Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Caroline isn't Senator Kennedy due to taxes women have a right to be furious

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:06 PM
Original message
If Caroline isn't Senator Kennedy due to taxes women have a right to be furious
Zoe Baird was Clinton's first choice for AG but hadn't paid taxes on her nanny and her chaffeur so she justifiably in my opinion wasn't approved. Fast forward 16 years. Tim Geither didn't pay taxes on his salary but evidently will get to be Secretary of the Treasury. Now, if the NYT is correct, Caroline Kennedy isn't being appointed because she didn't pay taxes on her maid. Women have a very real right to wonder if the rule is women who don't pay taxes don't get jobs but men skate. I fail to see any difference at all between what Geither did and what Baird did. Both didn't pay taxes they were obligated to pay. This really appears to be a double standard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. I agree. Tim Geither is a crook and shouldn't get the job.
Neither should Kennedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clear Blue Sky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #1
39. Correct on all counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Assuming everything you assume, who, specifically, in your opinion, is to be blamed?
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 09:11 PM by BlooInBloo
EDIT: By "blamed", I mean blamed for this "double standard".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Obama should have withdrawn the nomination of Geither
and failing that the Finance Committee should have voted it down. My brother worked in the exact same situation as Geither and managed to pay his taxes on time and in full. It would be one thing if he had never been warned about this at all but he gets audited, pays the audited years, doesn't pay the ones which fall out of the statute of limitations and then says he made a mistake. Sorry but that dog doesn't hunt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. So on your view, is Obama to be blamed for the double standard you refer to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. partially, yes
Geither is, among other things, being appointed to run the IRS and is a tax cheat. I don't believe it was a mistake for a minute for the reasons I sited plus the fact he signed a statement every single year that he paid his SS taxes when the IMF gave him the funds to do so. I can't believe there isn't another person capable of running treasury. Barney Frank comes immediately to mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Barney isn't a MANAGER!
He's a policy/politician guy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. we need policy at treasury not to mention a good spokesman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #13
37. Bloo...I assume you don't deny
that there is still a very real predominantly male power structure" in this country. Yes...President Obama is part of it, as is the Senate, which is still overwhelmingly male, as did President Clinton.

Please tell me you don't recognize that there really is a double standard in this country when it comes to male/female issues. Damn...there is a double standard right here at DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #9
31. Wait, it's Obama's fault that Kennedy is *possibly* being held to different standard (by Paterson)?
:wtf: :crazy:

but don't let your anger at Obama cause you to become irrational and unthinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:28 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Geither should have been rejected
a tax cheat in charge of the IRS is just plain wrong. I don't care who does the appointing. Clinton was wrong to appoint Baird but at least he didn't know at the time of the appointment that she had not paid the taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. Don't change the subject. You are *blaming* Obama for Paterson's pick or not?
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. I think all tax cheats should be treated the same
Obama chose to elevate one to Sec of Treasury aka head of the IRS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. but you are blaming him for "sexism" in Paterson's action
even though a female was appointed.

I think your OP was not well thought out.

I see what you are getting at, but it's more than a stretch to blame Obama for that unless you can directly link him with a decision to deny CK the appointment. (I'm mainly reacting to the post upthread that you are "blaming" Obama)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. I Don't Believe That's the Underlying Cause
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 09:13 PM by NashVegas
Paterson fucked up, BIG, and now the past 18 hours has been in CYA mode, since no one is buying the Polite Fiction that Caroline bowed out because of Teddy.

We don't even know these charges are true, do we?

Now, he needs other plausible reasons polite or otherwise, for putting someone who has devoted so much effort to public service into a position where they were strategically ridiculed for 6 weeks.

He could have just made his choice public at anytime, and we would all have expected CK to behave like a grown-up. We didn't see anyone calling the media to report Maloney was backing off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. None of the principals claimed she bowed out because of Ted Kennedy.
That was a claim by an unnamed family source.

