

Just because the rule Daschle broke is different from the rule Joe blow broke or that you or I may have unintentially broke doesn’t lessen the fact that we all broke a rule. Just because the amount of money in Daschle’s rule breaking is far more than the money involved in any of the other examples still doesn’t make his rule breaking more heinous. In fact, unless it’s a criminal activity, and it is not being classified as such and neither would ours if we came forward to amend our taxes, it is exactly the same. By the way it is a quite common occurrence which is why they have a form to do it already to go and everything.
.
Actually scale does matter for two reasons. First, legally scale matters, which reflects a societal consensus that scale matters. I think everyone is familiar with the idea that stealing 1 million dollars will likely result in harsher penalties than shoplifting a sweater (unless you’re on Wall Street, in which case we are all enraged by the flouting of this basic rule). Second, scale matters because it’s easier to keep track of large sums of money than small sums. If he had the use of a car and driver for only 3 days, we’d all be more understanding of his failure to pay taxes. It would be easier to forget the whole thing and consequently it would have been easier to forget to pay taxes.
.
My main disagreement is this idea that because we’re not perfect we can’t criticize someone for a very serious tax offense. Failing to report every penny of tips you receive is not equivalent to failing to pay taxes on a car and driver whose services you received for a significant amount of time over a period of years. Actually this does parallel the irrationality attached to some sex scandals. Some people seriously argued that Foley and WJC were equivalent. Apparently because having an extramarital relationship with a subordinate is wrong, having an affair with a 21 year-old is equivalent to having an affair with an underage teenager. But any reasonable person can see that’s crazy! Not all offenses are equal.

Dee:

Failure to come forward to the Obama transition team. He didn’t tell them about this until nearly a month after he was nominated.
.
And, no, I don’t think Conyers, as chairman of Judiciary, will be much of a player on health care.

KT –I’ll defer to your knowledge of Congress about the role Conyers may or may not play. But as to your assertion about Daschles’s failure to come forward, isn’t it you that has decided that a month after the nomination is unseemly. Isn’t it you that has decided that he should have spoken about it in June. Isn’t it you that is giving this story the connotation that he has done something tricky and underhanded here. Suppose knowing his friend the way he does, he knew that it wouldn ‘t be that big a deal and was only making it an issue when he found out the amount. Why do you or any member of the press get to decide on the appropriate time line for forthright and failure?

from Matt Taibi who never minces words via Glenzilla
.

Obviously there has been some dire news on that front already. When Obama picked Tom Daschle to be the HHS Secretary, I nearly sh*t my pants. In Washington there are whores and there are whores, and then there is Tom Daschle. Tom Daschle would suck off a corpse for a cheeseburger. True, he is probably only the second-biggest whore for the health care industry in American politics — the biggest being doctor/cat-torturer Bill Frist, whose visit to South Dakota on behalf of John Thune in 2004 was one of the factors in ending Daschle’s tenure in the Senate.
.
But in picking Daschle — who as an adviser to the K Street law firm Alston and Bird has spent the last four years burning up the sheets with the nation’s fattest insurance and pharmaceutical interests — Obama is essentially announcing that he has no intention of seriously reforming the health care industry. . . .

SG — there’s something to be said for the notion that in order to institute change you need someone who knows where all of the bodies are buried.
.
BTW KT — only slightly off topic. When journos make millions of dollars in speaking engagement (Will, Brooks, Friedman) advising people about government, politics, etc. Should they be registered as lobbyist too?

More from Glenzilla. Dee I don’t know if this is the guy you really want to be throwing all of your support behind. Im just sayin.
.

UPDATE II: Back in June, 2008, when Barack Obama violated his clear commitment to filibuster any bill containing telecom immunity by doing the opposite: voting for cloture on such a bill and then voting of the bill itself, it was — as Matt Stoller noted at the time — Tom Daschle who defended Obama’s behavior in The Washington Post, by invoking the two leading all-purpose, Obama-justifying clichés: “Those who accomplish the most are those who don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good. Barack is a pragmatist.”
.
What Daschle (and The Washington Post) didn’t note, but Stoller did, is this:
.

The kicker of course, is that [Daschle's firm] Alston and Bird did work lobbying on immunity for telecoms on FISA [they were AT&T's FISA lobbyist - .pdf], even serving as a recruitment bed for the McCain campaign. And that’s what is really going on. Bribery. Tom Daschle goes in the Washington Post and makes the argument that Obama is being pragmatic by caving to big business on a core issue of civil liberties. He preaches the virtues of bipartisanship while working at a firm whose McCain supporting lawyers also support immunity for telecom interests. Meanwhile, Daschle and his wife are and did make enormous sums of money lobbying for the firms benefiting from Obama’s so-called pragmatism. It’s a sick, perverted, corroded system whereby perpetual political losers like Matt Bennett and affable status quo lobbyists like Tom Daschle push their agenda through journalists like Jonathan Weisman, without any disclosure whatsoever about possible conflicts of interest. And it’s bipartisan and flows through the leadership of both parties.
.
Tom Daschle is going to end up in a powerful position within the Obama administration, either head of HHS or Chief of Staff.

