I noticed President Obama already admitting he screwed up, a couple weeks into his administration. He admited that the problems with his nominees not paying their taxes was an embaressment, and he took full responsibility for screwing up.
I think this is really refreshing to see in a politician. Seeing all the contortions politicians seem to go through to avoid having to admit they ever did anything wrong.
Was there ever a time, in President Bush’s eight years, that he was so candid about making a mistake?
I’m not sure why Obama’s admirable behavior has anything to do with Bush, why it’s necessary to compare, but I seem to recall Bush nominating some bitch to the supreme court who wasn’t a very good choice, and than admitting it. Since you ask.
Than again, maybe Bush didn’t have so much trouble with his nominations because the Republicans weren’t so corrupt. Or, at least they were better at hiding it. You see, when you compare and contrast and play this “Oh isn’t Obama so much better than Bush” you really disservice both Democrats and Republicans.
Obama’s actions are not good in comparison to Bush. They are simply good.
I have an idea. Let’s stop comparing Obama to Bush unless it’s absolutely necessary. Quite frankly, after eight years, I’m tired of hearing about the man.
I agree that it’s admirable to publicly admit mistakes but I’m a bit troubled that it had to come to this. Is fudging on your taxes so rampant that Obama’s team didn’t immediately see this as a red flag? I don’t know what went on behind the scenes, of course, and maybe Obama has nixed a ton of possible nominees for tax reasons.
I’m curious how Obama screwed up? He may have…I just do not know enough of the process. I thought Obama did a vetting process where various candidates filled out a questionnaire and went through other rigmarole before being offered the job. Maybe such things are offensive to the likes of Daschle and they (Obama & Co.) just assume by this point if Daschle had any skeletons in his closet they’d have been dragged out by now.
I am also curious how these people made it this far in their political careers and then at such a crucial juncture the dirty laundry all comes pouring out. No one looked before this?
I am by no means absolving Daschle and the rest. Just wondering if Obama is at “fault” for it. Did he know then nominate them anyway?
I will say I wonder at Obama backing these guys when such stuff comes to light till they back out on their own. If we want to commend Obama then I think he should withdraw their nominations as soon as a credible (read that again) accusation arises. Even if the accusation is unproven (for sake of argument) appearances are paramount here. Maybe it is just how politics works and the President needs to show faith in his nominees and then behind closed doors tell them to withdraw on their own to save face.
Frankly my view is screw saving face. Set a tone that says such things will not be tolerated and if a nominee screws up they face the music. Too much “I fucked up but so what?” going on these days.
I also believe that it is to Daschle’s credit that he never claimed that this was a witch-hunt conducted for political purposes by the administration’s political enemies. I seem to recall that Edwin Meese et al played that gambit.
I’d feel better if he hadn’t screwed up in the first place, but admitting it is refreshing.
If by admitting it you mean blaming the confirmation process itself for causing his distinguished, respected, and “extraordinary” nominee to withdraw, you are correct.
I agree with the praise for Obama’s forthright admission, and with the observation that such candor was not a feature of the previous administration. I don’t remember Bush EVER saying, directly and unambiguously, that he screwed up, even when he did. I had earlier criticized Obama for not admitting error, and this statement by him takes the wind right out of those sails. Of course, neither did Clinton (possible exception the Lewinsky conduct), Bush 41, Reagan, Carter, or Ford. Even Nixon’s resignation speech was light on the personal blame.
I am tremendously impressed.
“Business as usual” always means that even if you screw up, you only admit it in kind of a political “code,” where everyone understands you’re conceding error but the words never leave your lips. One of the pre-election complaints about Obama was his inexperience, and I have to say that in this instance, his so-called “inexperience” is refreshing and positive: he doesn’t resort to code phrases; he steps up to the plate and says it like it is. Would that this were the rule for all politicians. Would that we, the voters, punished those that didn’t live up to this rule… instead of accepting and even rewarding it.
