Obama.........

[stephen]

banginjimmy...while i agree with your general argument that government is fucked up, we can't just single out obama.

you're absolutely right, giving people money is welfare...BUT...what's the point of welfare? isn't it supposed to assist those who are hurting financially within our country? THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS HURTING.

would you rather the U.S. continue to "borrow" tax payer money to fight a war, or put it into fixing our economy? think about all of the money good ol' bush borrowed for the war in iraq & afghanistan...we've been there 8yrs...what's it done for us? also, you do know that bush signed off over $1 trillion in bills, and that money is deemed "lost." that's not the total of ALL bills, that's just the total of "lost" money.

we also need to stop making obama's cabinet choices define him. hell, sarah palin owes back taxes. there's a number of congressional and white house employees (info from 2008) whose total delinquent back taxes exceeds $3.5B. bottom line...the man is trying to put our money to good use. when we start getting reports that the money is "lost," then i'll join the obama hating bandwagon.

[BanginJimmy]

banginjimmy...while i agree with your general argument that government is fucked up, we can't just single out obama.

I only singled out Obama because he is the current president. I was equal in my disgust for Bush with the first bailouts.

you're absolutely right, giving people money is welfare...BUT...what's the point of welfare? isn't it supposed to assist those who are hurting financially within our country? THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS HURTING.

No, welfare was supposed to be temporary money to help those that were affected by the Great Depression. Over the last 70 years it turned into a lifetime paycheck for several million american and illegal parasites. Those same parasites have found ways to get more money too, they breed more parasites.

would you rather the U.S. continue to "borrow" tax payer money to fight a war, or put it into fixing our economy? think about all of the money good ol' bush borrowed for the war in iraq & afghanistan...we've been there 8yrs...what's it done for us? also, you do know that bush signed off over $1 trillion in bills, and that money is deemed "lost." that's not the total of ALL bills, that's just the total of "lost" money.

I would rather spend the money on the war than encourage an increase in parasites. The Japs spent the entire 90's doing bailouts and it never helped their economy. We tried it in the 1930's and it didnt work. We tried it last year and it didnt work. How many more times do we have to waste this money to just watch it go to waste?

Now you brought up iraq and I agree it is a valid arguement, but in 5 years we racked up about 5.5T in debt. In 30 days Obama has overseen an additional 2T. At this rate we will be 100T deeper in debt by the time he leaves office. On top of this, he has said that he will ask for more money and we still have yet to hear a single detail about HOW the second half of TARP is going to be spent. I believe Giethner said he would require the printing of another trillion dollars for this bailout.

we also need to stop making obama's cabinet choices define him. hell, sarah palin owes back taxes. there's a number of congressional and white house employees (info from 2008) whose total delinquent back taxes exceeds $3.5B. bottom line...the man is trying to put our money to good use. when we start getting reports that the money is "lost," then i'll join the obama hating bandwagon.

These are his handpicked advisors, why should we simply ignore them? Didnt he get elected promising hope and change? Why should we not hold him to the standards that he set for himself? No Lobbiests? Well this guy and that guy are too important. Transparency? Well this "stimulous" bill is too important to allow cameras in. Tax cheat as the chief of the IRS? Are you kidding me? This guy is so smart and important he cant even figure out how to use turbo tax!!!!!

I did a quick search, the closest thing I could find to a reliable source for Palin owing back taxes is the huffington post. Even if she did miss the taxes on per diem, owing taxes on per diem is not at all the same as owing taxes on earned income. Hell for my 11+ years in the military I have never been taxed on per diem. I know for a fact that the fed govt doesnt tax per diem so I would have to check Alaskan state tax laws. Does Alaska even have a state income tax?

More than 450,000 federal employees and retirees owe a total of $3 billion in back taxes, according to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Ranking Republican Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

Not exactly the white house that owes 3B in back taxes. it is federal employees as a whole.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2007/04...nators-say.htm
A great quote that someone should put up on Giethner's desk.