SG, to be honest Matt Taibbi makes me feel like Dee on the issue of avoiding hypocrisy perhaps even at the cost of sacrificing some pretty basic moral standards. He just radiates contempt and self-satisfaction, which I find quite unpleasant. I’m unclear on what exactly he’s done that justifies his self-appointed status as moral guardian.

Dee: I think journalists should not take money for speaking to corporate or political interest groups. that is my personal policy. I have accepted honoraria from universities, school groups and, most recently, from a museum. but these are not the kinds of groups that pay the big fees, and it is not a major source of income for me. I also accept money from the few television outlets that are willing to pay for punditry. washington week, for instance, pays us $350 per appearance.

Also, Dee, I’ll take a flyer here and say I’m pretty sure the Obama people wish he had told them about this tax problem when they first discussed the possibility of nominating him, and certainly, when they began vetting him.

I should have made my last post clearer… I don’t like Taibbi, but of course he’s right about this. I just wish he’d bring down the self-satisfaction by 50%.
.
SG, thanks for the links and excerpts. The FISA lobbying connection is quite worrying.

Made a point which I think is worth repeating. Daschle is the quinessential insider. With the $$$ he and his wife were making one would think that would have a very capable accountant managing their tax affairs. The perk of car and driver was “permanent” not some on and off thing. Daschle has spent too much time in the Village and is part of the problem. And his ties to the Health care industry are deep rooted. I wonder why Obama nominated him, other than the fact that Daschle was one of Obama’s earliest promoters.

We can make all kinds of arguments; we can find ways to minimize the tax issue but Daschle broke the basic rule: tell the people vetting you about problems up front.

When I heard Dianne Feinstein making supportive noises I said to myself: “The fix is in. Leave it to Dems and Repubs in the Senate to innoculate their own”

“Borrowing the computer in the CNN green room:”
.
Reported as income? I keed I keed.

Besides for me its not about the man – I could care less about Daschle. For me its about the precedent. Obama should get to work with whomever he feels comfortable working with unless they are a pedaphile, murderer etc. At the end of the day we are going to hold Obama accountable for what gets done or what dopesn’t get done so he should get a lot of leeway on he wants to help get him there.
.
And I in the spsirit of our founders, I would rather let ten sleaze balls make it through than have precedents that keeps one magnificnet innocent from sharing his talents.

With the $$$ he and his wife were making one would think that would have a very capable accountant managing their tax affairs.
.
In light of the Enron debacle, the wall street melt down, the tarp fiasco and the tax headaches of either and Daschle, perhaps what’s needed here is a closer look at the accounting industry. Has anybody looked into their certification process and testing validity?

” would rather let ten sleaze balls make it through than have precedents that keeps one magnificnet innocent from sharing his talents”
.
Dee, I was thinking of Lincoln being told about Grant’s drinking. The times are bad enough that IF Daschle is the guy for the job it may be worth giving hi a pass on his now paid taxes.
Having said that I have no idea other than BHO’s say so whether Daschle is the right guy.

Dee: what precedent do you have in mind? And does comfort trump ability, or integrity or competence? I would like to understand what you say. Thanks. This one magnificent innocent you have in mind, is he like one of the Mag 7?

Dee
.
There is only one problem with your premiss. What happens when the next Republican gets into office or for that matter another Dem who might have a little less morals that we THINK President Obama has. Then they take advantage of the same exception you make now that as long as they aren’t a murder or pedophile its all good. Hell that could be the justification for bringing any number of Bushies back into the administration. Gonzo, Wolfowitz, Yoo et all would all be able to be welcomed right back in by your own standards. And THATS the precedent you should be looking at because whatever is good for President Obama you can be for damn sure that the next administration after his no matter when that is or who it is will claim that the same should be good for them.

KT — it’s good to know that you have standards, but there’s a lot of you who may not and we have no way to distinguish between you so that we can adjust our perceptions based on possible vested interests. the first amendment gives you immunity from such regulation that others in public life must contend with, and I would suspect if that most journos had to go through this kind of scrutiny the content of the news would look very different indeed.
.
One last thing before I go off to Superbowl pregame heaven. There’s a difference between perhaps they might have wanted to know about this earlier than implying that he did something underhanded because of a failure (sounds deliberate to me) to communicate. Did you not know that is the impression of your article?

There is only one problem with your premiss. What happens when the next Republican gets into office or for that matter another Dem who might have a little less morals that we THINK President Obama has. Then they take advantage of the same exception you make now that as long as they aren’t a murder or pedophile its all good. Hell that could be the justification for bringing any number of Bushies back into the administration. Gonzo, Wolfowitz, Yoo et all would all be able to be welcomed right back in by your own standards. And THATS the precedent you should be looking at because whatever is good for President Obama you can be for damn sure that the next administration after his no matter when that is or who it is will claim that the same should be good for them.
.
SG, well said. The founders would be appalled by the idea of giving Obama the power to appoint virtually whoever he wants to the Cabinet. People getting upset about a nomination and asking their Senators to do something about is part of the constitutionally mandated political process. Obama doesn’t get to do whatever he wants for a few years and only face opposition if things then go badly. America was designed in opposition to that kind of political system.