I'm as disappointed as anybody that Caroline's not getting it, but whatever her reason obviously she thought she couldn't make it through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Except Whomever Leaked To the Press Yesterday
I'm ambivalent; I'd have liked to see her there, but not enough to get overly excited. What I strongly dislike about this whole thing is it's clear Paterson didn't want to name her from the outset, and instead of displaying something that looked like a spine let her hang her ass out there for 6 weeks while Maloney and others pushed the press to ridicule her. *She's a big girl* and I'm sure she'd have been fine if Paterson had named someone else early, rather than let it come to this farce.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. I don't consider anonymous newspaper leaks to be official statements.
As far as Paterson not wanting to name her, he didn't have to if he didn't want to--and everything I was hearing prior to her bowing out suggests that she was going to be the pick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Zoe Baird was WRONG too ... Janet Reno represented us WOMEN just fine without the law breaking. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. My husband had some tax mix ups before we met. We have since paid out the
penalties and fees from that time. Just because you mess up on your taxes doesn't always mean your being a crook.. AND most of these people don't do their own taxes. They have accountants, but they are subject to any infractions and any penalties that may be found out by an IRS audit. I will overlook a tax issue as long as it is paid back and acknowledged as oops and not I'm trying to get away with illegal stuff like a Cheney attitude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. No, you have to take responsibility for your own actions. You can pay fines but not hold high ...
political office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. Most of these people do not do their own taxes. The tax code is insanely
large and difficult to swim thru. Most of our esteemed Congress Critters who help to write the tax code cannot complete their own tax returns properly. I disagree that you cannot hold an office because of a mistake; especially when you remedy that mistake. Its more of an embarassment than anything else for most people. My husband had one of those reg. tax preparers from H & R Block. He wouldn't know how to fill out a tax form if his life depended on it. AND I've been doing our taxes since we met; even when we were not married. It was only $1500.00 that was owed back. Should that error keep him from serving in any govt job.. even a job working on a road crew for the state? Let's get real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. "Let's get real." As I typed - not sound for HIGH office - responsibility. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glowing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #21
50. Even in a high office position, I would find a simple error like this ok.
People are human; not robots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riderinthestorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #6
24. We got audited and lost. Big time. IRS is totally fucked up.
My husband is a horse trainer. We own and operate a training farm which I run. He has always worked at our farm part time. His "full time" job is/was as an govt employee running an equestrian facility for the govt.

We were audited for taking deductions for myriad horse related expenses even including his riding boots.

It came down to the IRS declaring that he was not an equestrian professional and that we were just amateurs declaring equestrian expenses as a lark. Now we were/are involved in the horse industry 24/7. We do nothing else as a business or for private.

Yet. We (and we hired a tax attorney to represent us at the IRS hearings) were declared to be amateurs and thus in violation of the law.

We paid big time for our "transgressions". And although we've never been audited since, we continue to have a tax attorney prepare our taxes since we're "red-flagged." We were on the list of potential witnesses to Congress on IRS fraudulent prosecution years back....

It was a nightmare. And when I see/hear Geithner, I can't possibly condemn him. Our IRS tax code is impossible to navigate - even with the best help - (and we had Chicago Loop attorneys helping us at huge cost but to no avail).

We were told by the IRS agent that 'big" corporations are never audited since they have the litigious staff and accounting staff to fight the charges. So they have to go after the "little guys (corps)" to get the tax revenues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. But that's the point, "the power elite" like Geithner and Kennedy NEVER pay a personal price UNLESS
they run for high office. You toiled and did your best BUT those who have $$$ always slide by.

