Gays, Geithner, and Gender

Update: Geithner accepted payment from the IMF as restitution for taxes that he had not, in fact, paid. Full story HERE.

—————————————————————————————-

Gays, Geithner, and Gender became focal points for hypocrisy watchers immediately after Hillary Clinton showed she is a “smart power”.

Hillary Clinton yesterday showed the world what an experienced and qualified American president would look like and the Gallup poll announced her approval rating to be 65%.

Even with all her experience, qualifications and popularity, if Hillary had a “nanny issue”, like Geithner did yesterday, her confirmation would be dead. The Geithner story grabbed the headlines but no one noticed that Geithner is a man and that is why the “nanny issue” won’t be a problem for him (see below for more on this sexism and misogyny).

* * *

Gays:

Obama pal Rick Warren who mobilized his Saddleback Church to support a gay marriage ban in California, will be provided a worldwide forum by Barack Obama next week. Hypocrite Rick Warren joins other Obama supported homophobes who have been rewarded by Barack Obama for their hate even as they pretend to abhor hate.

Rick Warren has been busy. Rick Warren is secretly, through private letters, helping the anti-gay “dissident” factions of the Episcopalian Church.

“We stand in solidarity with them, and with all orthodox, evangelical Anglicans. I offer the campus of Saddleback Church to any Anglican congregation who need a place to meet, or if you want to plant a new congregation in south Orange County,” Warren reportedly wrote recently in a letter.

In the private letters Warren writes of his partnerships with anti-gay African Episcopalians, particularly Benjamin Nzimbi of Obama birthplace – Kenya.

The edited excerpt of Warren’s letter claims that he is on “[Diocese of New Hampshire] Gene Robinson and other’s attack list for my position on gay marriage.” Warren was a prominent supporter of California’s Proposition 8, which was passed last November and banned same-gender marriage in the state.

Robinson told ENS January 12 it was inappropriate for President-elect Barack Obama to invite Warren to deliver the invocation at the January 20 swearing-in ceremony on the steps of the U.S. Capitol because it would give high prominence at to a person whose views about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people “are pretty awful.” Warren has equated gay relationships to incest and child abuse.

Meanwhile documents continue to emerge documenting that Obama can’t be trusted.

Remember all those high-minded flowery words from Obama about why he cannot support gay marriage because of his high falutin’ supposed Christian ideals? It appears that in 1996 when it suited his advancement, when his constituency was socially liberal, Obama signed off in favor of… gay marriage.

In a 1996 questionnaire filled out for a Chicago gay and lesbian newspaper, then called Outlines, Obama came out clearly in favor of same-sex marriage, which he has opposed on the public record throughout his short career in national politics.

“I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” Obama wrote in the typed, signed, statement. [snip]

On another questionnaire the same year, Obama said he would support a resolution in support of same-sex marriage.

The editor of the Windy City Times, a successor of Outlines, Tracy Baim, said she hadn’t deliberately held onto the news until after Obama’s election. Baim, who had been the editor of Outlines at the time, said that just before the election, she ran across the old Outline story saying Obama backed same-sex marriage, but only dug his forgotten questionaire out of an old box this week, having assumed that she’d lost it.

Gay-Americans must know that they are under the bus while Rick Warren is on the bus. Obama can’t be trusted.

During the presidential campaign Obama said:

I’m a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman.”

Obama proclaimed himself a Christian when it was convenient and for his self-advancement. Obama was pro-gay-marriage when it was convenient and for his self-advancement. Obama was/is anti-gay-marriage when it is convenient and for his self-advancement. Repeat and repeat: Obama can’t be trusted… he simply can’t be trusted by friend nor foe.

* * *

Geithner:

The Geithner issue is tied to the issue of Gender. By now the basic facts are somewhat well known when it comes to the tax issues facing Geithner.

Democratic senators have gathered in an emergency meeting discussing the fate of Treasury nominee Timothy Geithner, who is under scrutiny after a report that he did not pay payroll taxes for his housekeeper.

Sen. Charles Grassley has raised questions about the immigration status the housekeeper, and also questioning why Geithner did not pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, The Wall Street Journal first reported this afternoon.

Two issues have emerged for Geithner in his confirmation: First, while working for the International Monetary Fund in the early 2000s, Geithner failed to fully pay his withholding taxes. Second, an immigrant who was working for Geithner during 2004-05 had her work authorization expire before she left Geithner’s employment.

Geithner was audited in 2006, and it was revealed that he had not paid all his withholding taxes while working at the IMF during 2003-04. Obama transition officials blame the IMF for that issue. Geithner then paid those back taxes plus interest.

But as Geithner was being vetted for the Treasury post, Obama transition officials also realized that he had also failed to pay all his withholding taxes for his housekeeper from 2001-02. Although he was not legally required to, Geithner paid those back taxes as well, according to a transition official.

Allegations about illegal immigrant domestic staff and failure to pay payroll taxes have killed cabinet nominations in the past, so the Obama transition team has quickly gone into damage control, releasing this statement:

The nanny issue has killed nominees to cabinet positions before – but they were women nominees. If you are a woman the “nanny issue” will kill you. If you are a man, the “nanny issue” is NOT a problem.

The sexism and misogyny in our society is so entrenched that no other commentator (we here at Big Pink are singular) has noticed that disparity. Women, will be held to account on the “nanny issue” while men will not be held to account.

Geithner, who will run the IRS if confirmed, also did not pay his taxes even after he was audited and the lack of payment was brought to his attention. The Obama vetters apparently did not have a problem with a Treasury Secretary who does not pay his taxes, even after an audit. Obama knew about Geithner’s problems for more than six weeks. And, because Geithner is a man, the Obama vetters did not care about the “nanny issue“.

Geithner who will run the IRS apparently did not notice that FICA taxes were not being taken from his paychecks. Geithner also did not possess the common knowledge among the self-employed that you are responsible for paying all the taxes required by the government. Even when alerted by the IRS audit, Geithner did not put two and two together and realize he had other taxes to pay – until he was vetted for the job of Treasury Secretary. Keeping track of details like taxes is such hard work.

The Treasury Secretary wannabee must not have an accountant who saw the problem at the time either. Americans who “forget” to pay their taxes will not have as forgiving an IRS as Mr. Geithner.

Women with “nanny issues” are not forgiven quite so easily. Clinton nominee Zoe Baird was forced to withdraw her name from consideration after the disclosure she had not paid Social Security taxes for a housekeeper, an illegal immigrant.

George W. Bush nominee Linda Chavez stepped aside as the nominee for labor secretary after it was disclosed that she had given money and shelter to an illegal immigrant who once did chores around her house.

The male exception which is not really an exception to the rule is Bernie Kerik. Mr. Kerick was nominated to run the very important Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Kerick was in trouble from the very beginning:

But others questioned whether Kerik had the management experience to continue the nearly 2-year-long effort to meld the Homeland Security Department’s sprawling bureaucracy, made up of more than 180,000 employees from 22 federal agencies.

Democrats also were focusing on Kerik’s recent windfall, which he made by exercising stock options in a stun gun company that does business with the Department of Homeland Security.

When Bernie Kerick developed a “nanny issue” that was the final straw for his withdrawal. Kaus called the Kerick “nanny issue” The Magic Nanny Excuse. Kaus wrote about Kerik:

Is “I have a nanny problem” the new resignation smokescreen of choice, replacing “I want to spend more time with my family”? The latter phrase has become such an implausible cliche it’s lost all utility–it’s practically a red flag signalling “I have a big problem I’m not telling you about.”

Kerik also had problems such as extramarital affairs (some trysts took place in offices intended to oversee the World Trade Center reconstruction) and well as ties to a construction company with alleged mob connections. Kerick, if appointed to head the Homeland Security Department would have been in charge of the Immigration Department too.

Kerick with alleged mob ties, “nanny issues”, extramarital tyrsts in politically incorrect ground zero is a man so the “nanny issue” was an excuse, not the sole reason for his firing.

Clinton nominee Kimba Wood had a “nanny issue” too and met the same fate as Zoe Baird. Kimba Wood, of course, was a woman. The “nanny issue” is sufficent to kill the appointment – for a woman.

Gender:

The “clueless comment” award of the year goes to Hillary Hater Roger Simon of Politico. During the primaries Simon was incensed that Hillary would not be a good girl and get out of the race even as she kept on winning by 40% margins.

Simon is clueless but even he sees the disparity in how race is considered seriously while gender issues are dismissed out of hand.

How come Roland Burris has had such an easy time getting to the U.S. Senate while Caroline Kennedy has had such a hard time?

Could it be that the race card trumps the gender card in U.S. politics?

Well, yes. It could be.

Once supporters of Roland Burris made his appointment to the Senate all about race, the deal was done, though it took a few days for Senate leaders to wake up to the fact.

At a news conference in Springfield, Ill., Rep. Bobby Rush, who represents a district on the South Side of Chicago, said that the mere criticizing of Burris was akin to lynching.

Rush then went on to say: “I don’t think that anyone, any U.S. senator who is sitting right now, would want to go on record to deny one African-American from being seated in the U.S. Senate. I don’t think they want to go on record doing that.”

After Burris was turned away from the Senate when he tried to get seated last week, Rush went on “Hardball” and told Chris Matthews, “It reminded me of the dogs being sicced on children in Birmingham, Ala. That’s what it reminded me of.”

And that was that.

Simon correctly notes that the Dimocrats who swore up and down they would never seat Burris, are now seating Burris on Thursday morning. Simon says, They were not going to try to stand up to the race card. Simon either because of a lack of intelligence, but more likely due to a lack of courage does not make the connection that Obama race-baited his way to the Democratic nomination and that Burris was following in Obama’s race-baiting footsteps.

Simon then discusses gender in a not very intelligent way:

What about gender, however? Supporters of Hillary Clinton observed repeatedly during her presidential campaign that black men in America were legally given the vote before women were. Their point was that women were also an oppressed class and that the gender card was legitimate.

Though it hasn’t seemed to help Caroline Kennedy much. Here is a woman who is a lawyer and an author and who has a fine record of public service and is not tainted in the least.

Hillary supporters did not play the “gender card” during the primaries. We noted that Big Media was biased against Hillary and very much for Obama. We also noted that the Obama race-baiting tactics were excused and buttressed by Big Media while charges of sexism and misogyny were ignored and even mocked. Only after the campaign did sexism-deniers like Howard Dean admit we were right.

Simon also does not understand that Caroline Kennedy is seeking an appointment to the U.S. Senate and has said if she does not get the appointment she will not run for the office in 2010 in an election. Apparently Caroline wants the Senate office handed to her but is not willing to go to the voters – like Hillary did.

Simon then asks a series of questions for Roland Burris which he does not bother to ask of Caroline Kennedy:

Where does Roland Burris stand on the fighting in Gaza?

Where does he stand on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

How does he feel about Obama’s financial bailout plan?

In fact, where does Burris stand on any major issue?

Who knows? Let’s just seat the guy and get it over with!

Roland Burris has run for elective office many times and has spoken about the issues for decades. Not so with Caroline. Simon says this stupidity:

Caroline Kennedy got asked serious questions about serious issues, and some thought her answers were vague and inarticulate. Fair enough.

But how come she got asked them and Roland Burris did not?

In the end, Caroline Kennedy may get appointed to the Senate. But if she is, it won’t be because her supporters played the gender card.

And that’s because there is no such card to play.

Simon is right, there is no gender card to play. There is no gender card to play because men (and women) like Simon don’t take the issues of sexism and misogyny seriously.

Gay-Americans and Women-Americans are under the Obama bus. Rick Warren and Tim Geithner will be on board with Obama laughing.

Share

167 thoughts on “Gays, Geithner, and Gender

  1. Admin, another nice interveaving of related ideas. Like those great episodes of Seinfeld, the Simpsons, or Monty Python…

  2. admin wrote up top:

    The editor of the Windy City Times, a successor of Outlines, Tracy Baim, said she hadn’t deliberately held onto the news until after Obama’s election. Baim, who had been the editor of Outlines at the time, said that just before the election, she ran across the old Outline story saying Obama backed same-sex marriage, but only dug his forgotten questionaire out of an old box this week, having assumed that she’d lost it.
    &&&&&&&&&

    As “Church Lady” (from Sat. Night Live) would say, “Isn’t THAT convenient?”

    If it was some dirt on Clinton, she would have been LOOKING for that old box, “It’s in here somewhere, and I won’t stop until I find it”.

  3. “if Hillary had a “nanny issue”, like Geithner did yesterday, her confirmation would be dead.”

    ———————————-

    And she will continue to be held up to a different set of standards not just because of gender but because she is a Clinton and is to be feared, ridiculed, and destroyed.

    ———————————-

    As far as Burris goes, I was flipping channels last night and I think it was on CNN that there were two media members? being interviewed. One of them, an AA, talked about how racism was at the root of the problem. The other one stated that if Burris wanted to do the right and ethical thing, he would refuse the senate seat unless appointed by the attorney general. Which got the AA representative all red in the face and insisting that it was legal and above board.

    It would be nice if “right” and “ethical” didn’t have to be attacked with the race card every time. I guess now that obama is playing president, we will see a lot more blurring going on.

  4. DAILY-KOS UNHAPPY W/ CHU NOMINATION:

    Steven Chu, energy secretary nominee, loves nuclear power.

    If you’re a proponent of nuclear energy in the United States, I’m not sure that Steven Chu’s testimony from today’s Senate confirmation hearing for Secretary of Energy could be any more encouraging. Excerpts from a rush transcript are below.

    Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): Let me ask you about nuclear energy. You have indicated in your statements and in our conversations that you support continued nuclear development. I think we recognize as we want to move towards a world where we have greatly reduced our emissions, that nuclear is a very key component in our energy package there. The nuclear waste policy act requires that in exchange for a 1 mill per kWh fee on nuclear power, the DOE has an unconditional obligation to take and dispose of that nuclear waste. That was beginning back in 1998. Obviously we’re about ten years late. The projected taxpayer liability for DOE’s failure is $11 billion at this point and growing. The issues as they relate to Yucca Mountain. I understand that President-elect Obama has said he opposes that. If confirmed, what do you propose to do, in the short term, to meet the government’s obligation as it relates to the nuclear waste issue. And if you could speak just a little bit about the option of nuclear fuel recycling.

    Steven Chu: Thank you, Senator. I think these are very thorny questions, as you know. The President-elect has stated his position very clearly. On the other hand, the Department of Energy has an obligation, a legal obligation, to safely dispose, provide a plan that allows the safe disposal of this nuclear waste. And indeed I am supportive of the fact that the nuclear industry is, should have to be part of our energy mix in this century. And so, in going forward with that, we do need a plan on how to dispose of that waste safely, over a long period of time. There’s a lot of new science that’s coming to the fore and I pledge, as Secretary of Energy, that I would work with the members of this committee to try to use the best possible scientific analysis to try to figure out a way that we can go forward on nuclear disposal. So it will occupy certainly a significant part of my time and energy.

  5. more on the Chu nomination (my 4:33pm posting was an excerpt from the first entry only):

    Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC): In 2005 we passed EPAC. That Energy Policy Act incorporated a loan guarantee program for companies willing to step out and build new nuclear generation. It was authorized at $18.5 billion. Not sufficient for the future, but a good start. Just recently, Progress Energy in North Carolina announced two new plants in Florida that they would construct. And they made this statement that they think that, they will seek to do these without DOE loan guarantees. Because they had run into too many hurdles with the program. One, it’s been slow to get up and running and structurally in place. Now, all of a sudden, we’re hearing companies that talk about it’s problematic to go that route. We’re on a timeline that, from a reliability standpoint, we have to start construction and we have to do it soon. Do you support the loan guarantee program, number one?

    Steven Chu: Senator, yes I do.

    Sen. Burr: If confirmed, do you commit to expanding the authorization levels?

    Steven Chu: Well, I think that’s a matter of Congress.

    Sen. Burr: [Are you] seeking to expand?

    Steven Chu: I think it is something that is very important. As I said before, [as is] the development of nuclear power. But as these companies, what little I know of what these companies are doing, it’s a mixture of the loan guarantee program and the local regulatory authorities that can allow the utility companies to fold whatever they want to do in the rate base. The point here is that nuclear power, as I said before, is going to be an important part of our energy mix. It’s 20% of our electricity generation today, but it’s 70% of the carbon-free portion of electricity today. And it is baseload. So I think it is very important that we push ahead. I share, what little I know, again, your frustrations of the time it has taken and I will do my best to, as I said before, put together a leadership and management team that can do it in a more timely manner.

    Sen. Burr: Do I have your commitment that you’ll work to make this a more workable program?

    Steven Chu: You absolutely do.

    ——————

    Senator Bob Corker (R-TN): The issue of nuclear. I’m gonna skip down and just be very brief since you’ve had now nine questions regarding that [nuclear]. I noticed a lot of people say that they support nuclear, but they also mention the waste issue. And it’s as if once we solve the waste issue then we can pursue nuclear again. It’s my understanding, based on what I’ve heard here today, you mean pursue nuclear now in spite of the, some of the issues that we have regarding waste. Is that correct? All out now? Loan guarantees, let’s move ahead. We have 104 plants today. Probably need 300, let’s move on?

    Steven Chu: Yes, because I’m pretty confident, I’m confident that the Department of Energy, perhaps in collaboration with other countries, can get a solution to the nuclear waste problem.

    Sen. Corker: Okay. Perfect. So, you’d move ahead while that was being solved?

    Steven Chu: I think, certainly, these first several [new] plants that we talked about, use the loan guarantee to start them going. Just also, as you well know, Senator, I think, this is a complicated economic decision by the utility companies that will invest in these plants. So it’s partly loan guarantee, it’s partly the rates that utility companies will allow. But it, there is certainly a changing mood in the country, because nuclear is carbon-free, that we should look at it with new eyes.

    ——————

    Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL): Let’s talk about nuclear power. You’ve mentioned this as an option, as something that will be part of the mix. I guess my question to you is, if you accept the CO2 as a global warming problem, isn’t it important that we accelerate this proven source of clean energy? And will you take a lead, not just to talk about it, not just to opine about it, as we often do, but actually do the things necessary to see if we can’t restart a nuclear industry in America? Are you committed to that?

    Steven Chu: Senator, yes I am. I think, first to get these first several projects [new plants] going. In the meantime, we need to do the work necessary to see if recycling and proliferation resistant and economically viable ways also [are] feasible. I think those are two areas that are very important.

    ——————

    Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA): My question is, to follow-up, and I ask this, because, not because it hadn’t been asked ten times to you this morning, but I think, in asking, you’ll understand how many of us feel about nuclear. You’ve had a least six or seven questions. Mine’s going to be the eighth. It’s just apparent to us, mainly based on the great leadership of Senator Domenici, who is with us, I think, this morning, and others, the importance of getting off the dime on nuclear. So would you just briefly state again what are your number one, number two, and number three strategies to move us forward on nuclear?

    Steven Chu: The first is to accelerate this loan guarantee program for the several [new] nuclear reactors, their need to start, to restart the nuclear industry. So that, certainly, you’ve got to get going as you say. I agree with you, Senator. The other question, and it’s a concern of other Senators, is that we need to develop a long range plan for the safe disposal of the waste. And this is something that’s the responsibility of the Department of Energy. And that has to go forward as well, because you have to develop that concurrently with the starting of this industry again. And so those are [inaudible], in my mind, the two highest priorities. The third is that there is research that has to be done. Again, because reprocessing has the potential for greatly reducing both the amount and lifetime of the waste and to extend the nuclear fuel.

    Sen. Landrieu: Well can we, can this committee count on you to go to bat in the atmosphere of these troubled financial markets? Can we count on you to go to bat with the Administration to make sure that the energy sector of this country is given priority, in terms of stabilizing markets so that we can get a lot of this done with government, you know, not being done by the government but supported by the government?

    Steven Chu: Yes. It’s been said again and again on the importance, for example, of that $18.5 billion loan guarantee program that to start moving in that direction.

  6. TONY “TWIGS” BLANKLEY:

    Truncated honeymoon? Congressional Democrats challenge Obama
    ————————————————-

    Tony Blankley
    Tuesday, January 13, 2009
    (url to follow)

    It was fairly common chatter from congressional Democrats in Washington during the autumn months of the presidential campaign that while Barack Obama was almost certain to win, in 2009 policy would be driven from the Speaker’s Office. While I didn’t doubt the congressional Democrats would try to lead Mr. Obama around by the nose, I rather doubted that Mr. Obama would cooperate. When a fellow gets himself elected president, he is inclined to want to try his hand at some real governing.

    And, while I predicted in a post-election November column – against conventional wisdom – that Mr. Obama might well have a fairly short honeymoon, I confess I am surprised at how soon, how vigorously and how publicly the congressional Democrats are flexing their muscles. In the last two weeks Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and committee chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairman Sen. Jay Rockefeller, chairman Sen. John Kerry and House committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank, among others, have all fired significant shots across President-elect Obama’s bow. Moreover, as was well reported, Rahm Emanuel and Vice President-elect Joseph Biden were informed a few weeks ago that they would not be permitted to attend the weekly Senate and House Democratic Caucus meetings – contrary to the custom with Republicans who invited Vice President Cheney and Karl Rove and a few other senior aides in to their caucus meetings.

    Why, after waiting for years (arguably decades) for such complete political power, are the congressional Democrats so cranky and turf-conscious so early? On the one hand, it would seem that congressional Democratic resistance is increased the more that Mr. Obama asks for big change quickly. He may well not understand how hard it is to move big, detailed legislation through the congressional process. Mr. Obama’s expectation that Congress could authorize and appropriate almost $1 trillion in only three or four weeks was never realistic. It is hard even in Washington to get a majority to quickly agree to spend the same $1trillion.

    His speech Thursday was clearly seen as a shot across the bow of the congressional Democrats to get on with his stimulus package quickly. While I have noted some Republican complaining about Mr. Obama’s partisan slap at bad Republican policies these last eight years, it is the Democrats who seem to have their noses out of joint from the speech more than do the Republicans. Consider the sequence: first, Mr. Obama proposes his stimulus plan in general terms; then the Democrats disagree with important pieces of the bill; then Mr. Obama goes on national television and tells Congress (i.e. the Democrats) to hurry up and get the job done; and then Sunday morning in The Washington Post there is a report of increased Democratic resistance to Mr. Obama’s policy leadership. And Mr. Obama hasn’t even been sworn in yet.

    The media has been focusing on how wonderfully Mr. Obama is ahead of previous presidents in selecting appointees andintroducing his domestic plans during his transition – which is true. But what really may be happening is that his early substantive policy stands combined with his early appointment of cabinet and subcabinet positions (for each appointment there may be a half-dozen or so Democratic senators disappointed that Mr. Obama did not pick their candidate) may be truncating his honeymoon with the congressional branch of government.

    In other words, every presidential personnel and policy decision makes a president more enemies (particularly in his party)and undermines his party’s unity. By getting started early on personnel and policy, Mr. Obama may have started the inevitable decline of presidential party unity early as well. Moreover, while his quick and peremptory policy announcements have ruffled some congressional Democratic feathers, his backing away from pre-election liberal stands may be ruffling other Democratic fowl.

    For example, on Sunday television Mr. Obama was asked to respond to this advice from Mr. Cheney: “Before you start to implement your campaign rhetoric, you need to sit down and find out precisely what it is we did and how we did it. Because it is going to be vital to keeping the nation safe and secure in the years ahead and it would be a tragedy if they threw over those policies simply because they’ve campaigned against them.” Mr. Obama responded: “I think that was pretty good advice, which is I should know what’s going on before we make judgments and that we shouldn’t be making judgments on the basis of incomplete information or campaign rhetoric.”

    Mr. Obama added: “So, I’ve got no problem with that particular quote. I think if Vice President Cheney were here, he and I would have some significant disagreements on some things that we know happened.” Notwithstanding that last sentence, I suspect that liberals will have bristled when they heard Mr. Obama essentially concede the possibility that his campaign opposition to Mr. Cheney national-security policies (implicitly including waterboarding, CIA renditions, Gitmo, the Patriot Act, NSA electronic surveillance, etc.) – was just “incomplete information or campaign rhetoric.” It was all a little vague, but conceding that Mr. Cheney, the devil in liberal minds, may be right, must have been offputting. It seems that the first – and pre-inaugural bites – out of the presidential hide are on Mr. Obama’s left flank.

  7. Burris has qualifications and sfaik the only problem was the Governor who appointed him.

    CK has no qualifications. She graduated from law school with a diploma but sfaik has never used it. WHAT record in ‘public service’? She has raised money for some causes. This no way compares with the other candidates: Carolyn Maloney D-NY for many years with many feminist legislative credits, Kristin Gillibrand same but younger, Andrew Cuomo a Clinton Cabinet veteran….

    To comment on this at Politico:
    h….w’s
    politico.com/news/stories/0109/17399.html

    To reach Gov Paterson who will choose Hillary’s replacement:
    h…../ no w’s
    161.11.121.121/govemail

    Other relevant contacts are at TNA and Pumapac.

  8. Tues Jan 20th,coronation day will be another “Day Of Infamy”as FDR described Pear Harbor Day Dec.7.I will not watch.A good day to read a good book and brouse the internet.I will resume my news watch on the 21st and follow our new SOS Hillary Rodham Clinton as she unfolds her plans to restore peace to this troubled world.Mr.Obama do not get too comfortable in your new hustings for they are very temporary and the large shadow that she will cast on you will make your presence in the Oval Office just a repeat of your previous political positions a do nothing know nothing “Prince of Darkness”.

    By ABM90 Hillary will be confirmed tomorrow.Start your engine Girl.The world urgently awaits you.

  9. I have to comment on that MoDo column in the previous thread. It’s not nearly as bad as what she usually writes about the Clintons, but it still is condescending toward them.

    Also, WTF is up with her referring to Bill’s foundation/library as an “unsavory gravy train”???? He doesn’t get a single penny from it, nor does Hillary. It just kills the MSM to admit the Bill is a true philanthropist.

  10. Everybody has technicalites that could be used against them. Do we WANT Geithner turned down? Who would be better as Treas Sec (Summers seems safer in the advisory position)? Would that better person (if any) be likely to get it? Doesn’t Geithner have some Clintonista cred?

    Same for Chu. Is there a better prospect, with a good chance of getting in?

    When Obama proposes a half-glass (or 3/4 or 9/10) appointee and centrists/feminists attack, that gives Obama cover to appoint an unqualififed bot instead (like ?Romer?sp? that Berkeley UC prof with no real experience, appointed as a token woman).

  11. turndown,

    I agree that Burris has the qualifications. I’m just not thrilled with how out of hand this has gotten.

  12. AAAH…NOW, THE PUZZLE PIECES OF THE CONSPIRACY START TO FIT IN PLACE…

    Blankley’s column included this:

    &&&&
    And, while I predicted in a post-election November column – against conventional wisdom – that Mr. Obama might well have a fairly short honeymoon, I confess I am surprised at how soon, how vigorously and how publicly the congressional Democrats are flexing their muscles. In the last two weeks Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and committee chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairman Sen. Jay Rockefeller, chairman Sen. John Kerry and House committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank, among others, have all fired significant shots across President-elect Obama’s bow.
    &&&&

    The Dems that fought to get Obama in rather than Clinton wanted someone as president who:

    * is unfamiliar with Presidential/Congressional power struggles
    * does not particularly care about The Issues
    * is willing to be led around by the nose, as long as people call him Your Highness
    * has a thin background and lightweight resume
    * is willing to be told what to do (like Cheney did w/ Bush)

    Again, after 8 years of this weak type of president, we’re in for four more. Just the paint job is blue now rather than red.

  13. …and they knew they couldn’t boss around Hillary, who

    * knows the Presidential/Congressional power struggles
    * cares *passionately* about The Issues (even Dowd admits Hillary is ultra-prepared)
    * would not be willing to be led around by the nose
    * has a deep background and heavyweight resume
    * does not need to be told what to do

  14. more of the Blankley piece worth commenting on:

    …it would seem that congressional Democratic resistance is increased the more that Mr. Obama asks for big change quickly. He may well not understand how hard it is to move big, detailed legislation through the congressional process. Mr. Obama’s expectation that Congress could authorize and appropriate almost $1 trillion in only three or four weeks was never realistic.

    $$$ You’d think Obama would have absorbed some of this whole DC culture during his brief tenure. But during his short four years, the past two have been spent running for president. He is living proof of the Peter Principle: promote the incompetent.

    $$$ Another factor is that with such little understanding of the issues and the players, he’ll have to have his lines cued to him from offstage. Like when quarterbacks have the coach call the plays. Hillary would have said, “Get this damn microphone out of my helmet, I know what plays we’re going to run”.

    His speech Thursday was clearly seen as a shot across the bow of the congressional Democrats to get on with his stimulus package quickly. While I have noted some Republican complaining about Mr. Obama’s partisan slap at bad Republican policies these last eight years, it is the Democrats who seem to have their noses out of joint from the speech more than do the Republicans. Consider the sequence: first, Mr. Obama proposes his stimulus plan in general terms; then the Democrats disagree with important pieces of the bill; then Mr. Obama goes on national television and tells Congress (i.e. the Democrats) to hurry up and get the job done; and then Sunday morning in The Washington Post there is a report of increased Democratic resistance to Mr. Obama’s policy leadership. And Mr. Obama hasn’t even been sworn in yet.

    $$$ It’s like watching a car crash in slow motion.

  15. OBAMA BIN BIDEN BIN LADEN…WHATEVER. SHEESH.

    Our favorite, HuffPost, has this story:

    Osama Bin Laden Challenges Obama In Tape
    ———————————————————-

    CAIRO, Egypt — Osama bin Laden urged Muslims to launch a jihad against Israel, seeking to harness anger over the Gaza offensive with a new message posted on the Internet on Wednesday.

    The al-Qaida chief vowed to open “new fronts” against the U.S. and its allies beyond Iraq and Afghanistan and also criticized Arab leaders, accusing most of them of being allies of the U.S. and Israel.

    The White House dismissed the call to jihad, saying it reflects bin Laden’s isolation and shows he is trying to remain relevant at a time when his ideology and mission are being challenged.

    Bin Laden spoke in a 22-minute audiotape posted on Islamic militant Web sites where al-Qaida usually issues its messages. The 51-year-old al-Qaida leader has been in hiding since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, believed to be living somewhere along the lawless Pakistan-Afghan border.

    It was bin Laden’s first tape since May and came nearly three weeks after Israel launched the offensive against Hamas that Gaza medical officials say has killed more than 1,000 Palestinians.

    He said President-elect Barack Obama has received a “heavy inheritance” from George W. Bush _ two wars and “the collapse of the economy.” He predicted that burden will render the U.S. unable to sustain a long fight against the mujahedeen, or holy warriors.

    There is “only one strong way to bring the return of Al-Aqsa and Palestine, and that is jihad in the path of God,” Bin Laden said, referring to the revered Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. “The duty is to urge people to jihad and to enlist the youth into jihad brigades.”

    He also appealed for donations to finance the fight, saying the “tithes from any of the great Muslim or Arab traders” would be enough “for jihad on all the fronts.”

    The authenticity of the tape could not be independently confirmed. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said he had no reason to question its authenticity but was not certain whether the U.S. had verified the voice.

    “It appears this tape demonstrates his isolation and continued attempts to remain relevant at a time when al-Qaida’s ideology, mission and agenda are being questioned and challenged throughout the world,” said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House.

    “This also looks to be an effort to raise money as part of their ongoing propaganda campaign,” Johndroe said.

    The tape, entitled “A call for jihad to stop the aggression on Gaza,” was played over a picture of bin Laden and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of Islam’s holiest sites. There were no English subtitles or the flashy production graphics that usually accompany such messages.

    That suggested the message had been hastily put together to exploit Muslim anger over the Gaza offensive. Israel says the offensive aims to halt rocket fire from Gaza against Israeli towns but Palestinian medical officials say half of those killed have been civilians.

    “The bin Laden speech is an obvious and cheap attempt to capitalize on the Arab world’s boiling anger about the Israeli invasion of Gaza,” said terror expert Eric Rosenbach of the Center for International Affairs at Harvard’s Kennedy School.

    He said links between al-Qaida and Gaza’s Hamas rulers are “tenuous at best” and that Hamas, which seized power in Gaza in 2007, has historically distanced itself from bin Laden’s terror movement.

    Bin Laden and his lieutenants frequently use the Palestinian issue to try to rally support for al-Qaida and often call for holy war to free Jerusalem. But there has been little sign that the terror group has carried out attacks in Israel.

    Bin Laden made no direct reference to Hamas, and al-Qaida leaders have frequently criticized the Palestinian militant group for participating in elections and failing to seriously pursue jihad against Israel.

    The al-Qaida leader also accused Arab leaders of “avoiding their responsibility” to liberate Palestine.

    “If you are not convinced to fight, then open the way to those who are convinced,” he said. Bin Laden accused most Arab leaders of allying themselves with the U.S. and Israel.

    Rita Katz, director of SITE Intelligence Group that monitors militant Web sites, said bin Laden was “attempting to convince Palestinians and the Muslims around the world that the only group that can help them is the jihadists” and that “Arab rulers and the Palestinian movements have failed them.”

    “His other purpose is to exploit the conflict to exhort others to jihad and build support for al-Qaida,” she said.

    Katz said the bin Laden’s appeal for money to finance jihad was unusual and “might reflect financial difficulties facing al-Qaida.”

    Bin Laden pointed to financial problems facing the U.S., saying that was a sign that the U.S. power was falling apart.

    “The Islamic nation’s jihad is one of the main causes of these destructive results for our enemies,” he claimed.

    He pointed to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq since the Sept. 11 attacks, saying al-Qaida was prepared to fight “for seven more years, and seven more after that, then seven more.”

    “The question is, can America continue the war against us for several more decades? The reports and signs show us otherwise,” he said. He said Bush had left his successor “with a heavy inheritance,” forcing Obama to choose between withdrawing from the wars or continuing.

    “If he withdraws from the war, it is a military defeat. If he continues, he drowns in economic crisis,” bin Laden said.

  16. Next, BO will have his netroots army e-mailing dims, who will not agree to the package as is. Imagine, wanting some changes. Jeez.

  17. Got an email from Deaniac today, asking for $$ of course, but also asking me to submit a question for Gov Kaine to respond to.

    This is what I submitted:
    —————————————-

    This is not a question, this is a statement.

    Until you wrest control back from the current Rules and Bylaws Committe, and from those DNC members who participate in intimidating us “old female” members and make public and private statements about how we are not needed by the party, you will not receive one minute of my time for any local, regional or statewide DNC endeavor (no phoning, no emailing, no door to door work, no coffees, no nada); nor will you receive one red cent…not even for pass-the-hat offerings.

    We each need to use every opportunity to speak truth to power, no matter how small the opportunity.

  18. The Dems that fought to get Obama in rather than Clinton wanted someone as president who:

    * is unfamiliar with Presidential/Congressional power struggles
    * does not particularly care about The Issues
    * is willing to be led around by the nose, as long as people call him Your Highness
    * has a thin background and lightweight resume
    * is willing to be told what to do (like Cheney did w/ Bush)
    ************
    The DNC and Congressional Dems are in for a big surprise….Obama is a sociopath; he isn’t going to be led around by the nose by any of those wimps, IMHO.

  19. JanH Says:
    January 14th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
    turndown,

    I agree that Burris has the qualifications. I’m just not thrilled with how out of hand this has gotten.
    =================

    If you mean the race card, Rush’s use of it … well,l I’d rather see it worn out by use against Reid, Obama, etc than saved intact for 2012.

    Dunno about Burris, what bothers me is CK getting set up as some sort of feminist icon worthy of feminist support. And teh suggestion that race vs gender is the MOST IMPORTANT difference bewteen CK and Burris. That destroys the important difference between CK and the QUALIFIED female candidates for Hillary’s seat such as Maloney, Gillibrad, etc.

    Cuomo is qualified too and is a Clintonista and good on liberal and gender issues. I don’t like seeing some feminists turn against him for poor little CK.

  20. SHV: “The DNC and Congressional Dems are in for a big surprise….Obama is a sociopath; he isn’t going to be led around by the nose by any of those wimps, IMHO.”

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Truer words have never been spoken. They guy is a sociopath.

  21. Obama and the Chicago “boys” are already out-flanking Pelosi and Reid. The Congressional Dems are still playing by the old “Inside the Belt-Way” rules..Chicago plays a tougher game.

    “Reporting from Washington — As Barack Obama builds his administration and prepares to take office next week, his political team is quietly planning for a nationwide hiring binge that would marshal an army of full-time organizers to press the new president’s agenda and lay the foundation for his reelection.

    The organization, known internally as “Barack Obama 2.0,” is being designed to sustain a grass-roots network of millions that was mobilized last year to elect Obama and now is widely considered the country’s most potent political machine.
    (snip)
    w.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-obama-army14-2009jan14,0,2211031.story

  22. SHV: “The DNC and Congressional Dems are in for a big surprise….Obama is a sociopath; he isn’t going to be led around by the nose by any of those wimps, IMHO.”

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Truer words have never been spoken. They guy is a sociopath.

    …………………………………………………………………………

    Cue a load a violins from us and 4 years of vicious infighting never seen before, this will be like watching Dawn of the Dead with the Dem Zombies eating each other alive…

  23. “Geithner’s confirmation hearing pushed back to next Wednesday”

    This is bullshit. They want time for this controversy over him not paying social security, medicare, cheating on his taxes and employing an illegal to die down. They figure the news over Obama’s inauguration the day before will bury this story and confirm him on the quiet.

  24. Dinner Guests Revealed
    Politico has a list of attendees at the dinner of conservative writers that President-elect Obama attended last night at George Will’s home.

    They were: Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, Larry Kudlow, David Brooks, Rich Lowry, Peggy Noonan, Michael Barone, and Paul Gigot.

    Meanwhile, Michael Calderone notes Obama met with the following “liberal” journalists this morning: On the list: Andrew Sullivan, E.J. Dionne, Eugene Robinson, Gerry Seib, Ron Brownstein, Frank Rich, Maureen Dowd, and Rachel Maddow.

    Marc Ambinder reports Paul Krugman was invited to today’s meeting but did not attend.

    Update: Andrew Sullivan on today’s meeting: “It was totally off the record and I’m a stickler for those rules. I can say, however, the following: it’s hard to express the relief I feel that this man will be the president soon. I realize that’s what I feel above all else: relief.”

  25. So, if we didn’t know it before, do not believe anything that comes from the media. They have been bought and paid for, IMHO.

  26. WAY off topic but:

    This is the CUTEST thing I’ve seen in weeks and i wanted to share.

    It’s a cockatoo petting a kitten with its foot.

    vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=47901593

  27. Alert:Thur 11:00am C-Span Senate Hillary farewell to her fellow members.Confirmation vote also for her tomorrow.I believe this is the best scenario for her and this country.She will be totally free of the sniping and misogynists that have had her targeted for many years.She will enjoy the support of both sides of the political structure.As of tomorrow there will be no more mention or criticism of the chosen.His sword is sharp and and he will wall on it countless times without our help.Let congress do its watchdog oversight.Watching Hillary on the world stage will be a pleasure I will enjoy and cherish as one of the greatest women of our time.Good decision good timing and you will shine in your new role as SOS.You rose above and beyond all of the lies and criticism that you were subjected to and your performance Tues. was a work of art and love for your country.God speed.

    BY ABM90 That says it all.

  28. Does anyone know, what the next bailout bill contains? Who is getting bailed out? Any relief for the common person? What fat-cat industry is going to benefit from it?

  29. basil9 Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
    WAY off topic but:

    This is the CUTEST thing I’ve seen in weeks and i wanted to share.

    It’s a cockatoo petting a kitten with its foot.

    vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=47901593
    ————————————————————————————————-

    That has to be the cutest and sweetest thing that I have seen in a long, long time.