“here is only one problem with your premise. What happens when the next Republican gets into office”
.
If Bushies try to get back in the reason we will object will not be because of a tax issue it will be because of competency issues and I have no problem fighting someone on competency.
.
If you object to Daschle on competency groups have at him. I just think this one strike and you’re out policy is good for the country. I think it restricts the imagination because the best person for a job may not be someone who can pass this test.
.
By these standards Obama couldn’t work for his own administration. (tony Rezko and the house deal)

Dee
.
You do realize that there is more here than just back taxes right? And guess what, if President Obama had tax issues you can be sure he would have had a lot harder time getting elected. Why do you think everybody was clamoring for him to turn them over and why there were rumors about VP Biden having tax issues. Like I said today its tax issues that we excuse tomorrow it will be graft. Thats a mighty slippery slope you are creating for the rest of the country. It was your words that said as long as they aren’t murderers or pedophiles. I realize that was hyperbole but in reality where WOULD you draw the line???

Dee, so you don’t mind people like Taibbi who opposed Daschle from the start because of his connections to lobbyists? Or do you also think that’s inappropriate? And you mentioned murderers and pedophiles. What if it turned out that Daschle was actually trying to evade his taxes? Say a letter was found showing that he was knowing trying to evade paying taxes on the car and driver. Would that change your opinion?
.
Finally I think you’re really misunderstanding this precedent issue. There is NO precedent. The whole process is far more informal, as it was with Rezko and Obama. Obama spoke about it and he convinced the vast majority of voters that it wasn’t an issue. If he had failed to do that he wouldn’t be President. And absolutely no precedent would have been set.

The founders would be appalled by the idea of giving Obama the power to appoint virtually whoever he wants to the Cabinet.
.
Rose83 — this is kind of disingenuous on your part because this is not what I said nor what I implied at all. I said that unless your objection is for cause: Cause meaning that he has broken some law, not because you don’t like the way he paid his taxes. Wesley snipes aside who refused to pay his taxes as a matter of principle that taxes were illegitimate, we all have the right to amend our taxes, pay our interest and penalties if they apply and move on.
.
The idea that we should be able to derail an appointment for other than cause is what is absurd. By our standards, John Adams shouldn’t have been ambassador to England because he once worked to free British soldiers.
.
What was clearly objectionable to our founders is the use of arbitrary measures to deny inalienable rights. If the president wants Daschle and Daschle wants the president and they have broken no laws you don’t get to shoot him down because he isn’t exactly who you would have chosen. Yesterday it was nanny’s, today its taxes,. tomorrow it will be — what? (arbitrary).
.
I object to this one strike and you’re out god knows who will get caught up in that one tomorrow.

Dee
.
I am going to have to step in here and do something I have probably never done and defend rose83 although I am sure she is more than capable of doing so herself. You just said…
.

The founders would be appalled by the idea of giving Obama the power to appoint virtually whoever he wants to the Cabinet.
.
Rose83 — this is kind of disingenuous on your part because this is not what I said nor what I implied at all. I said that unless your objection is for cause:

.
But what you ACTUALLY had said previously was…
.

For me its about the precedent. Obama should get to work with whomever he feels comfortable working with unless they are a pedaphile, murderer etc.

.
Sorry but rose83 isn’t the one being disengenuous here. You couldn’t have said what she said you said any clearer unless you used the exact same words.

Dee, I wasn’t being disingenuous. I’m sincerely confused. I get that you think not paying taxes isn’t sufficient cause to derail a nomination. But some of us disagree. I think it IS cause. It’s not that I’m suggesting cause isn’t necessary, or that appointments should be derailed for arbitrary reasons. This is what I was trying to find out in my last post: How do you define cause?
.
If the president wants Daschle and Daschle wants the president and they have broken no laws you don’t get to shoot him down because he isn’t exactly who you would have chosen.
.
Actually that’s not really true. You might want to read Article II Section 2 again. If people decide they don’t like the President’s choice, they can ask their Senators to not approve the nomination. And there’s nothing stopping the Senate from doing just that. It is a checks and balances system.

SG — I get what you’re saying and I think I said several times that I draw the line at criminal activity. If he intentionally evades his taxes like Snipes, that’s a crime.
.
Having worked in Washington for a long time I can guarantee three kinds of people in politics:
.
1) Those whose ideals drive them and they will forever tilt at windmills extolling the process is as important as outcome
.
2) Those who achieve their acknowledge that sometimes process has to be circumvented to achieve the ideal outcome
.
3) And lastly, those who say ideally, what’s important is what works.
.
I think Obama is a 3 which is why he focuses on what works, that he does not adhere to a particualr ideology and will accept those who lobby where necessary and where not not. And more importantly where the process doesn’t work change the process.

You might want to read Article II Section 2 again. If people decide they don’t like the President’s choice, they can ask their Senators to not approve the nomination.
.
Wasn’t this back when the people were unable to even elect their president and the Senate was expected to be statesman not representatives. And cause would be that he was not knowledgeable about the industry, couldn’t function at that capacity, etc. Cause is not something that is arbitrarily decide upon based on current sensibilities. Look at what this mentality is doing to the judiciary.
.
Now we have judges who’ve never written anything out of fear that something they write at twenty will derail them when they are fifty.
.
We’ve gone from nanny gate, to sexgate, to tax gate, SG you asked hat’s next — with the NSA wire tappings I say be careful about commenting on blogs.