It's class war. We all know it but are afraid to speak the truth ... we live in a plutocracy and that MUST change if we wish to maintain a viable Middle Class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #24
30. you and Geither are totally different
Your case, if you wish to be charitable to the IRS was a clearly disputable one. Geithers is red letter law. People whose employers don't pay social security taxes are responsible for both halves of that tax. It isn't at all unclear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
7. Sorry there are different people doing the appointing so apples and oranges.
You have Clinton, Obama and Patterson. How do you know Patterson would have chosen Geither? Different people different ideas different values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. They were here illegally
and she didn't pay taxes for them either. I don't know Caroline's issue, but Baird's isn't the same as Geither.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. at the time it wasn't illegal to employ people who were here illegally
maybe it should have been, but it wasn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #10
28. Well then that makes it perfectly FINE since these Power Elites could barely make ends meet ...
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. I guess the words, in my OP, correctly denied the AG were somehow unclear
or ambiguous, it couldn't be that you were to lazy to read them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. No, it's just that
you are wrong. ;) :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. No you are lying
You implied that I thought Baird should be AG and I stated the exact, precise opposite. I stated, in clear, unambiguious language that she was rightly rejected for AG. You out and out lied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
55. It's been illegal since 1987...
It's been illegal since 1987 to knowingly employ an illegal immigrant/undocumented worker. They just simply have never enforced the law. Part of the Republican "immigration reform" has always been to criminalize the illegal immigrant while decriminalizing the employer. Which of course does nothing but give the employer the advantage over the employee. "Do as I say or..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mucifer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. Here's some nice info on Kirsten Gillibrand
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I am unsure who I would have wanted to get the seat
I see plenty of legit reasons for it not to have been Caroline Kennedy but this reason isn't legit in my mind. I am underwhelmed by Gillibrand but am willing to wait and see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
15. Sounds like Caroline WITHDREW
because she expected problems due to taxes and family employees stuff, expecting problems when these became public. We don't know what the NY Governor knew.

We don't know anything about the tax thing, and I certainly won't assume anything. As to family employee stuff, we all should examine the relevant issues; there are lots of quite burdensome requirements on families, many of whom don't know about them. And then there's the immigrant status matters, which are really obnoxious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #15
27. For what it's worth, Paterson came out and said they weren't aware of any disqualifying information.
In other words, according to the governor, "personal reasons" really means "personal reasons."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #27
36. The rumors of taxes, relationship and helper problems
supposedly came from an aide of the Govs. That pissed me off when I read it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
18. Caroline Kennedy withdrew Tim Geither did not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShadowLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 11:07 PM
Response to Original message
23. Kennedy had to run for reelection if appointed, and proved herself to be a weak candidate
Tim Geither however does not have to run for election anywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 07:10 AM
Response to Original message
35. Geither should definitely have been rejected. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
38. Oh Please. You Look For Any Reason To Be Furious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #38
45. You Look For Any Reason To Be A Contrarian POS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
40. Here is the difference, if all you say is true.
Geithner didn't pay his taxes, but survives because everyone in Washington believes that he is singularly capable of doing his job, and that putting any other person in his position would result in damage to the American economy.

CK didn't pay her taxes, and didn't survive because she's a politically incompetent dilettante with an ever-sinking approval rating, and Paterson only needed one good reason to drop her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. The New York State Tax Department has stated that there is
nothing wrong with Kennedy's tax records. Taxes were not the reason she was dropped/bowed out.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8132550
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
42. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #42
48. so you are OK with women and men being treated differently?
that is exactly what happened here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
43. Howard Dean thinks you're being unreasonable
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
51. I'm betting Caroline withdrew because of the wringer she's been put through.
It appears she was penalized for a) being a Kennedy and b) for staying out of the limelight for so many years to rear her kids. That's a double standard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
52. Sorry, but, I wasn't impressed. She didn't seem ready to me.
I don't know anything about this woman, so, no opinion on her.

The name sounded comforting but she didn't demonstrate the knowledge or verbal gymnastics needed for such an important job. New York is no place for beginners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Curtland1015 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. I gotta agree.
She seems like a very smart, amiable person, but nothing I've seen of her told me she was ready to be a Senator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
54. I should have been clearer in my post
I actually didn't have a problem with Kennedy not being appointed. I think there were plenty of valid reasons not to do so. My major problem is that I think it is a double standard on taxes here. Male appointee skates, female ones not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC