Let's make it #4 for the Dems!!!... Solis Senate Session Postponed

[sacase]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/02/05/solis_senate_session_canceled.html?hpid=topnews

Solis Senate Session Postponed in Wake of Husband's Tax Lien Revelations

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 report, by USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-05-solis-husband-taxes_N.htm), came just before the Senate's Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee was slated to meet to consider Solis's nomination, which had been delayed by questions over her role on the board of the pro-labor organization American Rights at Work. A source said that committee members did not learn about the tax issue until today.

"Today's executive session was postponed to allow members additional time to review the documentation submitted in support of Representative Solis's nomination to serve in the important position of Labor Secretary," read a joint statement issued by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the panel's chairman, and Mike Enzi (Wyoming), the committee's ranking Republican. "There are no holds on her nomination and members on both sides of the aisle remain committed to giving her nomination the fair and thorough consideration that she deserves. We will continue to work together to move this nomination forward as soon as possible."

No new date has been set for the hearing. The disclosure about Solis's husband comes after tax problems caused trouble for three of Obama's top appointees, leading two of them -- HHS-nominee Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer, who was to be chief performance officer -- to withdraw.

[bbgun]

Most ethical administration evah! There's a reason Dems don't mind raising taxes: they never pay 'em.

[trickblue]

This is getting comical now...

[JBond]

Obama's apology over nominating tax cheats to cabinet level positions is laughable. The only thing he is sorry about is getting caught backing losers who can not pay their patriotic share.

If he were truly sorry Geithner the tax cheat would not be the head of the IRS.

Obama is full of crap.

Change we can believe in!

[TheCount]

I'm not sure if you guys can read or not, but the issue is with her husband's business, not her. Not to mention he paid them in the wake of people throwing hissy fits about tax issues right now.

You'd think they all had criminal records.

[sacase]

I'm not sure if you guys can read or not, but the issue is with her husband's business, not her. Not to mention he paid them in the wake of people throwing hissy fits about tax issues right now.

You'd think they all had criminal records.

Yes it was her husband. but they were outstanding for 16 YEARS!!!! Only paid because of the nomination. Sorry, but she knew about them.

http://extremeskins.com/images/smilies/dance.gif


http://extremeskins.com/images/smilies/muching_out.gif

[zrinkill]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v210/zrinkill/obama.jpg

[ABQCOWBOY]

Actually, that's 5. Richardson never got off the ground but at least he was smart enough to know that he would never pass the scrutiny test and pulled out.

I don't even know how you defend this. This really is rediculous. If the President says he didn't know, then that makes you wonder about what else he didn't know. If the President says he knew, then he's dishonest. I don't know, I guess it all slides of the Duck's back but at some point, you would think that it would catch up to the President.

[TheCount]

Actually, that's 5. Richardson never got off the ground but at least he was smart enough to know that he would never pass the scrutiny test and pulled out.

I don't even know how you defend this. This really is rediculous. If the President says he didn't know, then that makes you wonder about what else he didn't know. If the President says he knew, then he's dishonest. I don't know, I guess it all slides of the Duck's back but at some point, you would think that it would catch up to the President.

I'm not defending anything, it's all there in black and white.

They obviously nee to do a better job investigating the finances of nominees, but the finance issue isn't that of the nominee, it's of her spouse.

I personally wouldn't let $6,500 stop me from hiring someone I felt to be qualified for a job.

[trickblue]

I'm not defending anything, it's all there in black and white.

They obviously nee to do a better job investigating the finances of nominees, but the finance issue isn't that of the nominee, it's of her spouse.

I personally wouldn't let $6,500 stop me from hiring someone I felt to be qualified for a job.

Sins of the father...

It doesn't matter whether or not it's right, but people are associated with those that are close to them. She obviously knew as well.

It just doesn't come across well for Obama. Most everyone in high level positions he's appointed carry a good amount of baggage into their tenure...

[WoodysGirl]

This is getting comical now...
Getting?

[iceberg]

Solis Senate Session Postponed in Wake of Husband's Tax Lien Revelations

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/02/05/PH2009020502226.jpg
Rep. Hilda Solis testifies at a Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing on her nomination to be secretary of labor in early January. (Mannie Garcia/Bloomberg News)

Updated 3:30 p.m.
By Michael A. Fletcher
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 -- including liens that had been outstanding for as long as 16 years.