“I couldn’t have put it better myself.”
.
I’m honored. Thank you Karen.
.
“I’m unclear on what exactly he’s done that justifies his self-appointed status as moral guardian…I don’t like Taibbi, but of course he’s right about this. I just wish he’d bring down the self-satisfaction by 50%.”
.
In the case of Tiabbi, (Glennzilla, Olbermann and the rest of our sometimes-self-satisfied-sounding moral guardians), I’m willing to go with: it’s a dirty job and someone needs to do it.

Dee, I think what Taibbi was suggesting is that Daschle’s corruption is so extreme it shows he’s not acting in the public’s interest. Even when he was a Senator and actually working for taxpayers. And considering that the principal task of a Cabinet official is to serve the public interest, there does seem to be a strong argument that Daschle is not suitably competent for the HHS post.
.
I think our core disagreement is not about Obama, but about executive power.
.
Cause is not something that is arbitrarily decide upon based on current sensibilities.
Sure, but arbitrariness is in the eye of the beholder. The issue is who gets to decide what’s arbitrary. Does the Senate have a say? Do voters have a say, by lobbying their Senators? Some people may look at Daschle’s connections to the health care industry and laugh at the idea that’s he’s qualified to help reform health care.

I think our core disagreement is not about Obama, but about executive power.
.
Sorry that makes no sense. I of course meant Daschle instead of Obama.

pluk et al: not guilty of wanting to excuse Daschle because he’s a Dem. In fact, I said it seemed to me he ought to be held accountable for violating gifts policy if he thought it was a gift (though I guess this happened after he left the senate).
.
I’m speaking out of ignorance born of the fact that I’ll never be in the rarefied atmosphere that has to worry about this sort of thing, but I’m realizing there are all sorts of other perks that must not get taxed – the company cafeteria, the company gym, etc. It seems like an interesting tax issue. I really don’t care if Daschle is confirmed.
.
KT – if you’re giving a speech somewhere and you’re flown to the site, do you have to count that as income?
.
Destor – I like your point that some perks would entail too large a tax burden to have them.

Rose for the record. If you disagree with Daschle based on competency that’s cause too. If you think he is too corrupt to give a fair hearing to health reform ideas that is valid grounds. To me arbitrary is an issue that is not criminal in nature is not relevant to the job one is applying for, and does not prove a pattern of consistent behavior that can be construed to be detrimental to the relevant position.
.
Denying him the position because he is a Washington insider is questionable because who isn’t at this level? Frankly, I think Rahm Emanuel’s brother might be better at it but then we would’ve cried nepotism.
.
We voted for Obama’s judgement and I will defer to that judgment as long as he isn’t excusing criminal activity. I do believe yesterday’s lobbyist can be tomorrow’s crusaders. Because that’s happened a lot in this town.

We voted for Obama’s judgement and I will defer to that judgment as long as he isn’t excusing criminal activity.
.
Dee, thanks for that post. I have a better understanding of your thinking now. But you are just talking about your own decision to defer to Obama’s judgment, right? That isn’t reflecting your own thinking about executive power in general?

kathy: it’s not income, because it is a business expense for getting me there. the difference with daschle was that he mostly used this car for personal use, which made it a perk. it was another form of compensation.

Obviously, I am talking about this one matter. Not executive power in general or any issue outside of how any president ought to be able to choose the cabinet.
.
When I think about executive power in general I recognize that the advise and consent provision of the constitution was put there as the people’s check on a political position that they did not directly vote for. However, that is no longer the case so tradition dictates that it not be used to hamstring a president who may not have a majority in the Senate. Tradition recognizes that now that people vote for a president and his judgment and the opposite party should not try to arbitrarily derail his key people for political game.
.
Which is why I defer to Obama’s judgment unless their is a specific cause to object which would include competency and criminality. The whole amended tax issue and other such one-strike disqualifiers sound dangerously similar to a kind of morals clause and that scares me more than anything the right wing has done so far.

you can see how picky the irs is here:
.
http://www.irs.gov/publications/p15b/ar02.html
.
it says that if a restaurant comps a waitress a meal on her day off, she has to count it as income. jeez louise.

@SG –I am going to have to step in here and do something I have probably never done and defend rose83 although I am sure she is more than capable of doing so herself

You just said…The founders would be appalled by the idea of giving Obama the power to appoint virtually whoever he wants to the Cabinet.
.
Sorry SG/rose I meant …of NOT giving Obama power…