"Of all people, Federal workers should pay their Federal taxes on time," said Sen. Baucus in a press release. "If the government doesn't make its own employees follow the rules, it's hard to tell the rest of the American people that they should do better."

That came from a democrat that is still in office. I wonder if he still feels the same. I'll send him an email and ask. Anyone know where I can find out how he voted in the confimation of Giethner? Found it.

"Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, managed the confirmation process for Geithner and later gave Geithner strong support."

I guess Baucus doesnt feel so strongly about paying your taxes when it is a democat in office.

[stephen]

I only singled out Obama because he is the current president. I was equal in my disgust for Bush with the first bailouts.

i know...i'm just determined to get you to say JUST ONCE "obama is an alright guy!" lol

No, welfare was supposed to be temporary money to help those that were affected by the Great Depression. Over the last 70 years it turned into a lifetime paycheck for several million american and illegal parasites. Those same parasites have found ways to get more money too, they breed more parasites.

that's what i was referring to...when the country is hurting. it was created during the great depression...we're headed into that direction now. obama didn't extend those 70yrs of lifetime paychecks, he's doing EXACTLY what "welfare" was designed to do.

I would rather spend the money on the war than encourage an increase in parasites. The Japs spent the entire 90's doing bailouts and it never helped their economy. We tried it in the 1930's and it didnt work. We tried it last year and it didnt work. How many more times do we have to waste this money to just watch it go to waste?

Now you brought up iraq and I agree it is a valid arguement, but in 5 years we racked up about 5.5T in debt. In 30 days Obama has overseen an additional 2T. At this rate we will be 100T deeper in debt by the time he leaves office. On top of this, he has said that he will ask for more money and we still have yet to hear a single detail about HOW the second half of TARP is going to be spent. I believe Giethner said he would require the printing of another trillion dollars for this bailout.

i agree, we shouldn't allow an influx in parasites, but the bottom line is SOMETHING still has to be done. taking $15 -$25 less in taxes a week out of people's paychecks is a far cry from creating parasites. parasites are those who make millions of dollars a year off of this war...parasites are the people who make millions of dollars a year, and refuse to pay their taxes...parasites are the people who find ways of taking money out of the average individuals pocket, and stuff it in their own.

obama hasn't overseen $2T just yet...we're almost at $1T. one thing you have to remember, all of these problems didn't start the day he got into office. what do you think would have happened if bush had another year? would it have been ok for him to oversee $1T in the first 30days of 09? accusing the man of overseeing spending within his first 30days IS PART OF HIS JOB...A JOB THAT DOESN'T END. if he got into office and just didn't do a damn thing the first 30days, would you still complain??? i guess obama is just "damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't."

These are his handpicked advisors, why should we simply ignore them? Didnt he get elected promising hope and change? Why should we not hold him to the standards that he set for himself? No Lobbiests? Well this guy and that guy are too important. Transparency? Well this "stimulous" bill is too important to allow cameras in. Tax cheat as the chief of the IRS? Are you kidding me? This guy is so smart and important he cant even figure out how to use turbo tax!!!!!

it's not necessarily a matter of ignoring them, the fact remains that in the history of this country, there's ALWAYS going to be "fuck ups" in power. it's almost impossible to get any sort of "clean" official. that's something that we KNOW obama can't change. what he can change is the relationship the government has with the people. hell...having a tax cheat as the chief of the IRS may not be a bad idea lol. don't software companies hire hackers to PREVENT hacking? lol, i know that's stretching it...but hey, if dude ends up reducing our national tax gap by hunting for people like himself...then it might've been a wise decision afterall.

I did a quick search, the closest thing I could find to a reliable source for Palin owing back taxes is the huffington post. Even if she did miss the taxes on per diem, owing taxes on per diem is not at all the same as owing taxes on earned income. Hell for my 11+ years in the military I have never been taxed on per diem. I know for a fact that the fed govt doesnt tax per diem so I would have to check Alaskan state tax laws. Does Alaska even have a state income tax?

it's actually some sort of "new law" that they've created. the difference between your per diem and hers...SHE GETS PAID TO LIVE IN HER OWN HOUSE...A PARASITE. her ass needs to pay per diem tax.

