Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-04-09 01:53 AM
Original message |
I have a few closing thoughts about Daschle |
|
I hope you don't mind me posting here, but it seems to be the logical place for post mortems. If I am wrong, let me know.
Daschles's #1 mistake was not being clear about his tax problems and actually hiding them until after his nomination. IF the Obama team had known that they had 3 tax flawed candidates, they might have played the game differently.
They might have altered the batting line-up and had the bigger problem (Daschel) go first. Once they got him through, it would have been difficult to let smaller sums like Geithner and Kellifer get derailed. In for a penny, in for a pound, as they say. I think they would have kept Geithner cos they really wanted him but would have disqualified Kellifer not on her amount but on her putative value and the fact that 3 tax cases was one too many.
So, I think Daschle was ultimately sunk by his own dirty game of accepting a nomination when he knew of his issues while the Obama team didn't. An earlier reveal would have produced a different strategy and he would be HHS Secretary today.
|
Why Syzygy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-04-09 01:57 AM
Response to Original message |
|
another case of Wall Street first. Public health last. By that I mean, the 'players' making that happen, not Obama. You might be right. But, would we be glad about that?
|
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-04-09 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. No. I wouldn't have been. It played the only way it could with the cards on the table. nt.- |
dkf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-04-09 02:07 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Did they know all three had tax problems? |
countmyvote4real
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Feb-04-09 02:24 AM
Response to Original message |
4. It's not about owing taxes on the car service. That's just stupid. |
|
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 02:26 AM by countmyvote4real
The company that Daschle worked for provided the car and driver. It's actually their tax DEDUCTION as a business expense unless they directly employed the driver rather than a third party car service. At least that's how I understand it and pay my taxes.
The problem with Daschle was his "ties" to health care companies and the couple million dollars of earned income that could be presumed to be influence. That just doesn't jive with Obama's change in lobbyist house-cleaning policies.
At least, that's how my accountants advise me as I prepare my taxes each year.
|
mackerel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-08-09 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Why vet at all if you're going to miss these problems. |
|
Yeah I know taxes are for us little people.
Seriously Daschel's biggest problem was his apology. He really didn't sound sincere and that's when the calls from constituents started coming in.
|
thesquanderer
(647 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-09-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
re: "The company that Daschle worked for provided the car and driver. It's actually their tax DEDUCTION as a business expense"
I'm not sure what you're saying here, but whether something is a company's tax deduction or an employee's taxable income are two completely different issues. Something can be either, or both.
A paycheck issued by a company is both a deduction (business expense) and *also* taxable income for the recipient.
A car given by a company to an employee is a deduction (business expense) -- and, as I understand it, *also* taxable as income for the recipient, though only to the extent that the car is used for personal use.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun Oct 12th 2025, 09:20 AM
Response to Original message |