Failure to come forward to the Obama transition team. He didn’t tell them about this until nearly a month after he was nominated.
_
correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Daschle part of the transition team?
_
While I’m still trying to find a good timeline, the fact that Daschle found out about his tax troubles in June 2008 suggests, at least to me, that what we’re looking at here is someone who would have filed various appeals with the IRS that take time to work through the system, and (later) entered into negotiations with the IRS over the amount owed, penalties, etc. etc. In other words, it may well be that Daschle did not know for certain the full and final extent of his liability, even when he was nominated.
_
And I have to say that a lot of what is being reported right now sounds like damage control coming from Team Obama. After all, Daschle provided them with this information on January 2; yet the “Obama transition team” (not to mention the Senate) itself failed to make the information public.
_
In other words, talking about Daschle’s failure to “tell the transition team” is an attempt to distract from the fact that Team Obama was aware of Daschle’s problem for weeks, and yet acted as if there was no potential problem with the Daschle nomination.
_
Daschle, it appears, is being “thrown under the bus” by Team Obama — Daschle is being sent the message that he’s to fall on his sword, because fighting for the nomination raises questions not merely about Daschle, but about how Team Obama ignored this information….

kt– it says that if a restaurant comps a waitress a meal on her day off, she has to count it as income. jeez Louise.
.
Hence my earlier demand to raise your hand if you are without sin. It’s impossible to be perfect under the standards they set. So our only issue here is one of scale. If it’s just a little meal we say jeez Louise, if its a car service we say perk and he should’ve known better.
.
I wonder if my brother-in-law knows that if he actually ever gets to sell his old clunker and drive the company car he’s going to have to pay taxes on it?

but, dee, it also goes right to shepherwong’s original point: if the little people have to play by the rules, the big guys should too. and i do think he should have known better on something that was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

and pluk, under your scenario, he would have known that he had an ongoing dispute with the IRS, and should have told the obama folks that.
.
i am told, by the way, that the people we should watch most closely on this are the democrats on the finance committee.

Personally, picking the sand out of the corners of his eyes, I’d like to see Obama pull the pick. I’m not going to morally hyperventilate, but as a dem I’d like it if our leadership lived up to what Bill Clinton says–that he doesn’t think someone in his tax bracket should pay less in taxes (Bush policy). And espec. someone about to head HHS and go to war to estab. universal health care, which will inevitably (once reality sets in) lead to increased taxes. Having a tax-defaulter heading up that eventual call for sacrifice–as far as ideas go, not in the brilliant category. And this is said as someone who loathed Clinton’s throw them under the bus technique whenever a pick was the least bit controversial.

When I think about executive power in general I recognize that the advise and consent provision of the constitution was put there as the people’s check on a political position that they did not directly vote for. However, that is no longer the case so tradition dictates that it not be used to hamstring a president who may not have a majority in the Senate. Tradition recognizes that now that people vote for a president and his judgment and the opposite party should not try to arbitrarily derail his key people for political game.
.
Well there’s obviously a middle ground between completely restricting a President and allowing them to appoint any basically qualified person without a criminal record. But I do hope that you see the concerns some of us share about Daschle’s failure to pay taxes are not completely unreasonable. The fact that I absolutely agree about the irrelevancy of personal scandals in general should demonstrate that the precedents issue is not a serious concern. Opposing someone because they didn’t pay over a hundred thousand dollars of taxes isn’t the same as introducing some kind of ridiculous “morals clause.”

KT- perhaps Daschle should have known better. I’m just saying that when the little people sit in judgment they should also remember that odds are the waitress didn’t claim that meal, or all of her tips, or the cab rides the boss paid for because she worked a later shift etc.
.
I’m just trying to keep perspective. Yes the big dogs needs a tight leash but lets not get sanctimonious as if we wouldn’t be doing the same thing if we were in their position – its called the human condition and just because we’re all breaking different rules doesn’t change the fact that we are all rule breakers together.

Is Obama so incompetent that he didn’t know that he must properly vet any potential Democrat nominees for long histories of repeated, unrepentant tax evasion or is he just so incompetent that he is unable to properly vet said Democrat nominees’ long histories of repeated, unrepentant tax evasion? I’m sure Obama’s fawning press release writers (i.e., the Washington press corps) is searching for the answer to that question, right?

and pluk, under your scenario, he would have known that he had an ongoing dispute with the IRS, and should have told the obama folks that.
_
Karen, we do know that he was reporting other problems with the IRS, don’t we?
_
But more to the point, regardless of whether Daschle disclosed in a timely fashion, the question of Team Obama’s response when the information was disclosed remains open. And, imho, its that inaction in the face of Daschle’s disclosure that is “the real problem” — Daschle can try and use the “I had no idea of the amount of money the IRS would say I owed” defense, but that doesn’t help Team Obama when it comes to the question of what happened AFTER Daschle told them of his problem.

Rose I don’t know your personal situation but I would bet that most people who are upset by this are not people who are in a position to owe the IRS a hundred grand. And to those who are not in this position not paying your taxes is an immoral act (hence that silly moral clause).
.
I doubt if the problem was his failure report the lunches he got free in the congressional dining room, or as a waiter in college we would have the same visceral reaction. I am guessing what is feeding the outrage is a sense that once again the rich is getting special treatment.
.
Well as a student of history it seems what generally happens when the little people get fed up with the rich people they seek to crack down on what little control they think still have. And that’s what I believe gave rise to the McCarthy era, the Reagan era, the Bush era and what ever comes next if we don’t get a handle on this economy.

I agree with KTs take on the equity issue. Every employee who has had use of a company car or owns a small business and uses the car outside of business jolly well knows, or should know or have been told by the employer, that these are taxable compensation in the first instance, and non-deductible as an expense in the latter. The adult equivalent of the dog ate my homework is the accountant didn’t tell me. Demonstrating your ability to do your own taxes should be a qualification for anyone in high office.

These guys write these things into law and impose them on us little people to squeeze every tax dollar they can out of any and all employee benefits. (Geez, the repugs think taxing health benefits would be a major reform.)

But more troubling than this tax nonsense on Daschle’s part is the strong ties to the health care industry which this further review has exposed. Perhaps as one writer earlier suggested, some lobbyists can become crusaders, but this worries me. We desperately need healthcare reform and the last thing we need is someone so cozy with the industry we’ll end up with some watered down mess like we usually do! It all feels a little smarmy to me. I want so much to have Obama stay away from all that and it is leaking in on him. If you always do what you always did, you’ll always get what you always got. That’s got to change.

I doubt if the problem was his failure report the lunches he got free in the congressional dining room, or as a waiter in college we would have the same visceral reaction. I am guessing what is feeding the outrage is a sense that once again the rich is getting special treatment.
.
Dee, well now we’re arguing in circles! As I explained earlier I think scale does matter, not because I resent the rich – some of my closest friends are rich – but for the reasons I outlined in my 2:11 post.
.
Well as a student of history it seems what generally happens when the little people get fed up with the rich people they seek to crack down on what little control they think still have. And that’s what I believe gave rise to the McCarthy era, the Reagan era, the Bush era and what ever comes next if we don’t get a handle on this economy.
.
Or the New Deal era. I’m not making any kind of argument there, just pointing out another facet of history.

I missed this comment of yours: I’m just trying to keep perspective. Yes the big dogs needs a tight leash but lets not get sanctimonious as if we wouldn’t be doing the same thing if we were in their position – its called the human condition and just because we’re all breaking different rules doesn’t change the fact that we are all rule breakers together.
.
I’d argue that there is a qualitative difference, not merely a quantitative difference. And we might as well get the scale right. Daschle has apparently earned around 5 million over the past two years. $100,000 is a fairly common two-year income, which is 2% of 5 million. What’s 2% of $128,000? $2,560.00. That’s not exactly pennies. If my sister were dating a guy and I found out that he didn’t pay $2,500 dollars of taxes that anyone with a normal amount of common sense would know had to be paid (unlike with Geithner), I wouldn’t be happy. To be honest, yes I can be judgmental about that. That’s actually a lot of money. And the guy making $50,000 a year can’t afford a top accountant to help him pay his taxes.
.
The relevancy of this to his political career is another issue. I just thought that we might as well get the numbers right. There are many people making $50,000 a year who don’t avoid paying $2,500 of their taxes.

…there were rumors about VP Biden having tax issues.
.
@sgw #115: Maybe so, but this whole Daschle chauffeured limo story sure gives Biden an extra reason to brag about taking Amtrak everyday!

My disappointment with BHO keeps on growing.

- First there was the FISA thing.
- Then came the ungodly Clinton embrace. I mean, if (according to various sources) the future center of our destruction, mayhem and gratuitous human slaughter for resources is going to be in the resource-rich West African region, shouldn’t we expect BHO to appoint a team that has among them some who empathize with Africa and its people’s struggle against victimization (*) and demise with as much intensity as those in the team who empathize with the supremacist agenda of Israel?

- BHO’s condemnation of torture during the campaign and his current foot dragging on the closure of Guantanamo concentration camp of torture – of mostly poor innocent souls – is like someone crying with innocent you while clamping your foot firmly in the fire and cautioning against yanking your foot out of the fire too fast lest you knock down a piece of his precious furnishings …

- And what was that campaign pau-wau with the native Americans – and mucho promises – all about? The photos with the natives in mid-America were as grand as those that came from the campaign stop among the ruins of Jordan. Where are the native Americans in BHO’s cabinet, top policy making bodies or the numerous think tanks? Can we assume that the going attitude is that others can take care of native Indian affairs? Does the same apply to women’s issues? It seems like yesterday that Americans thought – nay, we swore – that women were not good enough. Millions of hard-working, very hard-working Appalachian hillbilly can swear to it. Now, so it seems, women are capable enough. They couldn’t have evolved that fast surely. So who thinks that native Americans are not as deserving of a chance but women are?

.

Commerce secretary? Perhaps if Daschle’s problems become insurmountable ..
Perhaps it is only a hope – but is it worth clinging to a hope, BHO?

————-

* – Recently, an American oil company announced a profit of over US$45,000,000,000. I don’t expect Clinton to question their profiteering by using slave labour in West Africa – and the use of mercenaries to kill Africans who would clamour for a share of their resources. … She has no empathy for Africa. Now, if the oil companies were extracting their oil in Israel – Clinton would be on the forefront of pious condemnation of the companies and an urgent effort to put in place new strict guidelines of fair business practices for the companies. Now, her department can find many rationalizations for the crimes against humanity in Africa …
BHO will be pressured to observe the centuries-old view that in Africa, the word is “Pax Britannica” with the USA providing the diplomatic and destabilization muscle.
And Clinton is British-American, right?
[Not that GWB#43's team of African-American Rice and Frazer gave the beleaguered Africans any consolation. ..]