Not exactly the white house that owes 3B in back taxes. it is federal employees as a whole.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2007/04...nators-say.htm
A great quote that someone should put up on Giethner's desk.

"Of all people, Federal workers should pay their Federal taxes on time," said Sen. Baucus in a press release. "If the government doesn't make its own employees follow the rules, it's hard to tell the rest of the American people that they should do better."

That came from a democrat that is still in office. I wonder if he still feels the same. I'll send him an email and ask. Anyone know where I can find out how he voted in the confimation of Giethner? Found it.

"Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, managed the confirmation process for Geithner and later gave Geithner strong support."

I guess Baucus doesnt feel so strongly about paying your taxes when it is a democat in office.

i stand corrected...i mis-quoted the article. there's still A LOT of capitol hill employees who owe money...regardless of party.

The Executive Office of the President, which includes the White House, has 58 employees who did not pay more than $319,000. More than 1,000 Capitol Hill workers are on the list.

i wish they listed who owes what...

[BanginJimmy]

i know...i'm just determined to get you to say JUST ONCE "obama is an alright guy!" lol

If I am to judge by his first 30 days in office I have to say that it isnt going to happen.

that's what i was referring to...when the country is hurting. it was created during the great depression...we're headed into that direction now. obama didn't extend those 70yrs of lifetime paychecks, he's doing EXACTLY what "welfare" was designed to do.

Part of the money in the "stimulous" is to goto states that add MORE people to their welfare rolls. handing out money for nothing is not stimulous and it encourages behavior that is detrimential to the growth of this country. While on the other hand, his tax hike plans discourage the activities of those that better this country.

IMO the govt needs to make a blanket statement change to welfare. Basicly say that March 1 is day 1. You have 3 years until your welfare benefits are cut off. Kids are counted on day 1 and you get no more money if you have more kids. The only exception to the 3 year rule is for those that are going to COLLEGE fulltime. Then it can be extended for up to 5 years. Grades and verification of enrollment have to be turned in within 1 week of the end of classes. You must retain a cumulative B average and a semester average no lower than a C. That is all. No loopholes, no lifetime parasites.

i agree, we shouldn't allow an influx in parasites, but the bottom line is SOMETHING still has to be done. taking $15 -$25 less in taxes a week out of people's paychecks is a far cry from creating parasites. parasites are those who make millions of dollars a year off of this war...parasites are the people who make millions of dollars a year, and refuse to pay their taxes...parasites are the people who find ways of taking money out of the average individuals pocket, and stuff it in their own.

The people that would only save another 100 a month only pay about 2.5% in income taxes a year anyways, but I could sure as hell use another $100 a month. The govt wouldnt even notice the difference. The people that benefit from tax cuts are the people that actually made something of themselves and they could see in upwards of $100 a week difference.

A parasite is someone that makes money on their own? I guess you consider me a parasite then because I am in the military. I have deployed once and I am volunteering to deploy again. People that make millions are not a parasites as they do not use govt services. How can you have a parasite that doesnt consume anything? Also, that millionaire is still paying more in taxes than 50% of the population, even if he is giving himself a 50% tax break. Now you are calling ANY business owner and the govt a parasite. Judging by your examples I am not sure you know what a parasite is.

obama hasn't overseen $2T just yet...we're almost at $1T. one thing you have to remember, all of these problems didn't start the day he got into office. what do you think would have happened if bush had another year? would it have been ok for him to oversee $1T in the first 30days of 09? accusing the man of overseeing spending within his first 30days IS PART OF HIS JOB...A JOB THAT DOESN'T END. if he got into office and just didn't do a damn thing the first 30days, would you still complain??? i guess obama is just "damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't."