The report, by USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-05-solis-husband-taxes_N.htm), came just before the Senate's Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee was slated to meet to consider Solis's nomination, which had been delayed by questions over her role on the board of the pro-labor organization American Rights at Work. A source said that committee members did not learn about the tax issue until today.

"Today's executive session was postponed to allow members additional time to review the documentation submitted in support of Representative Solis's nomination to serve in the important position of Labor Secretary," read a joint statement issued by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the panel's chairman, and Mike Enzi (Wyoming), the committee's ranking Republican. "There are no holds on her nomination and members on both sides of the aisle remain committed to giving her nomination the fair and thorough consideration that she deserves. We will continue to work together to move this nomination forward as soon as possible."

No new date has been set for the hearing. The disclosure about Solis's husband comes after tax problems caused trouble for three of Obama's top appointees, leading two of them -- HHS-nominee Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer, who was to be chief performance officer -- to withdraw.

Asked about the USA Today report at the White House daily briefing, press secretary Robert Gibbs emphasized that the nominee's tax returns are in order.

"Well, I read the story in USA Today, and it quotes somebody that works here, so obviously we've -- we know about this story. I'll say this. We reviewed her tax returns, and her tax returns are in order," said Gibbs.

"The story denotes that her husband had some issues with paying a business tax, and obviously that tax is -- should be paid. He's -- she's not a partner in that business, Gibbs continued. "So we're not going to penalize her for her husband's business mistakes. Obviously, her husband, I think, has and should pay any taxes that he owes. "

----------
on one hand, it's only $6400 and not the 6 digits others have had problems with. on the other hand, he only paid it up yesterday.

you'd think obama would go through the tax history of any future apointee with a fine tooth comb by now and avoid these hits.

what is it now, 4?

sorry for the new thread - thanks for merging it!

[DIAF]

hahahaha. This can't be happening, lol.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I'm not defending anything, it's all there in black and white.

They obviously nee to do a better job investigating the finances of nominees, but the finance issue isn't that of the nominee, it's of her spouse.

I personally wouldn't let $6,500 stop me from hiring someone I felt to be qualified for a job.


These people are being hired to head the most powerful jobs in the land. President Obama said it himself, we have to be better and cleaner then the next guy. Apparently President Obama does not share that opinion. On the other hand, actions speak louder then words so maybe he does agree with your perspective.

[zrinkill]

Obama needs to place his foot in the buttocks of whoever is "venting" these people for him.

He does not need this kinda stupidity in his first few weeks of his Presidency.

[Dallas]

Obama needs to place his foot in the buttocks of whoever is "venting" these people for him.


He does not need this kinda stupidity in his first few weeks of his Presidency.




That is what has me scratching my head. I don't understand how these tax issues are not found in the vetting process.

Wouldn't you ask for financial details from them? Wouldn't you contact the IRS w/ regard to tax problems they could be having?

Seems like Vetting 101 to me.


It seems so ignorant that these problems are not caught from the start.

[JBond]

Actually, that's 5. Richardson never got off the ground but at least he was smart enough to know that he would never pass the scrutiny test and pulled out.

I don't even know how you defend this. This really is rediculous. If the President says he didn't know, then that makes you wonder about what else he didn't know. If the President says he knew, then he's dishonest. I don't know, I guess it all slides of the Duck's back but at some point, you would think that it would catch up to the President.

Obama is not the most observant man. He did not even realize his pastor of 20 years was a racist pig.

I am starting to wonder if I gave Obama to much credit for his political savvy. Maybe he's just not very smart. Maybe he really is clueless and had no idea the people he nominated for cabinet level positions do not pay their taxes.

I can forgive stupid but if he thought he could deceive the American people and ram a bunch of tax cheats down our throat to run the government, well that almost bothers me more than if he is just dumb.

[DIAF]

That is what has me scratching my head. I don't understand how these tax issues are not found in the vetting process.

Wouldn't you ask for financial details from them? Wouldn't you contact the IRS w/ regard to tax problems they could be having?

Seems like Vetting 101 to me.


It seems so ignorant that these problems are not caught from the start.

Dude, its the government. I worked for the US Govt for nearly two years, and never turned in my background-check follow-up info. And half of my family is from a country known to have several hotbeds of Muslim extremists. For two years no one so much as emailed me a reminder, or anything. I left the incomplete packet in my desk when I left.

Somehow, horrible vetting does not shock me, lol

[JBond]

That is what has me scratching my head. I don't understand how these tax issues are not found in the vetting process.

Wouldn't you ask for financial details from them? Wouldn't you contact the IRS w/ regard to tax problems they could be having?

