The Brightest Bulb

What does it mean?  Well, my intent with this blog is to create dialogue and thoughts about th

world around us.  I plan to add new entries as often as time permits, and based around whatever subject warrants our attention.

I want to address the issues surrounding some recent choices by President Obama for his cabinet.  If it had ended with Geithner, that would be one thing, but then Daschle [who has since withdrawn] was found to have over a $146,000 shortfall in taxes from 2004-2005.  Are you kidding me?  I guess it could just be a problem of the uber-rich, because they just have no idea how much money they have floating out there.  We are talking about an amount of money that most of us don’t make in a year, and he states that he was “disappointed and embarrassed” that this happened.  There was also an issue with Obama’s nomination for Chief Performance Officer, Nancy Killefer.  She also withdrew due to a similar “tax issue”.

My question here is simply this: would any of these people have handled the shortfall had they not been nominated for these cabinet positions?  Would they have come to light, had they not been put under the microscope that is the nomination process?

In President Obama’s defense, he told Kate Couric, “I don’t want my administration to be sending a message that there are two sets of rules . . . one for the prominent people and one for ordinary folks who have to pay their taxes every day.  I think I messed up I screwed up, in not recognizing the perception that, even though this is an honest mistake.” 

There’s just one problem with his statement, perception is reality in this case.  If you think there are not two sets of rules, you are living in denial.