The money that Giethner wants is about a trillion, then another ~1.1 trillion in the bailout. It is right there at 2 trillion already. No, the problems didnt start when he got in office, but look at what investors have said since he got in office. The DOW is now at its lowest point since 2002. The DOW dropped more than 2700 points since Nov. 4, with the biggest losses coming on the heels of every economic move this administration makes.

Would Bush be any different? No, he was a centrist. He had the spine to deal with the press about Iraq, but folded on the economy. I dont think this "stimulous" would have been passed though if Bush was in office.

Would I complain if he didnt do anything? Depends on if you mean doing nothing about the economy, then no I wouldnt have said a word. If you mean sit in the Oval Office and let Biden do the talking, I would be laughing my ass off. Every time he gets in front of a camera he says something stupid.

it's not necessarily a matter of ignoring them, the fact remains that in the history of this country, there's ALWAYS going to be "fuck ups" in power. it's almost impossible to get any sort of "clean" official. that's something that we KNOW obama can't change. what he can change is the relationship the government has with the people. hell...having a tax cheat as the chief of the IRS may not be a bad idea lol. don't software companies hire hackers to PREVENT hacking? lol, i know that's stretching it...but hey, if dude ends up reducing our national tax gap by hunting for people like himself...then it might've been a wise decision afterall.

So just because there is always going to be fuckups we should just let them stay there after they are outed? WE HAVE A TRESURY SECRETARY THAT CANNOT FIGURE OUT TURBO TAX. I'm not sure about you, but that doesnt make me giddy with confidence. How can Obama not change that? If he finds out his nomination for tresury sec. is a tax cheat then he needs to get rid of him and find someone else. It really is that simple. If you really hink he is going to go after his friends then you are kidding yourself.

it's actually some sort of "new law" that they've created. the difference between your per diem and hers...SHE GETS PAID TO LIVE IN HER OWN HOUSE...A PARASITE. her ass needs to pay per diem tax.

Got a reference for this? If this is a new law, then how could she have back taxes on a law that didnt exist yet?

i stand corrected...i mis-quoted the article. there's still A LOT of capitol hill employees who owe money...regardless of party.



i wish they listed who owes what...

How come now mention of Senator Max Baucus? I was sure you would have some great insight into his change of heart on tx cheats.

[stephen]

If I am to judge by his first 30 days in office I have to say that it isnt going to happen.

Part of the money in the "stimulous" is to goto states that add MORE people to their welfare rolls. handing out money for nothing is not stimulous and it encourages behavior that is detrimential to the growth of this country. While on the other hand, his tax hike plans discourage the activities of those that better this country.

IMO the govt needs to make a blanket statement change to welfare. Basicly say that March 1 is day 1. You have 3 years until your welfare benefits are cut off. Kids are counted on day 1 and you get no more money if you have more kids. The only exception to the 3 year rule is for those that are going to COLLEGE fulltime. Then it can be extended for up to 5 years. Grades and verification of enrollment have to be turned in within 1 week of the end of classes. You must retain a cumulative B average and a semester average no lower than a C. That is all. No loopholes, no lifetime parasites.

government can't necessarily make a blanket statement such as that. it's funny...in one of your statements you make a comment about me not knowing what a "parasite" is...it's pretty evident that you haven't totally grasped the definition of "welfare." welfare doesn't totally apply to low income individuals...there is a such thing as corporate welfare. let's take bush's bailout for example...how many of those CEO's and other executive individuals took the money that's supposed to SAVE THEIR JOBS, and stuffed ridiculous amounts in their pockets? those OTHER parasites that i spoke of...i was referring to the individuals on corporate welfare.

it's pretty ironic that people believe THE WEALTHY are the ones who need to be given back more of their money (because they're the "key" to the economy)...and yet, they're the only ones who receive "welfare checks" that reach the million dollar mark. what's the difference between the person who bankrupts a business, lays off thousands of hard working employees, and is able to walk away with a severence package that is 3x their $500k salary for the next 5 years (who ultimately sticks it in some off shore account)....and the person who sits on their ass & receives state funding totaling no more than 30k for 3 years? there is no difference...THEY'RE BOTH PARASITES. if government is going to put some sort of cap on welfare for the low income families...then there should be some sort of cap on corporate welfare ALSO.

The people that would only save another 100 a month only pay about 2.5% in income taxes a year anyways, but I could sure as hell use another $100 a month. The govt wouldnt even notice the difference. The people that benefit from tax cuts are the people that actually made something of themselves and they could see in upwards of $100 a week difference.

A parasite is someone that makes money on their own? I guess you consider me a parasite then because I am in the military. I have deployed once and I am volunteering to deploy again. People that make millions are not a parasites as they do not use govt services. How can you have a parasite that doesnt consume anything? Also, that millionaire is still paying more in taxes than 50% of the population, even if he is giving himself a 50% tax break. Now you are calling ANY business owner and the govt a parasite. Judging by your examples I am not sure you know what a parasite is.

making money off of YOUR JOB is not a parasite. the military is YOUR JOB...read a little closer into what i said. you're collecting money off of the war because you're providing a service. it's a shame that you're military, and you can sit here and defend the people who are making millions off of oil, and you risking your life. you said those people that make millions are not parasites because they don't use government services??? lol...wow...ok. let's see...how can i put this so that you'll get it...

YOU....THE MILITARY GUY....YOU'RE THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE THEY'RE USING. YOU'RE FIGHTING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY, GOING TO FIGHT TERRORIST, GOING TO RISK YOUR LIFE FOR THE HONOR OF YOUR COUNTRY....THEY (people like mccain's financial advisor, and all the other oil money loving bastards) ARE MAKING MONEY FROM THE OIL THAT FLOWS UNDER THAT BROWN SAND YOU STOOD ON. THE MORE "TERRORIST LIVES" THAT YOU (if your combat) TAKE, THE FATTER THEIR CHECKS GET.

understand that it agitates me to know that your life (eventhough i don't know you personally) & the rest of our service members lives, is represented by a few dollars in some greedy old bastards pocket.

The money that Giethner wants is about a trillion, then another ~1.1 trillion in the bailout. It is right there at 2 trillion already. No, the problems didnt start when he got in office, but look at what investors have said since he got in office. The DOW is now at its lowest point since 2002. The DOW dropped more than 2700 points since Nov. 4, with the biggest losses coming on the heels of every economic move this administration makes.

Would Bush be any different? No, he was a centrist. He had the spine to deal with the press about Iraq, but folded on the economy. I dont think this "stimulous" would have been passed though if Bush was in office.

Would I complain if he didnt do anything? Depends on if you mean doing nothing about the economy, then no I wouldnt have said a word. If you mean sit in the Oval Office and let Biden do the talking, I would be laughing my ass off. Every time he gets in front of a camera he says something stupid.

come on man...the dow was almost this low last fall. i promise you...the decisions his administration have made or proposed have little to do with the dow's current standings. the man didn't even get into office UNTIL january, so anything before that is bush's baby. un-employment shot WAY up in dec/jan....foreclusres are 50% higher in jan. 09 compared to jan. 08....i don't even know how many banks have shut down...A LOT of major companies had a horrible 4th quarter that they're coming out of...dude, do i really need to continue? so, you'd REALLY prefer him to not do anything? yeah..ok. i'm giving you the benefit of a doubt and i'm going to assume you're just saying that for the sake of the argument...i KNOW you're smarter than that.