Seems like Vetting 101 to me.


It seems so ignorant that these problems are not caught from the start.

I would love if every member of congress, the President, the cabinet and all federal judges were audited by the IRS. A total in depth audit of the last seven years for all of those people would turn up some very interesting surprises I'm sure.

If I were the IRS I would immedatly audit anyone Obama nominates based on he track record of nominations.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I would love if every member of congress, the President, the cabinet and all federal judges were audited by the IRS. A total in depth audit of the last seven years for all of those people would turn up some very interesting surprises I'm sure.

If I were the IRS I would immedatly audit anyone Obama nominates based on he track record of nominations.


If I were an Auditor, I'd be trying to figure out how to get myself assigned to all of those guys. Get my quota done for the quarter in like, 3 weeks. Sit back, chill for the rest and probably make a bonus if such a thing were possible in the Government.

:laugh2:

[TheCount]

Sins of the father...

It doesn't matter whether or not it's right, but people are associated with those that are close to them. She obviously knew as well.

It just doesn't come across well for Obama. Most everyone in high level positions he's appointed carry a good amount of baggage into their tenure...

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

[sacase]

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

http://extremeskins.com/images/smilies/dance.gif

[iceberg]

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

on it's own this would never be an issue. however, after obama's spread the wealth tirade/platform, it looks bad coming off 3 6 digit failures to pay of choics before.

[ABQCOWBOY]

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.


There is an ethics issue here. Where were she and her husband 16 years ago in their lives? You are going out of your way to make the point that you are not defending anybody while defending them.

These are the facts and they can not be disputed. Her appointment has been postponed because the IRS has found issue with something. If it were as simple as, "It was her husband and so it doesn't affect her", then her appointment would have already been approved. Clearly it is not just about him. It will be investigated and a determination will be made. 5 nominations that have had issues. Those are the facts and they can not be disputed.

[Viper]

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

You do realize that she is responsible for the debt. A husband and wife share debt equally. His debt is hers and visa versa.

[Heisenberg]

Pay your damn taxes people!

[ThaBigP]

I'm not sure if you guys can read or not, but the issue is with her husband's business, not her. Not to mention he paid them in the wake of people throwing hissy fits about tax issues right now.

You'd think they all had criminal records.

You'd think they'd all have criminal records all right. If ANY OF US PULLED THIS CRAP, we'd all have criminal records. Do not stand there and lecture us about overblowing this little *issue* into "darn, you'd think they'd all have criminal records" when the ONLY reason they DON'T is because they are all powerful Dems who cover for each other and have a media (supposedly the watchdog over all of this mess) doing the same damned thing.

Oh, by the way...my friend....the terrorist mastermind of the Cole bombing will very soon likewise be able to claim he doesn't have a criminal record either. News is coming down that Obama is going to order the charges against him dropped since the military judge presiding over the case didn't go along with Obama's order to stop the trial.

[bbgun]

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

Are you serious? Where would you draw the line? Ever heard of ethics or conflicts of interest? There are plenty of rotten people in this country who could "do the job," but they have no business being in high office.

[ninja]

I'm not sure if you guys can read or not, but the issue is with her husband's business, not her. Not to mention he paid them in the wake of people throwing hissy fits about tax issues right now.

You'd think they all had criminal records.

#1 Obama apologist! Methinks you are going to get tired defending this chump Obama and his sleazy administration.

If people remember correctly, what was the one of the first things Obama did before officially running for president? He paid his outstanding parking tickets.

[ThaBigP]

It doesn't come across well but like I said, the person he nominated is not the one with the issue.

I'm not trying to defend anyone, those are just the facts.

If the choice was to either nominate someone he thought was best for the job or pass on her in order to spare a few chuckles at his expense for someone he felt was less qualified, only someone overly prideful or cowardly would tuck tail and choose the less qualified employee.

My concern is whether she can do the job or not, if she can't then she should be hired in the first place. I could care less about her husbands $6,500 tax debt.

In her case, you're probably right that it wouldn't be too terribly big a deal - Obama nominated her, not her husband. But come on...we're just playing musical chairs now with all of the tax issues. They'll run out of Democrats pretty soon... (edit: they'll run out of hyper-liberal left-wing Democrats that only seem to be currency in the current Congress/Administration...there are plenty of decent Dems out there, but they're rarely allowed out of their cages by the party's power brokers)

[sbark]

Obama needs to place his foot in the buttocks of whoever is "venting" these people for him.


