Thursday, January 22, 2009

Just Say No To Timothy Geithner

Timothy Geithner is Barack Obama’s nominee for Treasury Secretary.  As Treasury Secretary, Geithner would be in charge of the IRS.

At the Senate confirmation hearings, it was revealed through documentary evidence that Geithner had not paid $43,000 in self-employment taxes.  Geithner settled his outstanding taxes only after he had been nominated to the Treasury post.  What did Geithner say when this was pointed out?  "These were careless mistakes.  They were avoidable mistakes.  But they were unintentional.  I should have been more careful."  

Presto!  He's off the hook.

Even key Republicans have predicted that Geithner, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, is unlikely to encounter serious obstacles on his path to the Treasury Department!  Are they joking? They're going to confirm as Treasury Secretary a man who can't pay his own taxes?  

My opinion: You Republican senators who vote to confirm Geithner should pack up and go back homewe don't need you, you're worthless. 


Obama's Treasury secretary owed taxes, but it's OK

Geithner's apology makes it worse.

Gender-Selection Abortions

Death to Free Speech in the Netherlands


Anonymous said...

Absolutely. No Republican should confirm this guy. To state the obvious, if the party affiliations were reversed we'd never hear the end of it. But with Obama's nominees they won't get the scrutiny.

Obama is very efficient, I'll grant him that. His administration had ethical issues before they took office.

-suitepotato- said...

I'm not surprised about Wilders. He's a bit round the bend to push things as far as he has and let's not be like the lefties who like to pretend to Europe being more human rights friendly than us. They do not have a long history of free speech and other rights and have long been all too willing to restrict them on flimsy excuses.

Were it here, he could march and speak at Washington like the commies and neonazis do, but it ain't.

Fact is Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all have a fair share of violence in their holy writings. The difference is no on in the last two is advocating strict adherence to those things or even somewhat taking them seriously. Islam is dominated by people focusing on hate and violence currently. It need not always be.

They need to learn to mature and swallow their cognitive dissonance.

DaBlade said...

The republicans will act like whipped little puppies hoping to please their master I'm afraid. Go along to get along. They don't want to be viewed as obstructionists unwilling to compromise with the new guy. "Compromise" is defined by the dems as agreeing with them without exception.

robert verdi said...

how is this any different then Rangel who gets more power as he misbehaves?

Pasadena Closet Conservative said...

The stink is on him big-time. Obama should cut him loose and start over.

RightKlik said...

4S: If Republicans are serious about getting out of the wilderness, they need to show it.

SP: Islam has intimidated the rest of the Netherlands into submission.

DaBlade: Obama's idea of bipartisanship is to vote with Democrats or vote "present"

RV: It's ridiculous.

PCC: Of course Obama won't, but at least the Republicans could show a little fortitude.