So just because there is always going to be fuckups we should just let them stay there after they are outed? WE HAVE A TRESURY SECRETARY THAT CANNOT FIGURE OUT TURBO TAX. I'm not sure about you, but that doesnt make me giddy with confidence. How can Obama not change that? If he finds out his nomination for tresury sec. is a tax cheat then he needs to get rid of him and find someone else. It really is that simple. If you really hink he is going to go after his friends then you are kidding yourself.

dude...the treasury secretary cheating on his taxes is the least of our problems. let's think about this...we've got a treasury secretary who TRIED to cheat on his taxes and not pay $35k....BUT we've got the house speaker and 6 other house DEMS who take a fucking $20k per hour, 20 hr plane trip to italy...for this bitch to get a copy of her grandparents' birth certificates, and go to fucking museums, art galleries, and dinners on the tax payers dime. hmmm...let's compare him to something you should be more familiar with. saxby chambliss...he dodged going to fight in a war 6 times (the last excuse was he had an "old football injury"), but he was quick to vote "AYE" to send troops to iraq/afghanistan...he voted against a healthcare bill for low income families, while regular tax payers are paying for him to have the finest, FREE healthcare...guess who hand picked him?

i'm just saying man...we can't just single out obama's picks...THEY ALL HAVE DIRT. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO GET RID OF THEM ALL. you already know this too...you read that other thread about the 500 (something like that) vs 300M.

Got a reference for this? If this is a new law, then how could she have back taxes on a law that didnt exist yet?

here's a source you'll "AGREE" with: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-diem-income/

JUNEAU, Alaska -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will have to pay back taxes on nearly $18,000 in expenses she charged the state for living in her home instead of the state capital, officials said Wednesday.

A review of state policy and Internal Revenue Service tax laws determined the per diems should be treated as income, Department of Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer said.

if you read the entire article, they consistently refer to it as a "new" rule. it probably is deemed new because people are finally starting to pay attention to it.

How come now mention of Senator Max Baucus? I was sure you would have some great insight into his change of heart on tx cheats.

you assumed that, because you figure i stand behind any democrat i suppose. i just want obama do help get us out of this mess...and he has to be able to do it with the team he's got (with the losers BOTH him and the american people picked). if the man was going to make ALL of the changes you and i suggest, he'd probably spend all 4 years trying to find "perfect" government employees.

[BanginJimmy]

government can't necessarily make a blanket statement such as that. it's funny...in one of your statements you make a comment about me not knowing what a "parasite" is...it's pretty evident that you haven't totally grasped the definition of "welfare." welfare doesn't totally apply to low income individuals...there is a such thing as corporate welfare. let's take bush's bailout for example...how many of those CEO's and other executive individuals took the money that's supposed to SAVE THEIR JOBS, and stuffed ridiculous amounts in their pockets? those OTHER parasites that i spoke of...i was referring to the individuals on corporate welfare.

it's pretty ironic that people believe THE WEALTHY are the ones who need to be given back more of their money (because they're the "key" to the economy)...and yet, they're the only ones who receive "welfare checks" that reach the million dollar mark. what's the difference between the person who bankrupts a business, lays off thousands of hard working employees, and is able to walk away with a severence package that is 3x their $500k salary for the next 5 years (who ultimately sticks it in some off shore account)....and the person who sits on their ass & receives state funding totaling no more than 30k for 3 years? there is no difference...THEY'RE BOTH PARASITES. if government is going to put some sort of cap on welfare for the low income families...then there should be some sort of cap on corporate welfare ALSO.

I will write this off as a philosophical difference. We could fight it over for years and never change anyones mind.

making money off of YOUR JOB is not a parasite. the military is YOUR JOB...read a little closer into what i said. you're collecting money off of the war because you're providing a service. it's a shame that you're military, and you can sit here and defend the people who are making millions off of oil, and you risking your life. you said those people that make millions are not parasites because they don't use government services??? lol...wow...ok. let's see...how can i put this so that you'll get it...

YOU....THE MILITARY GUY....YOU'RE THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE THEY'RE USING. YOU'RE FIGHTING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY, GOING TO FIGHT TERRORIST, GOING TO RISK YOUR LIFE FOR THE HONOR OF YOUR COUNTRY....THEY (people like mccain's financial advisor, and all the other oil money loving bastards) ARE MAKING MONEY FROM THE OIL THAT FLOWS UNDER THAT BROWN SAND YOU STOOD ON. THE MORE "TERRORIST LIVES" THAT YOU (if your combat) TAKE, THE FATTER THEIR CHECKS GET.

understand that it agitates me to know that your life (eventhough i don't know you personally) & the rest of our service members lives, is represented by a few dollars in some greedy old bastards pocket.