  30. Shit is going to hit the fan, technically Geithner could be guilty of fraud also.

    Geithner Accepted IMF Reimbursement for Taxes He Didn’t Pay

    basically Geithner took the allowances, signed the forms stating he would pay the appropriate tax and didnt until caught. So technically he could be guilty of fraudulently obtaining money.

    http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=YzJjOGQyODY2ZjhhMWY4Y2U3YmVkMjhlMWQ2MWZiNTA=

    The tax allowance has turned out to be a key part of the Geithner situation. This is how it worked. IMF employees were expected to pay their taxes out of their own money. But the IMF then gave them an extra allowance, known as a “gross-up,” to cover those tax payments. This was done in the Annual Tax Allowance Request, in which the employee filled out some basic information — marital status, dependent children, etc. — and the IMF then estimated the amount of taxes the employee would owe and gave the employee a corresponding allowance.

    At the end of the tax allowance form were the words, “I hereby certify that all the information contained herein is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I will pay the taxes for which I have received tax allowance payments from the Fund.” Geithner signed the form. He accepted the allowance payment. He didn’t pay the tax. For several years in a row.

  31. Here is a partial answer to my question:

    WASHINGTON – A solid plurality of the American public supports the economic stimulus plan that President-elect Barack Obama has proposed, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

    But the public also is concerned that the stimulus’ price tag might be too expensive and would increase the U.S. deficit.

    “They want to do something and want to see it done,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. “But what they’re warning [Obama] collectively is — be careful.”

    Obama’s stimulus package, which his team estimates will cost some $775 billion, includes:

    Distributing $500 in tax credits to individuals (and $1,000 to families)
    Providing money for shovel-ready construction projects
    Increasing production of renewable energy
    Expanding unemployment benefits and government-assisted health insurance.
    According to the poll, 43 percent believe the stimulus is a good idea, compared to 27 percent who think it’s a bad one, and 24 percent who don’t have an opinion.

    Popular details in the stimulus
    The individual parts of the stimulus are much more popular.

    Eighty-nine percent support the creation of new jobs through increased production of renewable energy (as well as making public buildings and schools more energy efficient). And 85 percent think it’s a good idea to generate jobs through the repair and construction of roads and bridges.

    In addition, 67 percent approve of the the tax cuts in the stimulus plan, and 65 percent agree with the expansion of unemployment insurance and government-assisted health insurance.

    This support isn’t too surprising given that nearly three-fourths of Americans believe that the current economic recession will continue for at least another year — and perhaps even longer.

    By comparison, 4 percent believe that the recession is almost over or will be in the next six months.

    Yet there is a warning sign for Obama in this poll: 60 percent say they’re concerned that the government will spend too much money in trying to stimulate the economy, ultimately increasing the size of the deficit.

    McInturff speculates that negative opinions regarding the cost and implementation of the government’s earlier financial bailout are making the public a bit gun-shy about the size of the stimulus package.

    “Right now, the Obama economic stimulus is wrapped around perceptions about the bailout.”

    msnbc.msn.com/id/28657844

  32. Another Richardson Inner Staff Pay to Play

    (This led the 5:30 local news, but there was not link to a story on the site yes).

    A civil suit has been brought by a person who used to work with the School Pension fund. He claimed that a member of Richardson inner staff put considerable pressure on them to invest $40Million (I think that number is right but it could have been $90) into mortgages that the pension fund board thought were risky. All of this money was lost. This mortgage company donated $15K to Richardson’s Presidental Election fund.

    I will like later tonight when I see it posted.

    It amazing to see the CRAP coming out.

  33. last time a looked 43% was not a majority, it means that 57% of people are not sure its the best way, once again they try to sell it as a majority when its not.

  34. birdgal,
    Here’s one more. A dancing cockatoo with rhythm rivaling James brown.
    More at Cute overload. (I confess, i am so sick of being depressed about BO i am desperately searching for diversion)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utkb1nOJnD4

    Check out the birds category and scroll down to crow and kitten for some real inspiration.
    (sorry everyone for the

  35. moononpluto Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
    last time a looked 43% was not a majority, it means that 57% of people are not sure its the best way, once again they try to sell it as a majority when its not.

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Yep, it is all in the spin. People are very wary of the stimulus package. I bet the private contractors are frothing at the bit, to get a piece of this package. I wonder, how much of the package, is for tax cuts? The article doesn’t say.

  36. So far we have

    Richardson (Commerce) about to be indicted

    Geithner (Treasury) a unpatriotic (ask Biden) non tax payer who doesnt check illegal workers papers.

    The AG Nominee worked in the Pardon Office and didn’t know anything about who was pardoned

    The whole Panetta debacle

    Susan Rice, just dont go there, her greasy hair is enough.

    I’m laughing at this webpage,found it by accident, its as long as my arm…..

    Obama Administration Scandals List

    conservativeamerican.org/dems-libs-socialists/obama/obama-administration-scandals-list/

  37. moon: Geithner will be confirmed, according to some news reports. His hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday, the day after Black Tuesday, so it will be overshadowed and buried in the news.

  38. moononpluto

    Yet, the news media thinks this is the best transition ever. Can their picture of reality be any more distorted.

  39. I’d love to know whats really going on behind the scenes because so far as I can see, the Muppet show is the best description to describe the Bamabi Administration, remember all the back stage fighting.

  40. If it were a bot with tax problems, or Judas, sure we’d go after them.

    But why SHOULD we go after Geithner, an old Clintonista?

    Not every BO appointee is bad — he appointed Hillary, and she needs old friends to work with.

  41. Are you mad, I dont give a care who he is, clintonista, repug, whatever, the guy is dirty, we’d be in jail if it were us.

  42. Tax rules are complicated. Tax accountants have differing opinions. Humans make mistakes in following complicated forms.

    The IRS’ job is to try to squeeze more money out of taxpayers, either by difference of opinion among accountants, or by finding honest mistakes — or by trying to embarass someone with publicity.

  43. Tax rules are complicated. Tax accountants have differing opinions. Humans make mistakes in following complicated forms.

    Not when you are going to be in charge of the Treasury………….

  44. Nobody is perfect. Media and political enemies single one person out for lynching and ignore mistakes of others.

    If Obama names some bot instead, that bot will probably have mistakes as bad or worse, which the media will cover up.

  45. moononpluto Says:
    January 14th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
    *************
    Don’t forget this crook:
    Ray LaHood, who represented Illinois in the House for seven terms, sponsored $60 million in earmarks last year, steering at least $9 million in federal money to campaign donors, a Washington Post analysis shows. An opponent of earmark reform efforts in Congress, LaHood ranks roughly among the top 10 percent in the House for sponsoring earmarks in 2008, according to a watchdog group.
    LaHood’s record poses an important question as hearings begin today that will explore how he would administer part of a $775 billion stimulus package that will be directed to the Transportation Department. LaHood has defended his use of earmarks as a way to direct federal money to decaying communities in his district and insisted there is no connection between his earmarks and projects benefiting campaign donors.
    w.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011302860.html

    Ray LaHood, who represented Illinois in the House for seven terms, sponsored $60 million in earmarks last year, steering at least $9 million in federal money to campaign donors, a Washington Post analysis shows. An opponent of earmark reform efforts in Congress, LaHood ranks roughly among the top 10 percent in the House for sponsoring earmarks in 2008, according to a watchdog group.

    LaHood’s record poses an important question as hearings begin today that will explore how he would administer part of a $775 billion stimulus package that will be directed to the Transportation Department. LaHood has defended his use of earmarks as a way to direct federal money to decaying communities in his district and insisted there is no connection between his earmarks and projects benefiting campaign donors. *

    Ray LaHood, who represented Illinois in the House for seven terms, sponsored $60 million in earmarks last year, steering at least $9 million in federal money to campaign donors, a Washington Post analysis shows. An opponent of earmark reform efforts in Congress, LaHood ranks roughly among the top 10 percent in the House for sponsoring earmarks in 2008, according to a watchdog group.

    LaHood’s record poses an important question as hearings begin today that will explore how he would administer part of a $775 billion stimulus package that will be directed to the Transportation Department. LaHood has defended his use of earmarks as a way to direct federal money to decaying communities in his district and insisted there is no connection between his earmarks and projects benefiting campaign donors.

  46. What……!!!!!!!! r u having a laugh?

    Oh come off it, the guy is meant to be running the treasury, he’s been acting dodgy, you just cannot sweep it under the carpet, what example does it set, when the guy running the treasury, does not check papers of his employees, does not pay his taxes until he gets nominated for the treasury.

    If you did what he did, it would be, spell it, FELONY.

  47. Moon: from a tactical standpoint I agree with you. But, from a strategic standpoint I very much agree with turndown.

    Let me suggest that the goal here is to get the best possible support for the country and for Hillary there is–so she succeeds beyond all expectations. This guy appears to satisfy that test. Ergo she needs him in the cabinet. What is more our financially strapped country needs him in the cabinet based on his talent and expertise. He satisfies that test as well.

    The counterveilling risk if he does not make the cut is we are likely to end up with an unqualified bot as his replacement in which case we will be far worse off. He may not have a nanny problem, but that is as nothing compared to what he will do to the country. What I am suggesting is simply this: strategy trumps tactics.

    It is like the situation in Palestine. We all want a democratically elected government in principle, but do we still want it if it produces a hamas run goverment. This is what happens when we push principle to the limits of its logic. On the other hand I am not saying the end justifies the means. I am saying that when I weight the perceived advantage of his candidacy against the transgressions note, I think he should be in the cabinet.

    In sum, there is a context to everything, and here it favors his confirmation. But I could be wrong.

  48. No sorry guys can’t agree with you on this, regardless, it sets a bad example and frankly thats what fought against all of last year in the primaries. If you let one away with it, it sets the precedent.

  49. LaHood’s record poses an important question as hearings begin today that will explore how he would administer part of a $775 billion stimulus package that will be directed to the Transportation Department
    ———————————-
    Like I said, I was scheduled to introduce this guy at a fundraiser and he did not show. I dont know him. But his opposition to earmark reform is a problem. I know pork is the way legislators keep their jobs, but experience has shown they routinely abuse it. If they did it the right way–the way Hillary does it, I would not have a problem. In that case it can be beneficial, and if the president has line item veto authority that can be abused as well. Ray La Hood. If I were still in the transportation business this would be good news.

  50. basil9 Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
    ———————————————————————————

    Basil, that bird has rhythm!!!!! OMG!!! Right on the beat. Incredible.

  51. Prepare to barf. This is NOT a joke.

    ojamas.us/servlet/the-5/Obama%2C-Obama-pajamas%2C-memorabilia%2C/Detail

    propaganda to a new level.

  52. last time a looked 43% was not a majority, it means that 57% of people are not sure its the best way, once again they try to sell it as a majority when its not.
    ——————————–
    true. And if they were into truth–which these pollsters are not–they would say 6 people out of 10 do not know if the benefits outweigh the costs. The Pelosi led congress asks a different question: I dont care whether it is good for the country–does it give me enough grease to spread around in my district to attract the flies who will re-elect me. We really do need earmarks reform, and term limits for both politicans and big media celebrities.

  53. wbboei, thanks!

    Now, is it possible that the Clintons had a hand in Geithner getting nominated in the first place?

    It seems like too many old 90s Clintonistas getting appointed to Treasury to be coincidence. (Even the non-Clintonistas were still in the Rubin school.)

  54. WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama would spend the remaining $350 billion of a financial bailout fund on expanded lending and reduced foreclosures and would not use the money to help other industries, lawmakers said Wednesday after discussions with Obama emissaries.

    The Senate was set to vote Thursday on whether to release the money. Lawmakers insisted that Obama advisers put their assurances in writing before the vote.

    Seeking to secure votes from wary members of both parties, Obama aides fanned out across the Capitol on Wednesday. Their lobbying effort culminated in a closed door meeting between Senate Republicans and top Obama economic adviser Larry Summers and incoming White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.

    The private guarantees went further than what Obama’s team has been willing to discuss publicly about his plans for the second half of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program.

    Obama has asked Congress for the money and has been trying to overcome misgivings from lawmakers over how the Bush administration spent the first half of the fund.

    Democrats were growing increasingly optimistic that the Senate would agree to release the money to the new administration. And even reluctant Republicans praised Obama’s outreach.

    “These folks have much more credibility already than Secretary Paulson,” Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said, referring to the Bush administration’s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson.

    Still, Republicans demanded that the incoming Obama administration put in writing details of the conditions and goals for the money.

    “There is a real concern that it’s one thing to say it in the privacy of that room; it’s another thing entirely to put something on the record,” said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.

    While the criticism of the Bush administration’s handling of the bailout has been bipartisan, Republicans were especially opposed to using the bailout funds to help out nonfinancial sector industries. Money from the fund has been used to assist insurance giant American International Group Inc. and automakers General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Summers and Rahm “did not represent they are in favor of industrial policy.”

    “We’d like to see something publicly stated with reference to that issue,” he added.

    In the House, Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said Summers assured him that Obama would commit a significant portion of the bailout money to foreclosure relief.

    The House on Thursday was scheduled to vote on Frank legislation that would place broad restrictions on the bailout program. One major provision would require that the new administration spend between $40 billion and $100 billion on reducing the number of foreclosures.

    “I believe they would have done this anyway,” Frank said after speaking to Summers on Wednesday.

    Obama’s transition office would not comment on discussions held with members of Congress.

    The House bill has little chance of passing the Senate.

    Summers this week submitted a three-page letter to congressional leaders as part of Obama’s request for the money that outlined the Obama economic team’s goals. But several Republicans and Democrats said the letter was not specific enough and said they needed more information from the president-elect.