He does not need this kinda stupidity in his first few weeks of his Presidency.




......maybe they just are fully vetted.......and these are actually the best of the bunch Obama had to choose from......:rolleyes:

[sbark]

Dozens of New Tax Errors Revealed, (cheat) Rangel Blames Press (not a crime until you get caught) (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2179328/posts)
02/05/2009 4:25:20 PM PST · by Libloather (http://www.freerepublic.com/~libloather/) · 8 replies (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2179328/posts?page=9;q=1#9) · 444+ views
Gothamist ^ (http://www.freerepublic.com/%5Ehttp://gothamist.com/2009/02/05/dozens_of_new_tax_errors_revealed_r.php) | 2/05/09 | Billy Parker
Dozens of New Tax Errors Revealed, Rangel Blames PressBy Billy Parker in News on February 5, 2009 3:48 PM For the latter half of Charles Rangel's adult life, he's averaged just about one omission a year when filing his taxes. A private government ethics group reported to the ongoing House investigation on Rangel yesterday disclosed their discovery that Rangel has failed to account for more than $239,000 in assets over the last 30 years. He has listed many assets over the years without disclosing when he acquired them. The Sunlight Foundation found 28 separate instances where he failed to report...

[TheCount]

There is an ethics issue here. Where were she and her husband 16 years ago in their lives? You are going out of your way to make the point that you are not defending anybody while defending them.

It's hardly an ethics issue, I would say the same thing if it were a Republican nominee on the other end. Unlike most of the people that trot around here, I'm not in the business of using every excuse to attack another party, you'll have a hard time finding proof to the contrary.

You do realize that she is responsible for the debt. A husband and wife share debt equally. His debt is hers and visa versa.

It's a business tax issue from what I understand, I'm pretty sure the two are separate.

You'd think they'd all have criminal records all right. If ANY OF US PULLED THIS CRAP, we'd all have criminal records. Do not stand there and lecture us about overblowing this little *issue* into "darn, you'd think they'd all have criminal records" when the ONLY reason they DON'T is because they are all powerful Dems who cover for each other and have a media (supposedly the watchdog over all of this mess) doing the same damned thing.

Now you're just being dramatic. I know people that discovered they owed extra taxes or were fined for misfiling, including my fiance, and she does not have a criminal record (as far as I know).

Then again, she's not running for political office.

#1 Obama apologist! Methinks you are going to get tired defending this chump Obama and his sleazy administration.

If people remember correctly, what was the one of the first things Obama did before officially running for president? He paid his outstanding parking tickets.

I'm not even sure what that's supposed to prove.

[JimDandy]

Obama needs to place his foot in the buttocks of whoever is "venting" these people for him.


He does not need this kinda stupidity in his first few weeks of his Presidency.




"Rookie mistakes" by the empty suit Obama. Totally predictable to those not stupid enough to buy into the cries of "hope and change". :laugh2:

[trickblue]

Pay your damn taxes people!

Don't tell us... tell the remainder of Obama's appointments...

[trickblue]

It's hardly an ethics issue, I would say the same thing if it were a Republican nominee on the other end. Unlike most of the people that trot around here, I'm not in the business of using every excuse to attack another party, you'll have a hard time finding proof to the contrary.

You may say the same thing... but the lefties and the media would be all over this...

[TheCount]

You may say the same thing... but the lefties and the media would be all over this...

You're probably right but I don't speak for anyone but myself.

[trickblue]

You're probably right but I don't speak for anyone but myself.

Same here... just pointing out the obvious... that's all...

[zrinkill]

"Rookie mistakes" by the empty suit Obama. Totally predictable to those not stupid enough to buy into the cries of "hope and change". :laugh2:

Large!

[burmafrd]

Count.

Did or did not Obama say that he would have the most ethical administration?

Did or did not Obama say that his standards would be higher then previous administrations?

When you SAY things like that you draw a line. And if you step over it you blow it.

Now its CLEAR that some of this was already known (Daschle for sure) before the final decision was made to nominate them. SOME clearly was just found out.

BUT you claim this means nothing. Post after post says its not a big deal.

Who says that these guys and gals are really all that more qualified then anyone else who JUST MIGHT BE TOTALLY CLEAN?

Clearly the vetting (NOT VENTING) process is BROKEN. AND that is also in the end on Obama since he SHOULD have insisted on a better process then what has happened.

No matter how much white wash you are trying to use here, this is bad and it makes Obama look bad and it SHOULD.