A Stream of Scandal

I admire Obama for his outreach across the political aisle (he had dinner with conservative columnists, and met with Republican congressmen.) But what I don't understand is the steady stream of people that he is appointing, that is simply not meeting the standard. Richardson backs away because of a corruption scandal that seems more serious than he lets on. Geithner, a man that will have power over our money, admitted to underpaying taxes (and he was approved!). And now we have Tom Daschle, who has done the exact same thing. And while Richardson had enough sense to back down, the other two are still in line for Cabinet offices. In my opinion, the last two should be going to jail (and we shouldn't even be talking about Cabinet positions for them.) Is committing a crime that would get any ordinary American thrown in jail excusable if you have enough political connections? Is this the change that we can believe in?

Disclaimer: That is my personal opinion, and while you can feel free to criticize my opinions and the opinions of others in this thread, please do not criticize the person making the argument.

I have to agree. Seems very unjust to let a felons be, not only pardoned, but able to hold such a high ranking position in government. He is taking a huge chance. Seems illogical in my opionion. I almost want to pull a race card as to why this is being allowed, but I know that would be a foolish decision to fully go through with on my part. I am sure you can all infer as to what I may be alluding to though.

If I recall correctly, wasn't Cheney the President of Haliburton and a staunch advocate of a unitary executive power (almost like a dictatorship)?

Alberto Gonzales was also perhaps one of the worst attorney general's in the history of politics, allowing himself to be manipulated by Cheney and Addington's dual interpretation of the law to the point that they ran the government "underground."

There's a PBS documentary that is online called, "Cheney's Law" (*highly entertaining and highly recommended*) which vividly displays that these people were political radicals who showed raving support for a dictatorial-translation of the Constitution by utilizing executive privileges in time of conflict. They gathered allies in the Department of Justice and for a time period managed to get away with looking at personal search logs on phones, computers, and internet search engines without being accountable to Judicial Review or the FISC which is, "an established federal court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Act of 1978 and oversees requests for warrants against suspected foreign intelligence agents inside the United States by federal police agencies."

there was another girl that was being appointed that had tax problems X_X she backed out tho. It really sad that but some what funny that all these people are being appointed, but they have major tax problem. But at least some of them have the modesty to back out because of it.

Daschle just withdrew his nomination as well due to the tax scandal. So I guess that leaves one of the three you mentioned left

its really hypocritical if you think about it.
and your right, he shouldnt be appointed cabinet member.

i also admire Obama, and i hope he stands by everything he said he would, but right now, idk with him...he just doesnt seem....right.

If I recall correctly, wasn't Cheney the President of Haliburton and a staunch advocate of a unitary executive power (almost like a dictatorship)?

The unitary executive power actually derives itself from federalists, it is nothing new. Halliburton is a large oil company, any wise person would invest in one of these, especially after we hit peak oil.

The unitary executive power actually derives itself from federalists, it is nothing new. Halliburton is a large oil company, any wise person would invest in one of these, especially after we hit peak oil.

investing in it, and being the CEO of it, then giving that company huge contracts in a land where you started a war... two very different things.