    Congress built in a safeguard by requiring that after the first $350 billion of the bailout fund was spent, Congress could reject spending the second half. Obama has said he needs the additional money to help extend loans to small businesses, consumers, homeowners and local governments.

    Lawmakers from both parties have complained that the Bush administration did not spend the money as it initially intended.

    Paulson told legislators last year that the money would be used to buy toxic assets held by the banks in hopes that would help them make more loans. But the Treasury soon changed course and used the money to make direct infusions of capital into financial institutions with few strings attached. Lawmakers complained that the money has not appeared to loosen credit.

    “It is critical we provide a real road map on how this funding will be spent,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

    Republicans argued that Frank’s bill was a futile effort.

    “That we would just go ahead with the bill that everyone acknowledges is not going to become law as cover for us to then release the $350 billion is just plain wrong,” said Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif.

    news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_go_co/obama_bailout

  55. turndown, what makes you think that the Clinton’s had a role in any of the appointments? State Dept.-yes. But Treasury?

  56. birdgal Says:
    January 14th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
    turndown, what makes you think that the Clinton’s had a role in any of the appointments? State Dept.-yes. But Treasury
    ==============

    The Treasury and some other department appointments have been called “Clinton Restoration.”

    If that’s accurate — then there must be some cause. Did Obama just suddenly decide (or know all along) that the Clinton admin (including Hilary) were really the best people to appoint (now that he’s finished running against them)?

    Is it just coincidence, all these Clintonistas, the old team, turning back up in a similar team? Even Betty Currie and the cat.

    By doing this, Obama has made some enemies among former supporters, who could have been helpful in his new plans. Why? What reward is he getting by doing a Clinton Restoration, and who is he getting
    that reward from?

  57. Latest figures on the Coronation Jan 20.Hold on to your hats!!1

    50 million plus dollars.Costliest in our history.

    New Estimate of the coronation cost.Hold on to your hats.

    $50 million PLUS .Costliest in history.

    For What?

    By ABM90 I repeat..Day of Infamy

    f

  58. [ condensed from above posted story ]

    yahoo: Obama would spend bailout funds on housing crisis
    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Summers and Rahm “did not represent they are in favor of industrial policy.” [….] In the House, Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., said Summers assured him that Obama would commit a significant portion of the bailout money to foreclosure relief. [….] One major provision would require that the new administration spend between $40 billion and $100 billion on reducing the number of foreclosures.“ [….] Summers this week submitted a three-page letter to congressional leaders as part of Obama’s request for the money that outlined the Obama economic team’s goals.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_go_co/obama_bailout
    ===================

    Thank God for sanity and honesty! Good old Summers who is abrasive and blunt and non-PC — and therefore can be trusted in the important things, imo.

  59. $50 million PLUS .Costliest in history.

    For What?
    —————————
    To assuage his vanity and make aa’s feel good. We dont have the money for this nonsense. And even if we did there would be far better ways to spend it.

    But, if you are going to waste it I would rather see it wasted on this charade than having it used to bail out big media.

    Where big media is concerned Disraeli comment is apt: if Gladstone fell in the Thames that would be unfortunate. If someone rescued him that would be a tragedy.

    50 million is only an estimate. 100 million will be closer to the final figure. Not including the 3d world pork.

    Rumor has it that the fashion question has been settled with finality. Meesh will dress up like Mary Lincoln. This will start a new trend in fashion–while rome burns.

  60. h…./ no w’s
    online.wsj.com/article/SB123194884833281695.html
    It’s possible some of Mr. Geithner’s problems stemmed from bad advice. In 2004, an accountant advised Mr. Geithner in writing that he did not owe employment taxes. An accountant who reviewed Mr. Geithner’s 2001 tax return also didn’t inform Mr. Geithner he owed taxes, according to an Obama aide familiar with the situation.
    [….]
    Tax professionals noted that even trained preparers sometimes miss the subtleties involved in taxation of employees of international organizations.

    The IRS in late 2006 launched a settlement initiative aimed at noncompliant employees of foreign embassies, as well as international organizations such as the IMF. At the time, the IRS said as many as half of affected employees were out of compliance with tax rules in one way or another.

  61. http://www.krqe.com/

    This is the link to the new pay for play legal action taken against Gov Richardson’s inner staff. of course you need to put

    h t t p://

    and W W W. in front of this link. Ther is a video, that Admin can insert if they want to.

  62. http://www.krqe.com/

    this is on the front page of the Channel 13 TV station and the new pay for play legal action taken against Gov Richardson in NM. Of course you have to put the usually stuff in front of the link.

    Admin can insert the video if they want to.

  63. Another one is going to have trouble:

    (CNN) — President-elect Barack Obama’s choice to head the Securities and Exchange Commission is expected to face questions at her confirmation hearing Thursday about Bernard Madoff — the alleged mastermind of the largest Ponzi scheme in history.
    Mary Schapiro heads the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), which has examined portions of Madoff’s firm for decades.
    Now, questions are being raised about Schapiro’s role in the failure to discover Madoff’s alleged scheme. The SEC last week was criticized by Congress for missing red flags that alerted regulators to Madoff.

    .cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/14/obama.sec.appointee/index.html

  64. Now, is it possible that the Clintons had a hand in Geithner getting nominated in the first place?
    ————————————–
    Turndown: Absolutely. Heres why.

    There is a French saying which goes like this: revolutions eat their children.

    Sometimes violently (French Revolution, Bolshevik Revolution–nightmare in red, Maoist Revolution). In the French Revolution they were eliminated by the guillotine; in the Boshevik Revolution the axe murder of Trotksy, the doctors plot, etc., the use of red guard in china to dispose of old communists.

    Sometimes they are just pushed aside.

    The reason for this is clear. There is a huge difference between launching a campaign and actually governing. It requires a different kind of leader. In the ensuing competition for power the revolutionaries are all eliminated. The only exception, it seems, is when the revolutionary leader was charismatic, then he survives.

    In this case, the revoultionaries were bots, hostile african americans, and second or third tier political functionaries. Would anyone in their right mind put these people in charge. The people you put in charge of governance are those who have been there before. And when you are in the positon the country is in today after 8 years of Bush are those who are not just competent, not just experienced, but people who will be taken seriously at home and abroad–Clinton people with a proven track record of success.

    You can be sure Hillary was consulted. She and Bill have the inside information on these people. The only difference between this administration and the one Hillary would have assembled is she would have had more women. But they would have been qualified ones. Not the McCaskills, or Sebeniuses, or Pelosis of the world but women of substance.

    PS: did you notice that Maggie was back with Hillary helping her prepare for the senate confirmation.

  65. wbboei Says:
    January 14th, 2009 at 10:44 pm

    50 million is only an estimate. 100 million will be closer to the final figure. Not including the 3d world pork.
    *******************
    Bush declares a ‘state of emergency’ in Washington as cost of Obama’s swearing-in ceremony soars to £110m ($160m)
    By Paul Thompson
    Last updated at 11:34 PM on 14th January 2009
    dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1115942/Bush-declares-state-emergency-Washington-cost-Obamas-swearing-cerem

  66. It is reasonble to assume that the attorney general confirmation hearing tomorrow will be testy, as the Republicans grill Eric Holder on the Clinton pardons. That is a part of history I would sooner not revisit. The operative question should be is he better than Judge Gonzales and the answer should be obvious.

  67. turndownobama-com Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
    —————————————————————————————————-

    Experience must count for something. I don’t know the answers to your questions, but hopefully, we’ll find out.

    How did Senator Clinton find out about SOS nomination?

  68. # wbboei Says:
    January 14th, 2009 at 11:35 pm

    It is reasonble to assume that the attorney general confirmation hearing tomorrow will be testy, as the Republicans grill Eric Holder on the Clinton pardons. That is a part of history I would sooner not revisit. The operative question should be is he better than Judge Gonzales and the answer should be obvious.
    *************
    Clinton told the truth about the Marc Rich pardon. Ehud Barak asked that Pollard get a pardon and Clinton told him “no way”. The second choice was Rich. I suspect that pardon was also to help get AIPAC support for Hillary’s 2000 NT Senate run.

  69. Seemingly a little off topic but in the end not really:

    Great read Admin…Geithner is just the tip of the iceburg. If you choose to go deeper. I have some interesting information you may want to connect to.

    Put in simple terms, Soros is running Obama. Soros is Obama’s puppetmaster. Soros was the mastermind for getting Obama elected. Soros made $3 Billion on the backs of the failed mortgage market by cashing in on his Hedge Funds which more than likely caused the collapse.

    This was no accident. We heard very little about this in mainstream news. I watched a 60 min documentary on PBS last night illustrating just how Soros broke our economy.. I can’t tell you how unnerving it was to see him smile during the interview at his life’s accomplishment of breaking the backs of the middle class under his directorship with his money, his mind and his clout through the IMF..

    h’s + w’s…

    telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/investmenttrusts/3454463/Soros-faces-Congress-over-hedge-funds-role-in-meltdown.html

    Soros is attached at the hip to the IMF- International Monetary Fund. I have provided a link to the vastness of the IMF. It’s worth a read . The map and explanation is pretty much updated and current.:

    h’s and back slashes

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMF

    The IMF is fully supporterd by the European Union to the point of the UK giving up it’s sovereignty at the signing of the Lisbon Treaty in July 08′ with the exception of the (cut-out of the agreement) patch of land known as London, where the Monarchy resides. It is in the master plan for us to give up our soverignty soon after Obama becomes president.

    Geithner will be confirmed no matter what anyone says because he is a trusted IMF employee and is needed to administer funds between OUR Treasury and the World Bankers of the IMF. Who in turn will govern (the flow of money) World Trade through a central clearing house between the US and the UK.

    All in all, “our girl” never knew what she was up against with Soros all along hidden behind the curtain. She pulled off a miracle to remain standing until June. Right now, she is the only hope we have left to survive the pain and austerity Obama has in store for us and for our Nation.

    What I love so much about this forum is…Pink are the diggers, the fact finders. Pink doesn’t follow the nuances. There are hundreds of sites out there taking on important human rights issues. TG for them. Pink searches for the root of the problem and never disappoints by coming up empty handed. And believe you me… Soros is one hell of a Big root. The Root of ALL Evil. If it wasn’t for the intelligence and bravery of Big P… we’d be lost!

  70. Clinton told the truth about the Marc Rich pardon. Ehud Barak asked that Pollard get a pardon and Clinton told him “no way”. The second choice was Rich. I suspect that pardon was also to help get AIPAC support for Hillary’s 2000 NT Senate run.
    ————————————–
    SHV: Gefen was pushing someone for a pardon and did not get it, so he threw his support to obama and invited modo to holly wood. Do you recall who he was pushing. I dont think it was Pollard. Pollard was a navy guy who was a serious spy for Israel. Hell, if they had just asked us for what they wanted we probably would have given it to them. They are a key ally. I guess it is more fun to spy except when you are Pollard and happen to get caught.

    Speaking of spies, the Chinese American who was accused of spying for Red China. Someone told me Monday that he was exhonerated on appeal. I dont believe it. Could it be true? He was taking top secret information home, copying it and cleaning his disc. But it turned out that he failed to eliminate all that top secret information. And now he is suing the US government.

    If that is true I wonder what Assistant United States Attorney screwed that one up. It looked like an open and shut case for conviction as it was explained to me.

  71. Here’s a nice piece by Glenn Thrush on Hillary’s farewell party:

    January 14, 2009
    Categories: Clintons
    Inside Hillary’s farewell party

    A resourceful Amie Parnes somehow managed to position herself in the doorway of the LBJ room off the Senate chamber to spy on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s invitation-only going-away party, which featured 31 Senatorial drop-bys.

    For Clinton, whose entrance to the Senate with met with skepticism, curiosity and outright hostility, It was a surprisingly tearful and satisfying event .

    Amie’s story:

    At an emotional private party just off the Senate floor, soon-to-be Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told her Senate colleagues Wednesday night that serving in the Senate “has been the greatest experience of my life” and that leaving them was “like leaving family.”

    Clinton, whose eyes welled up as she worked the elegant LBJ room in the Capitol, hugged and kissed colleagues, posed for pictures and thanked them one by one as she reminded them she would be “just around the corner.”

    Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) nearly choked up as he spoke. “Parting is such sweet sorrow – I have such sweet memories of you,” he said. “I feel like crying.”

    An emotional Clinton responded, “This is not goodbye — this is just a wave, Harry.. . . We’re going to be in each others’ hearts and minds.”

    Clinton was feted by her daughter, Chelsea, and by some members of the Obama team — Rahm Emanuel, the incoming White House chief of staff, transition chief John Podesta and economic adviser Larry Summers, who left frequently to chat on his cell phone in the hall, a stray shirt tail hanging below his suit coat.

    The former first lady is expected to give her farewell speech at 11 a.m. Thursday, an hour after Vice President-elect Joe Biden delivers his own farewell address.

    Thirty-one senators attended the party, and there were both Democrats and Republicans there. Among them: host Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Max Baucus, Mary Landrieu, Barbara Mikulski, Bill Nelson, John Kerry, Jon Tester, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, Bob Corker, Olympia Snowe, Johnny Isakson and John McCain, against whom Clinton might have run for president if things had worked out differently.

    More than a dozen House members from New York House were also there, including two who’d like to replace Clinton in the senate — Upstate New York Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand and Long Island Rep. Steve Israel.

    » Continue reading Inside Hillary’s farewell party

    Schumer said he had “complete confidence” that Clinton would be “the best Secretary of State this country has ever known.

    “Eat your heart out James Monroe,” Schumer added to laughs. “I think he was Secretary of State.”