This old, tired excuse isnt even worth talking about. Iraq has nothing to do with cheaper oil. I wont agrue that oil may have played in a role, but in a sense that securing those fields would keep the oil flowing for everyone, and not just to those that were Iraq's friends.

come on man...the dow was almost this low last fall. i promise you...the decisions his administration have made or proposed have little to do with the dow's current standings. the man didn't even get into office UNTIL january, so anything before that is bush's baby. un-employment shot WAY up in dec/jan....foreclusres are 50% higher in jan. 09 compared to jan. 08....i don't even know how many banks have shut down...A LOT of major companies had a horrible 4th quarter that they're coming out of...dude, do i really need to continue? so, you'd REALLY prefer him to not do anything? yeah..ok. i'm giving you the benefit of a doubt and i'm going to assume you're just saying that for the sake of the argument...i KNOW you're smarter than that.

Hannity did it and I looked over it. Every time Obama hit a particular milestone on his way to the White House the dow dropped. It started with his wins in the primaries, then when he finally pulled away from McCain in mid October. After he got elected it dropped, then dropped again with the TARP bill passing. It dropped with Giethner's speech on TARP 2, it dropped again with his speech on bailing out people who were too irresponsible to buy a house they could afford.

dude...the treasury secretary cheating on his taxes is the least of our problems. let's think about this...we've got a treasury secretary who TRIED to cheat on his taxes and not pay $35k....BUT we've got the house speaker and 6 other house DEMS who take a fucking $20k per hour, 20 hr plane trip to italy...for this bitch to get a copy of her grandparents' birth certificates, and go to fucking museums, art galleries, and dinners on the tax payers dime. hmmm...let's compare him to something you should be more familiar with. saxby chambliss...he dodged going to fight in a war 6 times (the last excuse was he had an "old football injury"), but he was quick to vote "AYE" to send troops to iraq/afghanistan...he voted against a healthcare bill for low income families, while regular tax payers are paying for him to have the finest, FREE healthcare...guess who hand picked him?

This country is based on preception and confidence. Obama has gone back on his campaign promises on several key issues already. How much confidence does that give you in his willingness to make good on others? Even this new bailout left exactly $0 earmarked for Katrina cleanup. As far as dodging Vietnam, there isnt a single democrat that can bring that arguement up. Your hero Bill Clinton put his tail between his legs and ran to Canada. Dont bring up voting record either unless you have the complete bill. EVERY politician, regardless of party, has voted down an otherwise good bill because of pork, or some other stipulation in it.

i'm just saying man...we can't just single out obama's picks...THEY ALL HAVE DIRT. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO GET RID OF THEM ALL. you already know this too...you read that other thread about the 500 (something like that) vs 300M.

So is Giethner's dirt an honest mistake or was it a purposeful attempt to defraud the govt? If it was an honest mistake he is not qualified to do the job he has. If it was on purpose, he is not qualified for the job he has.

here's a source you'll "AGREE" with: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...s-diem-income/



if you read the entire article, they consistently refer to it as a "new" rule. it probably is deemed new because people are finally starting to pay attention to it.

Maybe it was an honest mistake consiering it was a new rule. I dont know, I wasnt there, but I stand behind the arguement that the chances are FAR greater that she made a mistake and didnt count per diem as income than Giethner simply made a mistake when he didnt count earned income.

you assumed that, because you figure i stand behind any democrat i suppose. i just want obama do help get us out of this mess...and he has to be able to do it with the team he's got (with the losers BOTH him and the american people picked). if the man was going to make ALL of the changes you and i suggest, he'd probably spend all 4 years trying to find "perfect" government employees.

I didnt assume anything. I simply made a comment and was looking for a response.

