You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Tom Daschle’ tag.
The Big City Press (N. Y. Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times, Atlantic Monthly, etc.) has been falling all over itself portraying the first weeks of the Trump Administration as Chaos or Dysfunction. They can find nothing being done by the Trump Administration that measures up to the wonderful job done by Mr. Obama and his Administration in its early weeks in office.
In today’s Washington Post, E.J. Dionne, Jr. has an Op-Ed that states that Trump is unfit to lead. His opening shot is that the Michael Flynn resignation was not just a terrible choice but showed a total lack of vetting. How could Mr. Trump appoint someone who had lied to his Vice President about National Security matters? He implied that Mr. Trump was, at best, a very poor decision maker and a bad judge of character. Dionne goes on to say that Attorney General Jeff Sessions should immediately recuse himself from all investigations to do with Russia, just because he was chosen by Mr. Trump who Dionne says is in bed with Russia.
It would be interesting to read Mr. Dionne’s op-ed about Mr. Obama’s choice for National Intelligence Council Chair in 2009, Charles Freeman. You will remember Mr. Freeman who had worked for (was on it’s Board) the Chinese Government-owned Chinese National Offshore Oil Company and who had lobbied extensively for Saudi-Arabia. Oh, wait. Dionne never wrote such an op-ed. It was apparently fine for an Obama appointee to be in bed with the Chinese Communists and the Saudis.
It would be similarly interesting to see Mr. Dionne’s op-ed asking Loretta Lynch, Mr. Obama’s Attorney General, to recuse herself from the investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s pay-to-play scheme and email scandal while Clinton was Secretary of State. You will remember that Lynch and Bill Clinton had a timely discussion just prior to Lynch making a decision that was very beneficial to Mrs. Clinton. Again, Mr. Dionne saw no evil there, either.
What about Tom Daschle? He was the Obama appointee for Health and Human Services who somehow neglected to pay more than $140,000 of taxes.
Or, Timothy Geithner who was actually confirmed as Secretary of the Treasury and served in the position for 4 years? Geithner somehow forgot to pay his Social Security Taxes for years (inspite of being advised to do so and being given extra compensation for that purpose). Geithner was also in the thick of the banking crisis that set up the 2008 recession and profited greatly from the rules he backed. Dionne did comment about that: “All of the administration’s critics are being emboldened by its hesitancy in dealing with the banking question and its apparent fear of temporary bank nationalization. On this issue, the president genuinely is trying to steer a moderate course.” Moderate? To appoint a tax cheat and one of the bankers at the heart of the crisis? Imagine, if you can, Dionne saying about Mr. Trump, “…the president genuinely is trying to steer a moderate course.”
Or, Bill Richardson who was appointed to run Commerce. He was not nicknamed “Dollar” Bill for nothing. He had a history of accepting outsized political donations from people who sought favors (mostly State contracts) in return. He finally withdrew, or was asked to withdraw, after over a month as the appointee.
Dionne did not, to my knowledge, decry any of these gaffs. He did not claim Mr. Obama was “unfit”. In fact, Dionne wrote in his recent book, We are the Change We seek: “Despite his fervent campaign promise to ease the country’s political divisions, he discovered that he faced a Republican opposition intent on taking back power by stymieing his program, challenging his mandate to govern, (emphasis mine) and leaving his dreams of harmony stillborn.”
Why such a different view? Perspective. Mr. Dionne and much of the Big City Press backed Mrs. Clinton. They were out of touch with the heart of the country and they are sore losers. They will continue to cherry pick the news and harp on the evils of Donald Trump, much as they cherry picked the news and wrote glowing reports of Mr. Obama and his actions.
The facts show that every administration has some missteps and some successes as they get started. Mr. Dionne’s conclusion that Mr. Trump is “Unfit to Serve” is provably biased and, at best, premature. Mr. Dionne and the Left learned nothing from the Right’s “Birther Movement” and show their inability to be unbiased observers and reporters with every stroke of their pens. They should take a deep breath and, for once, try to be reporters of the truth, not just hacks using their pulpit to push their political views.