Thank you so much for responding to commentary, KT.

Daschle blew it and he should withdraw his nomination from consideration as a courtesy to Obama. If Obama wants to have scored points over McCain not knowing how many houses he owns then he shouln’t let Daschle get away with not realizing that he’s collecting valuable compensation in the form of a chauffeur.
.
Again, these people don’t seem to inhabit the same world the rest of us do. It’s about time they started.

My final comment as I watch the Superbowl: Daschle should get out now. He is the quintessential insider and his excuses would never be accepted by the IRS if I were a citizen the subject of an investigation. What is it with us that we are as bad as the Repugs when it comes to covering for our own? If the President wants him then he pays a price. I have no problem with that. But I don’t want him to tell me how much he better he is than GWB.

“He is the quintessential insider and his excuses would never be accepted by the IRS if I were a citizen the subject of an investigation.”
.
Maybe. But, when caught, even the little people are usually forced to pay what they owe (just like Geitner and Daschle), not sent to jail (the whole point is to get your money, after all). And let’s remember that working people cheat the system big time. Maybe to the tune of <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=KNF5kqmKi78C&pg=PA91&lpg=PA91dq=loss+treasury+unreported+income&source=bl&ots=46P2VudtnY&sig=zf_Sy6-AIIp4_1No3z9rNZ34oBUtens of $billions lost to Treasury in unreported income alone. They just can’t claim that they didn’t know they were cheating because of crazily complex incomes, bad accountants, or a system designed to give them a pass.

Sorry:
.
Maybe. But, when caught, even the little people are usually forced to pay what they owe (just like Geitner and Daschle), not sent to jail (the whole point is to get your money, after all). And let’s remember that working people cheat the system big time. Maybe to the tune of tens of $billions lost to Treasury in unreported income alone. They just can’t claim that they didn’t know they were cheating because of crazily complex incomes, bad accountants, or a system designed to give them a pass.

Yesterday I posted that I would rather have a crook from my party be in there than a crook from the other party. I still feel that way, but Daschle isn’t in there yet. He might be great in the job, but the more I read and think about this, I’d rather he withdraw and save Obama the embarrassment.

I’m with PD, bitter & sacredh last 3 posts – step down Daschle.
.
pssst… Howard Dean, how do your tax records look?

Rose I guess the difference between us is that I have problem with scale being used as a justification for disparate measurement for determining severity of punishment.
.
Scale is at the core of the argument for making the sentence for crack 10 times harsher than the sentences for powder cocaine. Both are cocaine but supposedly the scale is different because crack is supposed to be more addictive, cause the community more harm, generating more income for dealers etc. In reality crack puts blacks drug users in jail longer while white drug users get lighter sentences.
.
The problem with scale always, without exception is where you stand is solely dependent on where you sit. I think all drug use is bas and I would make sure that all drug users had access to rehab. I would not say that crack user are less deserving or more deserving of rehab because I perceive the drug to be worse.
.
I’m not a water carrier for Daschle, Frankly, I think I’d be better at reforming the health care system. I just believe that if you are going to have a principal, then you don’t get to claim it when things are going your way and distance yourself from it when its inconvenient.
.
If you want Daschle out because you think he would be bad for health reform then lobby to your hearts content. But doing it this way means that the precedent continues. When Clinton caved on Nannygate it started a trend, Clinton caved on Lani Guinier so from that point on you write a paper in college it might wreck your career 20 years later (does Michelle Obama’s thesis come to mind). I just see taxes as another link in the same chain around the neck of anyone who might be helpful but can’t past muster. I’d bet by today’s standards Jefferson, Lincoln both Roosevelts and Kennedy would all be toast.
.
I just don’t believe in the one strike you’re out rule because it means that the standard of acceptance is perfection. Rose its okay if you believe that there are some mistakes that should weigh you down for life, but I feel that if you can never be rehabilitated then what is the point of learning from your mistakes?
.

Dee: I understand your argument and agree to a point, but the way I look at it now is that Daschle probably knew from the beginning that the car and driver were income and that the only reason he came forward was because he thought he had a chance at a cabinet post. He was on the senate finance committee and should have known the rules forwards and backwards. When he said that it “suddenly dawned on me” I had to laugh out loud. It suddenly dawned on him that if he didn’t stop cheating on his taxes and pay what he owed then his chances for a cabinet post were zero. I think his coming clean was self serving and too late.

“Howard Dean, how do your tax records look?”
.
Dean’s problem is that he’s a real liberal. You can tell because he has been right about just about everything. Everyone hates that.

shepherdwong: I’m a flat out liberal myself and would love to see Dean in the administration. I burned the election night coverage onto a 6 hour dvd and have watched it 4 or 5 times. What gets to me are the reacations of the crowds watching the returns. There’s the usual cheers and flag waving but seeing so many people moved to tears makes you realize that it wasn’t just winning the elction, it was us winning. All of us. Obama has the potential to be one of those once in a lifetime individuals that not only can make history, they might be able to change history. I felt that his election victory could change the business as usual crap that we’ve put up with decades. If Daschle gets confirmed, I think it sends the message that some things never change.