[stephen]

I will write this off as a philosophical difference. We could fight it over for years and never change anyones mind.

This old, tired excuse isnt even worth talking about. Iraq has nothing to do with cheaper oil. I wont agrue that oil may have played in a role, but in a sense that securing those fields would keep the oil flowing for everyone, and not just to those that were Iraq's friends.

i never said it'd result in cheaper oil. hell, i honestly feel like it'll result in more expensive oil. you're absolutely right, it's beneficial to keep the oil flowing for everyone...but at what cost? hell, with the amount of money being spent we could've put that into "green energy" development and just say screw oil.

Hannity did it and I looked over it. Every time Obama hit a particular milestone on his way to the White House the dow dropped. It started with his wins in the primaries, then when he finally pulled away from McCain in mid October. After he got elected it dropped, then dropped again with the TARP bill passing. It dropped with Giethner's speech on TARP 2, it dropped again with his speech on bailing out people who were too irresponsible to buy a house they could afford.

hannity did it.....hannity....sean......hannity....ok. how good do you think the DOW would be doing if mccain made it into office??? the DOW has hit a 6yr low....i.e. 6yrs ago (while bush held the seat) it was at this low point. one could easily say "well, 6yrs ago the stock market fell everytime bush opened his mouth" while we all know that there were BIGGER more significant factors....just like there are today. so...if i were to follow you & mr. hannity's logic, 4th quarter losses had nothing to do with the DOW...the first auto bailout had nothing to do with the DOW...the 2nd request for an auto bailout has nothing to do with the DOW...the high ass unemployment rate has nothing to do with the DOW....the forclosure market has nothing to do with the DOW...the increase in consumer cost has nothing to do with the DOW....hmmm...i guess you two are right...it has nothing to do with any of that, it's all a result of obama winning the election.

This country is based on preception and confidence. Obama has gone back on his campaign promises on several key issues already. How much confidence does that give you in his willingness to make good on others? Even this new bailout left exactly $0 earmarked for Katrina cleanup. As far as dodging Vietnam, there isnt a single democrat that can bring that arguement up. Your hero Bill Clinton put his tail between his legs and ran to Canada. Dont bring up voting record either unless you have the complete bill. EVERY politician, regardless of party, has voted down an otherwise good bill because of pork, or some other stipulation in it.

ummm....let's not even talk about what's in the bailout for lousiana. the lousiana governor REFUSES to take any of the stimulus money. obama still refuses to let those people down though: http://www.nola38.com/pages/abc26new...45&feedID=1154

President Barack Obama has extended the federal office of Gulf Coast rebuilding through September. He also has asked his heads of Homeland Security and Housing and Urban Development to visit the region and New Orleans in early March.

as far as clinton dodging vietnam...well hell, he also opposed the war in iraq...UNLIKE your man chambliss. the difference between the two:
clinton = dislikes unnecessary war
chambliss = coward...refuses to fight, but will send you to fight

So is Giethner's dirt an honest mistake or was it a purposeful attempt to defraud the govt? If it was an honest mistake he is not qualified to do the job he has. If it was on purpose, he is not qualified for the job he has.

Maybe it was an honest mistake consiering it was a new rule. I dont know, I wasnt there, but I stand behind the arguement that the chances are FAR greater that she made a mistake and didnt count per diem as income than Giethner simply made a mistake when he didnt count earned income.

I didnt assume anything. I simply made a comment and was looking for a response.

don't get me wrong...i completely understand your position on geithner, and i agree to an extent. i just view his dirt as minor compared to the rest of our elected officials. i don't think i've ever met a single person who hasn't cheated on their taxes. you obviously feel the same way about palin. her "honest mistake" is ok...but not for giethner. they both have important jobs which include overseeing large amounts of tax payer money.

regardless...i still don't think you understand my point. by your way of thinking, NO ONE IS FIT FOR THE JOB. they're all dirty (which is true), but you have to pick the lesser of two evils sometimes. that's all i'm saying.