    He was, from 1811 to 1814 and 1815 to 1817.

    Alluding to his relationship with Clinton, which improved steadily through the years they served together, Schumer said: “Hillary looks great from far away, but up close it’s even better.”

    “Hillary,” he said, “you’re the greatest.”

    Mikulski, a Democrat from Maryland, called Clinton “the best friend you can have.”

    Clinton said she wanted to have “a real partnership between the State Department and the Congress.”

    “Let’s go out and make the future better than it is,” she said.

    By Glenn Thrush 07:49 PM

  72. I stand corrected .FOX displayed the Coronation cost and revealed the % of money bundled by the big banks and wallstreet Special interests.IMF playing a huge part in all this under the control of Geo.Soros and SOT nominee Geithen.We can now see what Bill and Hillary have been up against with MSM as the prime outlets of slime time news.
    Hillary beat them all and has earned the befitting title of

    “THE IRON LADY” our new SOS

  73. Morning wbboei and a huge thanks for your encouragement in my efforts to be part of this great crusade for truth and justice.For me this is one of the rewards of getting old.Keeping busy,make new friends as the old slip away and maintain a can do attitude are the best goals and do not cost a penny.

    Thanks my friend ABM90

  74. I understand that the Clintons want to save this country, and believe in the Democrats as the way to do it. But having to sleep with Soros to me is not worth it. He is a crook, and his intentions are not honorable.

    So by his manipulation of this election he has not only gotten control of the President, but the country. I am not sure how putting Clinton people in the cabinet makes this better, as it only assures them of a second term.

    It is justified by saying we need to save this economy and this country, when in fact Soros was the one who tanked the economy.

    I feel we are now under the control of a dictator, who has a puppet named O, and the Clinton team will be of little use, if he can tank the economy at a moments notice.

    I do think the Clinton’s are making a power play at this point, but I see little value in it.

  75. So the obama rat pack knew about Geithner last November but kept it hushed up. They knew about Richardson but kept it hushed up. The media is already touting that the honeymoon is over.

    What makes me think that obama is going to give the shaft to both Republicans and Democrats as soon and as often as he can? What also makes me think that he and his egotistical wannabes will continue to push their agenda through fair but mostly foul means as long as they can?

    And finally, what makes me think that obama will make the Guiness Book of Records as getting the fastest impeachment in history?

  76. Paterson discounts polls on Clinton replacement

    BY JAMES T. MADORE | james.madore@newsday.com
    January 14, 2009

    ALBANY – Gov. David A. Paterson Wednesday discounted polls showing the public favors state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo over Caroline Kennedy to replace U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

    Paterson, who has sole authority to appoint Clinton’s successor, said public attitudes were based on media reports, not the candidates’ work.

    He was unaware of a Quinnipiac University poll, released Wednesday, that has Cuomo beating Kennedy, 31 percent to 24 percent, in the court of public opinion.

    “There is no body of work that the public is considering . . . these are popularity contests,” Paterson told reporters in the Capitol’s ornate Red Room.

    http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-stpate1512360412jan14,0,285222.story

    ————————————

    ahem…the fix is in!

  77. birdgal Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
    Geithner will be confirmed, according to some news reports. His hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday…
    &&&&&&&&&

    Or was that a typo, and it should have read:

    Geithner will be **arraigned**, according to some news reports. His hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday…

  78. WASHINGTON – The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Rodham Clinton to become the next secretary of State, endorsing President-elect Barack Obama’s promise to take U.S. foreign policy in a new direction.

    The action paves way for a full Senate vote after Obama takes office on Jan. 20. Clinton is not expected to hit any major roadblocks, with Republicans and Democrats alike praising her acumen on the issues.

    But concerns about her husband’s charitable fundraising overseas remains. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, who was among several Republicans who raised the issue at her confirmation hearing earlier this week, cast the lone opposing vote.

    Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said he too remains wary that contributions to the Clinton charity could pose conflicts of interest. But, he added, he wouldn’t stand in the way of her appointment at this point and noted that Clinton could become one of the nation’s best secretaries of State to date.

    Her departure from the Senate has been closely watched because it would give New York Gov. David Paterson, a fellow Democrat, the power to appoint her successor. Caroline Kennedy, the scion of a political dynasty, wants the job.

    Indications from both parties this week were that Clinton would win a near-unanimous vote Thursday in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

    “No problema,” Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., a member of the committee, said of Clinton’s prospects. And on the issues, Nelson added, “we see it very similarly.”

    Democrats and Republicans alike praised Clinton’s acumen on the issues, although some Republicans, worrying about potential ethics conflicts, still criticized former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation for continuing to accept overseas contributions once she takes office.

    Clinton and outgoing Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, the vice president-elect, are expected to give their farewell speeches on the Senate floor Thursday.

    Earlier this week, Clinton faced her former colleagues in a confirmation hearing that turned into a collegial discussion on how to bring peace to the Middle East and end the war in Iraq, among other weighty issues.

    msnbc.msn.com/id/28624112

  79. Burris has steeper learning curve than most
    By LAURIE KELLMAN – 7 hours ago

    Excerpt from longer article:

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Roland Burris is getting a warmer reception in the Senate than he received last week when he was turned out in the chilly rain. But the honeymoon in his new place of work could be short, and not all that sweet.

    Senate Democrats still have a bitter aftertaste from being shamed into seating Burris by impeached Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

    Still, they’re giving Burris a polite reception to the famously fussy chamber, insisting that their initial resistance was never about Burris personally.

    Burris was to be sworn in Thursday by Vice President Dick Cheney and seated without objection or a vote initially promised by Majority Leader Harry Reid. Then the senior senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin, was throwing a reception in Burris’ honor.

    Reality sets in after that. Burris will join the lowest of the lowly freshmen in the Senate hierarchy, forced on — rather than elected to — a chamber that prides itself on deliberation and independence.

    If Burris expects to win the seat outright in two years, he’ll need to quickly win over leaders of his party whose blessing can help raise campaign cash. That’s a tall order considering the former state attorney general has little if any legislative experience. And some Senate Democrats are still smarting over being forced into seating him.

    Advice for their new colleague from rank-and-file Democrats: Jump in, work hard, take distinct steps toward building good will. Burris’ first test will come with Obama’s this week, when Congress decides whether to give the new president access to the second half of an unpopular $700 billion rescue for the ailing economy.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gUvQkRopntRBnfYyaz06sD89bwnQD95NF21G0

    ———————————

    Oh yeah, like his predecessor obamarot jumped in and worked hard…NOT!

  80. rgb44hrc Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 10:31 am
    birdgal Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
    Geithner will be confirmed, according to some news reports. His hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday…
    &&&&&&&&&

    Or was that a typo, and it should have read:

    Geithner will be **arraigned**, according to some news reports. His hearing is scheduled for next Wednesday
    ————————————————————————————————————

    Yes, “arraigned” is a better word for it. There is more to the story, I’m sure. For someone with supposed financial acumen, he doesn’t manage his own finances very well.

  81. BUSH’S LOVE OF CRAWFORD, TX WAS JUST FOR SHOW?

    I thought Idiot loved his Ranch. Was going to clear brush until he passes on.

    So all this rustic, “I’m just a simple farmer-type guy, clearin’ brush, ridin’ horses, whatnot”, was all a ruse? Or will they keep their ranch for “vacations”?

    Or will Laura the Librarian be living one place, nestled down with a good book, and W. to use the ranch as a bachelor “love pad”, now that he won’t have to be concerned about impressing Evangelicals any more? “There just might be a few bad old habits I might have to pick up, heh, heh”.

    &&&&&&&&&
    Dubya’s New Digs
    by Mike Krumboltz
    January 14, 2009 05:13:46 PM

    Everyone’s obsessing about the new guy, Barack What’s-His-Face, moving into the White House. But what about the fella who’s been living there for eight years? He’s about to be evicted! Where the heck is he supposed to go?

    Answer: Dallas. President Bush and wife Laura have purchased a swanky 8,500-square-foot home in suburban Preston Hollow. According to an audio report from NPR, the president and first lady will take up residence on Daria Drive. It was once a sleepy little street, but ever since the move was announced, it has become a place for gawkers and photo-hounds.

    For those reasons and more, the street will soon become a gated community. The Dallas Morning News reports that the city council “unanimously approved gating Daria Drive.” And, in case you were wondering, an article from KERA quotes a council member as saying that the new gate will “be done at his [Bush’s] expense.” Nobody seems too sure who is going to pay for Dallas police to “provide around the clock security.”

    Regardless of who foots the bill, neighbors seem to be generally enthusiastic about having a former president on the street. A local young Republican printed up signs declaring “Welcome Home, George and Laura.” Future neighbor, Tom Hicks, who owns the Dallas Stars and Texas Rangers, is considering adding a helipad to his property. We assume he wouldn’t mind letting Dubya use it every once in a while. Heck, it’d be the neighborly thing to do.

  82. birdgal Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 10:35 am

    ————————————————-

    Bravo! Congratulations Hillary! and excellent news for the United States of America.

    Vitter is a jackass. His 2 seconds of fame are over now, thank God.

  83. Thrush, who is a politico shill and like the rest of them, a Hillary hater from way back, gives us this maudelin piece about Hillarys farewell from the Senate. My guess, and perhaps my bias persuades me that that group of liars and coward is glad to have her out of the way so they can pillage the nation and feather their own nest, and the only one happier about this is Hillary herself becasuse she knows how hemmed in she would have been in that fourm and any move she made for the good of the country would be blocked by the thugs and misreported by the hyper corrupt big media. But it was a great show. But if there was a member of congress who is not corrupt (and we know there are because some stood beside her during this ordeal), and if there is an honest member of the press (and we know there are because we have talked about them and admired them for the heroes and heroines they are) and if there is one patriot left in Washington DC who cares more about the fate of this country more than their own ability to make a fortune out of public office, then for them this is a sad day, because in marks the departure of our greatest leader from that body. On the other hand where she is going is into the eye of the storm, where the real work of this country–difficult, demanding and vitally important awaits her and where the future of this country and this world really do hang in the balance–far from this madding crowd the terrible corruption and bias of big media–the most evil and unpatriotic group of people of our time, in my opinion. Bush, Iraq, Bush, Obama–everything they do is a disaster. The have forgotten the truth and know only their own biased, with few exceptions.

  84. I only wish I had been there to see racist Harry Reid crying his eyes out. The sight of Harry affecting such emotion would be too much for anyone to endure. If they have a spare oscar in the closet, perferably a phony one it should be presented to him. If not lets at least give him that pulitzer they gave to robin givhan by accident, or the one boston charlie stole before they kicked him out of beantown. The one thing I would not wish upon him however is a sloppy kiss from the senate version of alice the goon namely clare mccaskill. What a mascot she is.

  85. BTW, that’s a great story about Hillary’s farewell party; it almost brought tears to my eyes.

    Also, when you have Repubs like DeMint saying Hillary could become one of the best secretarys of state in history, you know how awesome she really is. Oh, and Vitter can go to hell. What an idiot. Notice at the hearing he never once brought up her qualifications for the job. It was all garbage about Bill’s foundation.

  86. NY Times weighs in on Geithner (my comments follow $$$)

    More Questions for Mr. Geithner
    ——————————————

    President-elect Barack Obama’s team reacted predictably to the disclosure that Timothy Geithner, the nominee for Treasury secretary, failed to pay a chunk of his federal taxes over several recent years. The script gets played out, with slight variations, whenever a presidential nominee gets in that kind of trouble.

    On Tuesday, when Mr. Geithner’s failures were first reported by The Wall Street Journal, the Obama transition office issued a statement calling his underpayment of taxes “honest mistakes.” On Wednesday, Mr. Obama himself said it was “innocent.” Those themes have been echoed by several of the senators who will conduct Mr. Geithner’s confirmation hearing, which is now scheduled for next Wednesday.

    $$$ About time the Times finds a slight flaw with “their guy”.

    As much as Mr. Obama and his team may wish it, however, the disclosures cannot be dismissed so easily, or papered over. The just-the-facts report of Mr. Geithner’s tax transgressions, compiled and released by the Senate Finance Committee, paints a picture of noncompliance that is considerably more disturbing than his supporters are acknowledging.

    $$$ Smoothest, best prepared Transition Team in US History…?

    Mr. Geithner must be questioned forcefully about these matters at the hearing next week, and his explanations must be credible. Even in the best of economic times, it would be hard to accept a Treasury secretary — who, after all, is in charge of the Internal Revenue Service — with a cavalier attitude toward paying his taxes. Today, in a time of economic peril, the nation cannot afford a Treasury secretary with a tainted ability to command respect and instill confidence.

    According to the report, when Mr. Geithner’s tax returns for 2003 and 2004 were audited by the I.R.S. in 2006, the auditors found that he had failed to pay self-employment tax in those years. To make good, he paid the back taxes, plus interest — $16,732.

    Obama officials say Mr. Geithner, who worked for the International Monetary Fund, had made a common error among international employees in Washington. But as The Journal reported on Wednesday, failing to pay the self-employment tax is not necessarily common among sophisticated I.M.F employees. Rather, one of the reasons such noncompliance is widespread is that it includes household embassy workers and other lower- level contractors. And regardless, the Finance Committee found that Mr. Geithner had signed paperwork at the I.M.F. that acknowledged his self-employment tax obligation.

    $$$ You bad boy.