I’m a flat out liberal myself and would love to see Dean in the administration.
.
Me too and I’m surprised Dean has been so overlooked. If Daschle doesn’t work out, HHS seems like a great fit for him even though there are opinions to the contrary.
.
To me the argument that Dean doesn’t have enough clout or connections with CDC or NIH is sort of a cop out. He’s innovative and creative and fresh, and I’d like to see that all around this new administration.

OK Dee: You’re comparing tax offenses with drug offenses? The low-income crack user should be treated no worse than the white-collar coke user. OK, but you honestly see nothing a little off about the other 1/2 of your analogy? That a waitress, maybe a single mom, getting soooo much help from our gov’t, who might fudge the #s a bit on her return–that she and Tom Daschle are guilty of the same offense? That “scale” is to be ignored. In other words, working class Americans struggling to get by are to be judged by the same standard as our oligarchs with their teams of accts, the estab hyprocrites who tell us how to live? That a waitress doing it to put food on the table vs. wealthy swine who, well, we know what they use it for.
~
And the fact that Daschle, a would-be member of an Obama cabinet that will inevitably have to call for greater sacrifice for the common good (i.e. tax increases) eventually, don’t you think his far more egregious fudge is also a political problem?
~
“… if you are going to have a principal, then you don’t get to claim it when things are going your way and distance yourself from it when its inconvenient.”
~
So, during the next GOP admin, when something like this occurs, you’ll be posting the same, defending Joe or Jane ex-senator/lobbyist/estab puke? If this were Mitch McConnell or Newt Gingrich, a McCain nominee for HHS, for instance?
~
Finally, comparing Daschle’s lawbreaking with Guinier’s writing or politically unpalatable views–come on!

Dee, the crack/cocaine argument is weak. There is no rational justification for the different scale of punishments. That’s pretty much the opposite of what I’m saying.
.
I just believe that if you are going to have a principal, then you don’t get to claim it when things are going your way and distance yourself from it when its inconvenient.
.
So… how does this relate to what I said? You can’t seriously think the idea of scale is inherently inconsistent. The idea of scale is a principle!
.
I just don’t believe in the one strike you’re out rule because it means that the standard of acceptance is perfection. Rose its okay if you believe that there are some mistakes that should weigh you down for life, but I feel that if you can never be rehabilitated then what is the point of learning from your mistakes?
.
Wow, that’s quite the strawman! Just because I think not paying $128,000 dollars of taxes that any reasonable person would know they owed is sufficient reason to disqualify someone from the HHS post, I believe in a standard of perfection and that no one can ever be rehabilitated? Come on. I honestly doubt you really believe I’m saying something that ridiculous. Especially considering I’ve already specifically addressed this: But I do hope that you see the concerns some of us share about Daschle’s failure to pay taxes are not completely unreasonable. The fact that I absolutely agree about the irrelevancy of personal scandals in general should demonstrate that the precedents issue is not a serious concern. Opposing someone because they didn’t pay over a hundred thousand dollars of taxes isn’t the same as introducing some kind of ridiculous “morals clause.”
.
It’s unfortunate because you’re clearly intelligent and capable of engaging in productive discussions, yet for some reason you’d rather engage with strawman arguments that no one is making. I find this suggestion that I believe in zero-tolerance policies and the impossibility of moral improvement particularly offensive.
.
Oh, and the one-strike rule? It depends on the strike and the position one is a candidate for. Notice that I’m not suggesting Daschle be publicly ostracized or expelled from Democratic campaign committees. I’m merely suggesting that he should not be at the head of HHS, a highly prestigious and powerful cabinet position.

“I burned the election night coverage onto a 6 hour dvd and have watched it 4 or 5 times. What gets to me are the reacations of the crowds watching the returns. There’s the usual cheers and flag waving but seeing so many people moved to tears makes you realize that it wasn’t just winning the elction, it was us winning.”
.
It was a great moral victory for the country, the first in a very long time. I can honestly say that I’ve never had an emotional reaction like it.

shepherdwong Says:
” .. seeing so many people moved to tears makes you realize that it wasn’t just winning the election, it was us winning.”

Unblinking eyes. Silent tears coursing down still faces.
I saw those tears too – all through the campaigns – and at BHO’s speech on racism – and the presidential election night.

Tears of Joy? There seemed to be more to it. There were stories behind those tears. And the story was not merely about winning elections – or “us winning”.
Perhaps we got a glimpse into many human moments.
Those were very private moments.

Seeing Oprah’s tears in Denver and Chicago gave us pause – and we kept on watching. I watched “The Color Purple” again.

Then I remembered a speech – one that should be felt other than analyzed. A speech that is profound only within the context of history – and to the people touched deeply, and whose lives were defined and altered, by the events in that history.

And a silent prayer goes out to them: “Weep not, Child”.

It was a cathartic moment for many.
[And witnessing Beyonce at the end of her song at the end of the concert a day before the inauguration .. perhaps it wasn't just a show.]

Eric WHAT PARDONS Holder confirmed?

That should make Tom WHAT TAXES Dashole a shoe-in.

Some change, eh?