Yesterday, I received an email from a discussion group with whom I often converse. The day’s discussion was about a youtube type movie that discussed more new ‘facts’ about the Obama eligibility issue. One participant, a College Professor and quite (politically) Liberal woman from Portland, responded to the conversation without any real facts, but based on her beliefs, that Mr. Obama was obviously a natural born citizen and qualified to be President. In fact she stated that he was doing a great job and that she was proud that she would be voting for Mr. Obama this November.
I politely disagreed with her assessment of the job he is doing and stated that he may be qualified to be President based on his birth and citizenship, but, as to his skills, experience, and ethics, he might just be the least qualified person ever to hold the office.
Then, this morning, I read the Wall Street Journal and wished that our Liberal friend would some day read something other than the New York Times. If she did, she might have great difficulty answering the questions posed in Steven Moore’s opinion piece today which is copied in its entirety below:
By STEPHEN MOORE, The Wall Street Journal, February 7, 2012
President Obama has frequently justified his policies—and judged their outcomes—in terms of equity, justice and fairness. That raises an obvious question: How does our existing system—and his own policy record—stack up according to those criteria?
Is it fair that the richest 1% of Americans pay nearly 40% of all federal income taxes, and the richest 10% pay two-thirds of the tax?
Is it fair that the richest 10% of Americans shoulder a higher share of their country’s income-tax burden than do the richest 10% in every other industrialized nation, including socialist Sweden?
Is it fair that American corporations pay the highest statutory corporate tax rate of all other industrialized nations but Japan, which cuts its rate on April 1?
Is it fair that President Obama sends his two daughters to elite private schools that are safer, better-run, and produce higher test scores than public schools in Washington, D.C.—but millions of other families across America are denied that free choice and forced to send their kids to rotten schools?
Is it fair that Americans who build a family business, hire workers, reinvest and save their money—paying a lifetime of federal, state and local taxes often climbing into the millions of dollars—must then pay an additional estate tax of 35% (and as much as 55% when the law changes next year) when they die, rather than passing that money onto their loved ones?
Associated Press Photo
Is it fair that Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, former Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel and other leading Democrats who preach tax fairness underpaid their own taxes?
Is it fair that after the first three years of Obamanomics, the poor are poorer, the poverty rate is rising, the middle class is losing income, and some 5.5 million fewer Americans have jobs today than in 2007?
Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?
Is it fair that the three counties with America’s highest median family income just happen to be located in the Washington, D.C., metro area?
Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry—which provides at least 10 times as much energy—pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is “subsidized”?
Is it fair that those who work full-time jobs (and sometimes more) to make ends meet have to pay taxes to support up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits for those who don’t work?
Is it fair that those who took out responsible mortgages and pay them each month have to see their tax dollars used to subsidize those who acted recklessly, greedily and sometimes deceitfully in taking out mortgages they now can’t afford to repay?
Is it fair that thousands of workers won’t have jobs because the president sided with environmentalists and blocked the shovel-ready Keystone XL oil pipeline?
Is it fair that some of Mr. Obama’s largest campaign contributors received federal loan guarantees on their investments in renewable energy projects that went bust?
Is it fair that federal employees receive benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those of private-sector workers whose taxes pay their salaries, according to the Congressional Budget Office?
Is it fair that soon almost half the federal budget will take income from young working people and redistribute it to old non-working people, even though those over age 65 are already among the wealthiest Americans?
Is it fair that in 27 states workers can be compelled to join a union in order to keep their jobs?
Is it fair that nearly four out of 10 American households now pay no federal income tax at all—a number that has risen every year under Mr. Obama?
Is it fair that Boeing, a private company, was threatened by a federal agency when it sought to add jobs in a right-to-work state rather than in a forced-union state?
Is it fair that our kids and grandkids and great-grandkids—who never voted for Mr. Obama—will have to pay off the $5 trillion of debt accumulated over the past four years, without any benefits to them?