    The story does not stop there. Mr. Geithner also failed to pay the self-employment tax in 2001 and 2002. Those returns, which the report says Mr. Geithner prepared himself, were not audited and so the I.R.S. did not order him to pay up — which raises the question of why he did not voluntarily amend those returns and pay the taxes and interest at the time of the 2006 audit. Instead, he waited until after vetting by the Obama team late last year revealed the shortfall — $19,176 in taxes and $6,794 in interest.

    $$$ Tsk tsk tsk.

    A similar lapse occurred on another tax issue. On returns for 2001, 2004 and 2005, Mr. Geithner wrongly claimed expenses for sleep-away camps in calculating his dependent care tax credit. The accountant who prepared his 2006 return informed him that payments to overnight camps were not allowable expenses, but again, he did not file amended returns for the previous years at that time. The report does not break out the taxes and interest on that item alone, but along with other adjustments, Mr. Geithner owed an additional tax of $4,334 and interest of $1,232.

    $$$ How unbecoming!!

    Many people find taxes baffling, but before his job at the I.M.F, Mr. Geithner was a senior official in the Treasury Department under President Clinton, and for the past five years he has been the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. With that professional profile, tax transgressions are tough to excuse.

    $$$ Maybe it’s time for you to “spend more time with your family”, or your call girl. Mary Schapiro, the nominee to head up the SEC, is also facing issues about increasing her pay in a merger she oversaw; see my Jan 13th post at 4:37pm (in the “Stately Hillary Clinton” post).

  87. birdgal Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 10:35 am
    WASHINGTON – The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Rodham Clinton to become the next secretary of State, endorsing President-elect Barack Obama’s promise to take U.S. foreign policy in a new direction.

    &&&&&&&&&

    Vote was 16-1.

    “But concerns about her husband’s charitable fundraising overseas remain. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, who was among several Republicans who raised the issue at her confirmation hearing earlier this week, cast the lone opposing vote.”

    Hey, Vitter. Do you really think she is not “qualified”??? Who would you rather seat as SoS?

  88. turndownobama-com Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
    Tax rules are complicated. Tax accountants have differing opinions. Humans make mistakes in following complicated forms.

    The IRS’ job is to try to squeeze more money out of taxpayers, either by difference of opinion among accountants, or by finding honest mistakes — or by trying to embarass someone with publicity.
    &&&&&

    Valid points, but, tax rules are “complicated” for normal folks. It shouldn’t be for any schlock CPA, and especially not for “The Best of the Best of the Best, Sir!!!”.

  89. wbboei Says:

    January 14th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
    Now, is it possible that the Clintons had a hand in Geithner getting nominated in the first place?

    PS: did you notice that Maggie was back with Hillary helping her prepare for the senate confirmation.
    &&&&&

    Hmmm, but not Patti Soiled-Donuts???

  90. I am glad for Hillarys sake that it worked out the way it did. She never deserved the treatment she received from colleagues and the press. They fail to realize she is a separate human being than bill and that is a further testament to their bias. At a personal level this is something of a trimumph for her and a second defeat for big media who as recently as sunday were trying to derail this thing.Specifically, AP and the NYT.

    The colleagues who accorded her that icy reception when she returned from the campaign trail are now hail fellow well met. Big media is frothing at the mouth because it lost its opportuntity to go global and it will be harder to clinton bash and without that what do they have to say. They will have to revise their business plan.

    By going through this ordeal, our girl knows better than most people who you can trust when the chips are down. I cannot help but think this insight will be important in her role as secretary of state, which at this moment in history is without question the most important job in the world–bar none. As sos she will need to inform, coddle and lead this self serving body of people in the right direction. Left to their own devices it all would end in chaos.

  91. How do you know Maggie was back with Senator Clinton? Was she at the hearing, or was this printed somewhere? Maggie is a true friend.

  92. wbboei

    Thrush may have given over his column space for the story, but it was actually written by Amie Parnes, whom he credited.

    What’s important to me this morning is that I am currently in the warmest part of my state, sun shining brightly, wind speed is down, and it is a balmy MINUS 12 degrees.

  93. Emjay,

    From reading your post the other day, it sounds as if the weather has been a huge problem for all of you. I’m glad it has turned the corner for better…at least for today.

  94. Oh, and Vitter can go to hell.
    ———————————-
    He did, and he learned nothing from the experience.

    The foundation is a potential problem. The easy solution is to accept no foreign contributions, and if that was all there was to it, it would have been done. But the continuing ability to accept foreign contributions means more money which can be used to save lives.

    The Clintons have done what they can to address the problem. More than the law required, and more than others would have done in similar circumstances.

    If perception issues arise the press will distort them beyond all rationality. AP (which is short for anti-American People) and NYT have signalled as much by their articles this past weekend. In that case, I hope the country tells them to go where Vitters has been–and stay there.

  95. well…lol…if it ever gets through admin’s moderation, I posted an article above that states that Patterson will not take polls into consideration. He feels that they are just popularity contests and that people aren’t looking at accomplishments.

  96. What’s important to me this morning is that I am currently in the warmest part of my state, sun shining brightly, wind speed is down, and it is a balmy MINUS 12 degrees
    ————————————
    Hearing that, and knowing how warm it is getting in Point Barrow Alaska, perhaps we could interest the penguins in a travel package. What do you think emjay? Can we make a market in it? No frills, no meals and especially no free booze–unless their name is Nancy Pelosi.

  97. John Cornyn taking his time to laud Hillary, using it to piss on her parade by speaking out against Lilly Ledbetter legislation. What a small small man.

  98. I wish I had enough extra $$ to start drumming up our year old Pinker plan to reunion in Hot Springs AR.

    Remember OkieAtty’s promise to lead us to the best BBQ in the area? And I was going to bring a case of the world’s best red plonk, Merlot sold at WalMart for $2.87 a bottle (it really does taste good.) Best of all several of us had a desire to be warm, inside and out and all over, within a warm circle of HillFriends.

  99. Paula

    I heard that too, somewhere. She will be in Foggy Bottom, and Huma will be her Traveling CoS. Given a SoS travel schedule, much of it last minute, sounds like a team made in heaven to me.

  100. wbboei, Good point about the foundation. I think the biggest concern is not accepting money from foreign governments (whom Hillary will be negotiating with directly), and that potential problem has been eliminated. I imagine any contributions from foreign individuals will be closely examined on a case-by-case basis before being accepted.

  101. The media have made fools of themselves time and time again as we have seen. Their unbiased support for Obama and attacks on Hillary and Bill have been worse than anything I have seen since the disgraceful impeachment hearings . They now realize, that BO, a hack Chicago politician, their “golden boy”, needs not only Hillary and Bill, but nearly everyone remotely associated with former President Clinton’s administration as Obama is incapable of making any competent decsions without their assistance. Off course, we will hear how brilliant BO is b/c he has surrounded himself with both friend and foe, but that is to be expected. We here know that the man was and never will be qualified to be President of the USA. Anyone with a fith grade education could see that Hillary, once again on Tiesday, shwed the nation what true leaders have-the ability to think,quickly, analyze the issues, come up with solutions, and not have to read of a well written script by former Kennedy speech writers.

  102. JanH

    I love your optimism, but this time it is misdirected…it is MINUS 15 below 0 degrees. The entire state is below 0 and it is getting on to noon here. No cars, well a few, like 4, at the grocery, cause people can’t get them started.

    From my front second story bay window- not one person walking. Too damm cold. We are not used to this. I chose where to retire to because it was the second warmest place in the state. Last year, right at caucus time, this same thing happened, and it only warmed up to decent on the actual caucus night. The out of state volunteers still talk about it.

  103. # ABM90 Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 9:35 am
    “IMF playing a huge part in all this under the control of Geo.Soros and SOT nominee Geithen.We can now see what Bill and Hillary have been up against with MSM as the prime outlets of slime time news.”

    Yes, absolutely correct. We have to keep Soros in the mainframe. The Focus groups are honed in on the Misogyny, legislative issues and fringe news. Fantastic.

    ***New Mex Fan… Sleep with Soros? Heh, whether you know it or not we are all under the control of Soros directly or indirectly. In this case 1+1= trillions.

    Big Pink is qualified to take on the Soros Project. Pink has a political history background plus a fine understanding of the dynamics of Political-Science. Wbb does as well.

  104. Emjay Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
    —————————————–

    Oh dear. We are so used to that type of weather where I come from. We stockpile and bundle up and hope for the best…lol.. We just came through a few weeks of -30C to -37C. The windchill was horrendous.

  105. Mrs. Smith says:Big Pink is qualified to take on the Soros Project. Pink has a political history background plus a fine understanding of the dynamics of Political-Science. Wbb does as well.

    So, you know who Big Pink is??? Not fair. This information should be shared. I have spent many a night wondering who Big Pink is….as I ususally have to know who I am working and dealing with before I take one more step.

  106. After reading about the horror stories about weather, I appreciate the balmy 45-60 degree weather, where I am at.

  107. Mrs. Smith, if this so, I will rejoice when he brings down this group. I will give money and time to politically support Big Pink.

  108. Hi, Hillfriends. I’m so proud of Hillary. And, so proud of everyone here for steadfastly supporting her.
    It’s very cold here, too – it’s -9 degrees right now. Supposed to get all the way up to -1 today – but we’re not even close. Stay warm, Emjay – and everyone else in the deep freeze.
    Cheers,

  109. Emjay Says:
    January 15th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    I wish I had enough extra $$ to start drumming up our year old Pinker plan to reunion in Hot Springs AR.
    Remember OkieAtty’s promise to lead us to the best BBQ in the area?
    *************
    McClard’s BBQ??

    w.mcclards.com/index.htm

  110. Only one dissention vote against Hillary, and that by an insolent underachiever, shows the amazing respect both sides have for this truly accomplished humanitarian. As she goes forward, Hillary’s resume will continue to outshine and out-achieve those jealous men in her orbit who would seek to slap her down with ridicule and lies.

  111. wbb – you may be able to explain something that I just cannot make work logically.

    Since when do contributions to a charity become a “conflict of interest” to anyone? Of all the things that endear us to others, number one is the humanitarian things we’ve done from Hoover to Bush. Clinton’s Global Initiative will do more to repel terrorists than the Iraq war or any other war.

    Instead of limiting CGI, we should expand it since it is the smartest use of diplomacy with the cheapest cost (0).

    My question is how this conflict of interest would work. Would Hillary, carrying out BO’s foreign policy goals, secretly sabotage negotiations in order to favor the side that contributed more to charity?
    Would she whisper into some prime minister’s ear that she would overlook their attack on a neighbour (as April Glaspie did to Saddam) if they made a substantial contribution to the AIDS program? Would Hillary tell Hamas that the US will switch sides if they give money to CGI?

    Would limiting or even crippling this humanitarian work make us safer? Would allowing thousands more people to die of AIDS contain this epidemic?
    Is Carter’s global work free from “conflict of interest” but not Clinton’s? If this is global work, why should we not engage the world in it?

    Whose interest is conflicted?

    If you’ve listened to the open meetings of the CGI, you’ll see how innovative and effective these efforts are. My interest is in expanding them to the max — and anyone that wants to contribute, welcome! If governments or individuals think that contributing will help them, great! (It will, but not as a bribe) Maybe the governments and leaders will learn from discovering what works to solve problems, from combining with others to aid children, and may decide that this is a better way to go.

    Conflict of interest, my Aunt Fanny! Reducing the cost of AIDS medicine by 89% in 3 years conflicts with nothing that I care about.

  112. I shot off an e-mail to Margaret Carlson as well in response to her “Hillary Trapped…” article. The media will NEVER get over the Clintons-even regarding an organization that has done more for humanity than they would/ever could.

  113. Freckles, WBB – IMO, the only “conflict” is their detractors’ jealosy. The Clintons’ independence and goodwill elicit these ridiculous responses only from those who can never aspire to their level of achievement or global impact. The appropriate response is admiration and appreciation.

  114. happened to catch a segment of matthews and i think, ruth marcus, she wrote about Hillary’s conflicts in WP, going on about the problems with Bill and his organization going forward, bla, bla, bla…these people are so predicable, they remind me of a bunch of squeeling rats always knawing away and trying to take a bite…

    and then the female reporter, not lynn sweet, but another one from chicago (jennifer, June,?) piped in saying how Lindsey Graham told her that the Republicans love Hillary…and when she asked why…he said because Hillary is smart, hard working, was always ready to help and always ready to share credit…and they LOVE and respect her…too bad the so-called progressives cannot see a friend when she is standing right in front of them…

    Congratulations Hillary…

  115. Lindsey Graham told her that the Republicans love Hillary…and when she asked why…he said because Hillary is smart, hard working, was always ready to help and always ready to share credit…and they LOVE and respect her…too bad the so-called progressives cannot see a friend when she is standing right in front of them…

    Not coincidentally, Lindsay Graham was one of the Repubs who attended Hillary’s Senate going-away party yesterday. Senators on both sides of the aisle truly like and respect her BECAUSE THEY’VE SEEN THE REAL HILLARY, not the caricature the MSM has been feeding everyone for almost 17 years.

  116. I think people are jealous of Senator Clinton. Why else, all the vitrolic hatred? It is so out of proportion.

  117. It looks like Vitter will soon be on the fox list of pevert pundits with Carlson applying for a spot as well. Take note of my list of egomaniacs and slime merchants that fox has purchased on the cheap.Junk yard dogs have more character than fhese miserable and poor excuses for human beings.

    1 Hannity
    2 O’reilly
    3 Morris
    4 Beck
    5 Carlson (applicant)
    6 Vitter (applicant)

    I call them the the 3 P’s of fox slanted news .

