Nathan Moore's Thoughts
Taxing Arrogance
Barack Obama’s supporters voted for change. I just don’t think the change they got was the change they had in mind.
In another area of stark contrast with the predecessor administration, we are now witnessing one of the sloppiest cabinet filling efforts in recent memory. One has to go all the way back to Bill Clinton’s tax-evading cadre of attorney general nominees to get remotely close, and that was a sublimely professional effort compared to what we are seeing out of the nubile Obama administration.
Count ‘em. We are now up to four in the illustrious category of nominees to Obama’s cabinet who have had tax problems. Labor secretary nominee Hilda Solis is now on ice
A Senate committee today abruptly canceled a session to consider President Obama’s nomination of Rep. Hilda Solis to be labor secretary in the wake of a report saying that her husband yesterday paid about $6,400 to settle tax liens against his business — liens that had been outstanding for as long as 16 years.
The problem here, at least in my view, is not so much that Solis’ husband had some rather antique tax liens hanging around, but that the Obama administration’s vetting process has revealed itself to be decidedly incompetent. Or, more accurately, arrogant, which really is just a subform of incompetence.
Tom Daschle chauffeured himself out of the running for Health and Human Services, but that was only after the new Treasury secretary Timothy Geither, who also owed back taxes, had been confirmed. Nancy Killefer, the nominee for Chief Compliance Officer (whatever that is), also withdrew her nomination after it was revealed that she had not paid District of Columbia payroll taxes.
So what’s the deal? Why are so many of Obama’s nominees having tax issues? And why was Barack Obama initially ignoring questions about why so many of his nominees have a hobby of tax evasion?
In an interview with Brian Williams, Obama did address the latter question, but in a most troubling fashion
President Barack Obama acknowledged Tuesday that he had “made a mistake” in trying to exempt some candidates for positions in his administration from strict ethics standards and accepted the withdrawal of two top nominees, including former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, the first major setback of his young presidency.
It is clear the Obama administration knew about the tax issues of Obama’s nominees, but just didn’t care. The back taxes owed by Daschle came to light on Friday, but the administration stood silent, content to let the process continue, just as it did with Geither. It was Daschle himself who chose to withdraw his nomination from consideration. In short, the Obama administration has willfully and systematically dismissed back tax issues for its nominees as inconsequential. They not only chose nominees with known tax debts, but then didn’t show an ounce of leadership when those tax problems became public.
The message is clear, no matter how earnestly the president employs Newspeak rhetoric in a vain attempt to muddle it – there are two sets of rules, one for us, and one for them. If they truly believed there was one set of rules, the administration would have taken it upon itself to weed out the tax-encumbered nominees from the process, but they didn’t – and that speaks volumes.
Cross posted at News Platoon, Tennessee’s newest and best source for news and conservative commentary. You can subscribe to the MooreThoughts.com feed here.
Related Posts
You Have Delegated…(Un?)wisely?

















February 5th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Barack Obama’s supporters voted for change. I just don’t think the change they got was the change they had in mind.
Thanks for the concern. I know you’ve been worried for quite some time about our emotional status, what with his lack of adopting Conservative Republican ideology as a “change” from the liberal ways of George W. Bush.
Really, I appreciate you looking out for us.
February 5th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
[...] thoughts from Nathan Moore: “The problem here, at least in my view, is not so much that Solis’ husband had some rather [...]
February 5th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
No wonder the Democrats love taxes. They don’t pay ‘em.
February 5th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Maybe the vetting is fine but this is the best of the bunch. Now that’s a comforting thought!
February 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Hey, look at the bright side (or is it?): none of them have so far been found to have (gasp!) “unregistered firearms”!!
February 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Didn’t Obama have a long and rather invasive application form for applicants to White House jobs?
Why, yes, he did!
White House job application leaves no stone unturned
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/13/transition.questionnaire/index.html
It doesn’t seem that Obama’s team asked enough questions about taxes, but they did ask “whether anyone in the applicant’s family owns a gun.”
February 5th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Thanks to Doc75 for the link, but question 37 on the questionaire does ask about any tax liens for the candidate or her spouse.
I don’t see how Solis can be penalized for the relatively minor offense of her spouse, especially since we have no evidence she was aware of the lien. Even if she were aware of his deficiency, her returns were in order.
Even Caeser’s wife, as pure as she was, wouldn’t meet a standard that would preclude Solis from the cabinet based on her husband’s lien. (Caeser? He would have problems.)
February 5th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
REPUBLICANS: Paying our taxes so the Obama cabinet doesn’t have to.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:23 am
I was trying to buy some flags and ended up here. Nathan, where are the flags! Getting linked by the Instapundit, you are big time now! When will you have time practice law with your new found fame and fortune?
By the way, who choked more–Iggles or Titans?
February 6th, 2009 at 2:08 am
[...] http://moorethoughts.com/2009/02/05/taxing-arrogance Share and Enjoy: [...]
February 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
[...] MooreThoughts » Taxing Arrogance [...]
February 7th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Oh sure… to get appointees this dirty you have to go “back”… “way back”… “all the way back”… to the previous (D)emocrat administration.