I think President Obama looks better today than he did a week ago. Like millions of Americans I supported him, but you never know until the guy gets into office. I was angry about Geithner and Daschle, but I think he stepped up to the plate and did the right thing. The administration probably could have gotten Daschle though, but someone (either Daschle or Obama) made the decision not to try. He admitted a mistake, which is rare and is moving on. The President said that he wanted a “new era of responsibility” and so far so good.
I’m not sure I understand why Obama is taking flak for this, nor do I understand why he’s accepting any blame.
One of Obama’s campaign promises was to clean up government and so he instituted an intense vetting procedure. During the course of the vetting some of his nominations came up unclean.
That is a GOOD THING, isn’t it? After all, it’s not the media or the Republicans digging up all this tax evasion shit; it’s the vetting. I like that Obama is stepping up to take the blame as it shows character, but I don’t think he actually screwed up. Daschle screwed up, or his accountant screwed up - not sure who - but it wasn’t Obama.
Vetting means you look into these things before nominating someone to a position. Obama’s vetting process failed to uncover these problems, he nominated people with embarrassing faults, he deserves blame for that mistake.
But Johnson before him understood when he screwed up, and his subsequent abdication of the race is still astounding to watch. When I think of how far he let his mistakes run him before it finally broke through to him what the situation was, I actually tear up.
Here is to hoping that this is a sign that Obama will recognize his mistakes early, and will rectify them without a second thought when he does.
P.S. Bush is still the most famous for not admitting mistakes. I don’t know if anyone from Johnson through Clinton was asked point blank to admit one of their their mistakes, though.
I wonder, though, whether we’re picking nits and ignoring the elephant in the room.
Let’s leave Daschle out of this - the evidence strongly suggests that he was gaming the system all along, especially if past behavior is taken into account. And Bill Richardson is involved in something huge, sadly.
That leaves Geithner and Killefer - and the issue there isn’t the tax burden per se but the overwhelming difficulty and expense involved in tax and regulatory compliance. Most people know how much this burdens our economy, especially for regulations and tax laws that are unnecessarily arcane and complex. It has stung several Obama nominees - and more importantly, some people have been kept from even applying because they don’t want to deal with the bother. And of course the drain on economic activity at a time when GDP is shrinking can’t be ignored.
We ought to get a handle on this for many different reasons. I hope President Obama sees this.
It’s great that Obama is admitting his mistakes, but that is because admitting your mistakes is the first step towards rectifying them, and avoiding similar mistakes in the future. What is Obama doing to improve the vetting process so the next batch, and those who will come over the course of the next four years, don’t suffer from the same problems?
Obama sold himself as an outsider. Therefore he wanted to surround himself with experienced people to make up for his lack of experience. Turns out some of the experienced folks were not appropriate for the jobs. So, how has Obama improved his selection process, or is he now turning to other outsiders?
And if the tax code is so complicated that people who make six or seven figure incomes, and can afford the best tax attorneys in the world, can’t keep it straight, what chance do the rest of us have?
Is Obama now suggesting changes to tax policy so a normal person can be sure of following it? Or is tax policy fine, and he just picked some people who aren’t willing or capable of doing what they say the rest of us should?
Yes, and he backed them after the faults became public knowledge. If Daschle is going down in flames due to a tax issue I wonder if Geithner should go too.
I sincerely hope that this is addressed in a meaningful soon, but these people aren’t exactly the ideal poster children for such an issue. Not realizing that hundreds of thousands of dollars in consulting fees are taxable isn’t something your average taxpayer can sympathize with. And Obama making a big deal about simplifying the tax code right at this moment would look like he was hedging on his acceptance of responsibility. Plus he hasn’t exactly been sitting around twiddling his thumbs. Let the guy pace himself.
No. There’s no need for a one-size-fits-all response to drastically different cases. Geithner’s nonpayment of self-employment taxes was found to be an honest oversight. Daschle’s not realizing that hundreds of thousands of dollars of consulting fees and the free use of cars and drivers were taxable and driver, combined with the overstatement of charitable deductions, is harder to swallow (in my opinion, of course).