    “Porta Pottie Pundits”

    By ABM90 My days are getting better and brighter as I watch our new SOS prepare for her new and illustrious career as the worlds leading lady. Condy Who?.Obama Who?MO Who? MSM fold your tents of hatred and go away.We no longer need you.

  118. ABM90 Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 2:52 pm

    It looks like Vitter will soon be on the fox list of pevert pundits with Carlson applying for a spot as well.

    ——————————————
    Have stopped watching Hannity as well as O’Reilly. Much better for my health…lol…

    I would add the following to your list: Cafferty, Anderson Cooper, Bill Brown, etc…

  119. Paula, here’s the Carlson (i’ll provide link separately):

    Hillary’s Trapped by Bill’s Big Web of Donors:
    ———————————————————-
    by Margaret Carlson

    Jan. 15 (Bloomberg) — “Advise and Consent” was a great book and a good movie. It’s also a constitutional duty the U.S. Senate performs unevenly at best. Presidents know that. You can get an unqualified hack confirmed as long as he has no easily understood flaw to spice up the proceedings.

    That’s why the worst attorney general in recent history, Alberto Gonzales, sailed through his confirmation, while Bill Clinton was forced to withdraw the nominations of Zoe Baird (illegal nanny) and Kimba Wood (the same plus the moniker “The Love Judge” she was tagged with after the diaries of her lover were released.)

    The opposition party prefers to wage war over minor infractions that are YouTube-friendly rather than major ones that people don’t quite grasp.

    This partly explains the difference between Treasury Secretary-designate Tim Geithner’s confirmation and that of Secretary of State-designee Hillary Clinton this week.

    Geithner has juicy household help and tax problems that any ninny can understand, including claiming a credit for his kids’ summer camp. He had to fork over tens of thousands of dollars in back taxes for not paying up on self-employed income from the International Monetary Fund.

    Leaving aside that Geithner of all people should know better, it’s hard to underpay your taxes when using a computerized filing program as he says he did.

    Turbo Tax asks a question. You answer. To underpay, you have to override the system. As for the nanny, she was properly certified except for a three-month lapse and then swiftly recertified. How you feel about that nanny depends on how much each of us wants to become amateur immigration-service agents.

    Suffered Enough

    Geithner has taken his lumps. Many will never look at him the same way again. He has paid punitive interest and penalties. He must feel like a weasel.

    But it is too much for the Senate to hold up his confirmation until after Inauguration Day when every day counts for the one person on the planet who understands TARP.

    In contrast, there didn’t seem to be enough arms at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for all the hugs waiting for Clinton. The senators identify with one of their own. They, too, look in the mirror and see a president. Like Hillary, they, too, are settling for something less.

    Clinton will do as well as recent secretaries, maybe better, though she neither brought peace to Northern Ireland nor dodged sniper fire in Bosnia.

    The smartest student in the class who took good notes, studied hard and aced the exams knows her stuff cold. When asked at her hearing about Somali bandits holding foreign ships hostage, she was ready with a bit of history on the 19th-century Barbary Coast pirates. No wonder she was so bitter when Barack Obama, the cool kid with the great three-point jump shot, came out of nowhere to win the Oval office.

    It’s Bill

    It’s her husband who’s the problem. Has there ever been a bigger spousal conflict of interest than former President Bill Clinton collecting large sums from donors foreign and domestic, many of whom have a stake in cozying up to a global duopoly? Who knew two for the price of one could turn out to be quite so pertinent?

    While Clinton has agreed not to take any more money from regimes that have a stake in his wife’s policies, he still can accept money from foreign business executives as long as he names them annually. That ensures, Clinton said, there won’t be “even the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

    Always Disclosure

    Disclosure is the politician’s default position when he has to do something to answer critics. Disclosure worked when George Washington volunteered that he had cut down the cherry tree, the assumption being that disclosing meant he wouldn’t do it again. Not so politicians.

    There’s very little anyone can do upon finding out that Clinton is mixed up with a Nigerian businessman more questionable than the ones you hear from on the Internet promising vast sums if only you wire $10,000 in transfer fees.

    Gilbert Chagoury, who became wealthy during the reign of the corrupt Nigerian General Sani Abacha and sought to win favors for him, gave large sums to political committees during Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign and as much as $5 million to Clinton’s foundation after he left office, according to the New York Times.

    And what about the Indian politician Amar Singh, who gave money and then lobbied Mrs. Clinton on behalf of a nuclear- cooperation agreement, according to the Times. She told him she didn’t object, the Times said. Pakistan should be forgiven for suspecting that Clinton will tilt toward India.

    Or Frank Giustra, the Canadian businessman who donated millions to Clinton’s foundation and lends the former president his plane.

    Midnight Banquet

    Giustra delivered Clinton to a midnight banquet for Kazakhstan’s authoritarian President Nursultan Nazarbayev along with Clinton’s support for Nazarbayev to head an election- monitoring organization. Soon after, Giustra was awarded rights to three state-controlled uranium mines, turning him into one of the world’s largest producers. Clinton’s foundation has a right to half of any of Giustra’s future minerals earnings.

    It doesn’t take a cynic to wonder if Secretary Clinton is in an impossible situation. What happens if Madam Secretary goes soft on Kazakhstan, or India or Nigeria for reasons perfectly valid yet nonetheless suspicious because of her husband’s tangled web?

    There’s rarely hard evidence that one thing causes another, but excuse me for asking.

    Another Way

    Reformers are regulating the wrong end of the quid and the quo. There’s another way to get at this problem: Promise to reject automatically for any job, contract or a favor any donor/businessman who gives money. You end pay to play by saying that if you pay, you can’t play. If there aren’t enough people left who want to give for unselfish reasons, then public financing of elections will finally come to pass. It’s a lot cheaper for the taxpayer than legalized bribery.

    (Margaret Carlson, author of “Anyone Can Grow Up: How George Bush and I Made It to the White House” and former White House correspondent for Time magazine, is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are her own.)

  120. And: Tweety, KO, Andrea B*tchell, Crowley, Madow, Brazilla, and all the other Porta Pottie Pundits, can also be added to the list.

  121. Campbell Brown, I hate that bitch. TweetyBird well, he is the lowest of low I despise that mutherfucker! Anderson Cooper the little shit I used to like and he turned into one of the swine during the primary too .. Cafferty is so stoopid I can’t even think of a good word to describe him…

    I hope Karma comes to them all in massive doses and very, very soon

  122. Margaret and all the others that ABM90 and birdgal have mentioned are all “trapped” by their own egos and the onset of “weakened media brain function.” This new the complete exclusion of kool aid from the diet.

  123. should read “this new disease can be combatted by the complete exclusion of kool aid from the diet.

    —————-

    lol…dot48…I couldn’t agree more!

  124. January 15, 2009
    Caroline Kennedy losing ground in another NY poll

    (CNN) — A new survey of New York voters is the second poll in two days to find Andrew Cuomo pulling away from Caroline Kennedy.

    Four in 10 registered New York voters in a Marist poll released Thursday say they would would like to see Cuomo, currently the state’s attorney general, tapped as Hillary Clinton’s Senate replacement. Twenty-five percent of those polled think New York Gov. David Paterson should pick Kennedy for the spot.

    A month ago, both Kennedy and Cuomo drew the support of one in four New Yorkers.

    Cuomo now holds a clear advantage over Kennedy among Democrats (39 to 31 percent), Republicans (40 to 16 percent), and voters not registered with a political party (42 to 24 percent), and across most regions of the state. Only in New York City is the daughter of former President John Kennedy come close to Cuomo’s showing: she is the favorite of 31 percent of the city’s voters, compared to the 36 percent who favor Cuomo.

    Other candidates for the Senate seat — Nassau County executive Tom Suozzi, and Reps. Steve Israel, Carolyn Maloney and Kirsten Gillibrand — each draw single digit support.

    There are some more red flags for Kennedy in the new survey. Her favorability numbers have tumbled over the past month, with fewer than half — 46 percent — saying they have a positive impression of her, compared to the 60 percent who felt the same last month. Cuomo’s numbers have held steady, with 60 percent saying they view him favorably, compared to the 64 percent who answered the same way in last month’s survey.

    Just 41 percent of the state’s voters think Caroline Kennedy would do an above average job as senator; 62 percent say the same of Cuomo. And 20 percent of those surveyed say Kennedy would perform poorly — double the 10 percent who said the same of Cuomo.

    A majority of New Yorkers — including majorities of both parties, and both genders — say Caroline Kennedy has been treated fairly by the media, although that number is lower among women than men. Fifty-one percent of the women polled say Kennedy’s media coverage is nothing to complain about, while 57 percent of men gave the same answer.

    The phone survey of 603 registered New York voters was conducted on January 12-14, 2009, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent.

  125. Probably a 737. Part of plane may be sticking up out of the water, and maybe some people can be rescued. CNN has live feed.

  126. rgb44hrc Says:

    January 15th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
    US Airways flight 1549 goes down in Hudson River, according to CNN.

    —————————————————————————–

    I hope the passengers will be okay. Is the area accessible for rescue?

  127. us air flight 154 enroute from laguardia to Charlotte is down in the Hudson River .. 146 people onboard many being resdued from the wings…prayers for these folks .. as long as it ain’t one of them bitches or bastards listed up above!!!

  128. sounds like the pilot says they hit Canadian Geese (omen for FlimFlams’ visit to Canada maybe) .. sounds like the pilot kept his cool and did everything in his power to keep those folks safe. It looks like the plane is sinking quickly though. Can’t you imagine how cold they are

  129. rgb44hrc Says:
    January 15th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
    by Margaret Carlson
    Geithner has taken his lumps. Many will never look at him the same way again. He has paid punitive interest and penalties. He must feel like a weasel.
    But it is too much for the Senate to hold up his confirmation until after Inauguration Day when every day counts for the one person on the planet who understands TARP.

    ================

    DAMN RIGHT. WE NEED SOMEONE WHO CAN DO THE JOB. EVEN IF HE DOES OCCASIONALLY TAKE A LITTLE FINANCIAL BLOW JOB.

  130. birdgal Says:
    January 15th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
    I think people are jealous of Senator Clinton. Why else, all the vitrolic hatred? It is so out of proportion.
    ================

    The Clintons have been hated since their days in Arkansas, at least. So, ftm, were the Kennedys; JFK was in danger of losing re-election. Strong hatred of FDR too.

    Iirc RFK Jr wrote about this in HuffPo early in the campaign.

  131. Re Bill’s foundation … to be an outlier on this, I wonder why they don’t just turn the foundation over to someone else during Hillary’s term, so that Bill can spend his time travelling with her and being twofer SOS?

  132. rgb44hrc Says:
    tax rules are “complicated” for normal folks. It shouldn’t be for any schlock CPA, and especially not for “The Best of the Best of the Best, Sir!!!”.
    =================

    Ask your accountant. On situations like that IMF thing, tax rules are complicated, period.

    WSJ says:
    It’s possible some of Mr. Geithner’s problems stemmed from bad advice. In 2004, an accountant advised Mr. Geithner in writing that he did not owe employment taxes. An accountant who reviewed Mr. Geithner’s 2001 tax return also didn’t inform Mr. Geithner he owed taxes, according to an Obama aide familiar with the situation.
    [….]
    Tax professionals noted that even trained preparers sometimes miss the subtleties involved in taxation of employees of international organizations.The IRS in late 2006 launched a settlement initiative aimed at noncompliant employees of foreign embassies, as well as international organizations such as the IMF. At the time, the IRS said as many as half of affected employees were out of compliance with tax rules in one way or another.

    Much more at:
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123194884833281695.html

  133. rgb said:
    Hey, Vitter. Do you really think she is not “qualified”??? Who would you rather seat as SoS?
    ==================

    EXACTLY. Now apply that to Geithner.

    If Geithner were rejected, who would get the job … and WHEN? How many people would lose jobs and homes THIS MONTH?

    The Summers/GEithner camp wants to use the rest of the 700B bailout money like Hillary wanted: to stop foreclosures etc. Instead of bailing out the auto companies as the current Sec of Treas has done.

  134. rgb44hrc Says:
    January 15th, 2009 at 10:54 am
    NY Times weighs in on Geithner

    More Questions for Mr. Geithner
    ——————————————
    that Timothy Geithner, the nominee for Treasury secretary, failed to pay a chunk of his federal taxes over several recent years.
    ===============

    I have yet to see how big a PERCENTAGE this is of G’s overall taxes. Surely this was not all of G’s income or all of his tax bill.

    It’s easy to neglect some complicated little tail end thing that would cost you maybe 2% of what you’ve already paid. Especailly when two different tax accountants have told you you don’t owe anything, see WSJ quote above.

  135. Campbell Brown, I hate that bitch. TweetyBird well, he is the lowest of low I despise that mutherfucker! Anderson Cooper the little shit I used to like and he turned into one of the swine during the primary too .. Cafferty is so stoopid I can’t even think of a good word to describe him…

    I hope Karma comes to them all in massive doses and very, very soon
    ——————————–
    DOT: my first thought was right on. My second thought was you may be giving them too much credit.

  136. wbb – you may be able to explain something that I just cannot make work logically
    ——————————–
    freckles: I do not have time to respond right now. I am headed to Canada. I plan to return tonight. But I may decide to head up to the north end of Vancover Island in the sticks. Its cold and I have a bad case of bronchitus at the moment, but it still sounds better to me than listening to big media these next few days. Either way its news black out time–until someone returns to their senses. Where are the adults?

Comments are closed.