Total Hypocrisy on Christine O'Donnell

Remember these quotes...

tax cheat Tim Geithner

...

turbo tax Tim Geithner

Those are two common things that Sean Hannity says about the Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner. Remember, Geithner didn't pay the social security tax on his income at the IMF. The same Sean Hannity is now a chief defender and cheerleader for Christine O'Donnell. Isn't this the same Christine O'Donnell that is behind on her taxes?

In March, the IRS initiated an audit and placed a lien against her for $11,744.59 in taxes and penalties from the 2005 tax year.

When Karl Rove famously attempted to bring this up, Sean Hannity fiercely defended O'Donnell and said she explained all her tax troubles to him (Hannity) and her answers were fine. Of course, Geithner also explained his own tax problems. That hasn't stopped Hannity from attacking him mercilessly on the issue.

Meanwhile, the same liberals that fiercely dismissed the tax issues of Geithner, Rangel and other Obama associates are now saying things like this,

how can someone who can't handle their own finances be able to handle the nation's finances?

That sounds an awful lot like a conservative argument.

The reality is that everyone is an opportunist on this issue. If you are O'Donnell's opponent, her personal financial problems are a serious issue even though similar issues are dismissed when done by political allies. If you are like Sean Hannity, the same problems that mean you attack Tim Geithner mercilessly mean you dismiss them with Christine O'Donnell.

Dems in Big Trouble: A Microcosm

Last night, the Democrats of the 48th ward in Chicago held their regularly scheduled meeting and it was indicative of the kind of trouble they are all in. First, they fear the Tea Parties like no force going. According to a staffer from Congresswoman Jan Schakowski's office, the Tea Parties,

they enter communities and they are taking over. And they're changing the voting demographics everywhere.

She cited Democrat Phil Hare, who's district includes Rock Island (and who once said the Constitution doesn't matter) as an example. Hare's district is reliably conservative and he's in big trouble. The same person cited a 21% "enthusiasm gap" between Republicans and Democrats about voting this fall.

Second, no one was touting the Democrat's agenda. There was no mention of Obamacare, the stimulus, financial reform. There were certainly no mention of local, county or state accomplishments, since there are none. The only candidate with tangible accomplishments was the Attorney General, Lisa Madigan. Her representative spoke of several initiatives including one that targeted criminals that use nursing homes as their home base.

Third, the candidates attacked Republican Gubernatorial candidate Bill Brady on his belief in creationism, his stance on abortion, and his position against LGBT rights. Now, the 48th ward is especially progressive and it has a large LGBT community. Still, social issues will be non existent this fall. So, why is the focus on social issues?

The representative from Governor Quinn's office addressed a major controversy, increased salaries among his staff. The staffer said all those that received raises had added responsibilities. That may be true but the question is why did so many staffers receive extra responsibility. Quinn also touted initiatives to create jobs though his first initiative was to raise everyone's taxes, not exactly stimulative.

Pension reform was minimized, even though that's a massive hole in our budget. All Democrats tried to frame the election as a choice. Ultimately, there was little in the way of accomplishments. Most curious was Harry Osterman. He's currently the State Rep in the area. He's running for that office in November. He's announced that he's running for alderman next spring. Why would someone move from state government to city goverment? That's still not clear.

What's So Bad About a Political Civil War

All we're hearing today is how Christine O'Donnell's election is yet another example of the Tea Party eating its own and subverting electable candidates in favor of fringe candidates. By so doing, the movement is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

This is curious. After, whether you're a Democrat, Republican, or Independent, one thing is certain. You are unhappy with D.C. politicians. You're unhappy with the status quo. You're unhappy with the establishment.

So, what does the Tea Party movement do? It challenges all that. More often than not it wins. Isn't that a good thing? Isn't the Republican Party doing exactly what the voters are demanding and purging itself of the political class that caused the cynicism. In the process, we've seen voter turnout boom, excitement increase, and fresh faces have shown up.

Furthermore, it's created a well needed debate over the future of the party. Meanwhile, facing an unprecedented electoral disaster, what has the Democratic party done? It's reelected, almost entirely, the exact same folks. Even the man facing a series of ethics violations, Charlie Rangel, got nominated.

So, the voters are disgusted with career politicians, the status quo, and the establishment. The Republicans have responded by a full out war over all this in the primaries and the Democrats have done nothing. Yet, if you read some so called smart people, it's the Republicans with the problems.

Republicans in Delaware faced a very simple choice in Tuesday's primary: Did they want to win Joe Biden's old Senate seat in November, or did they want to lose it?

They went with the latter option, and if that really surprises you, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to Republican Party politics in the age of Obama.

The 2008 election, the second straight election in which it suffered a crippling national defeat, left the Republican Party drained of its hangers-on -- less ideological voters who had, in the past, broadly agreed with the party's philosophy, even if they dissented on individual issues. What was left was an angry, restive base that resented (and even feared) Barack Obama and that believed the GOP had lost power because it hadn't been conservative enough. This base quickly found a catchy name -- the Tea Party movement -- and dedicated itself to cleansing from the GOP's ranks politicians who reminded them of the party's pre-2008 spirit.

So, Republicans use the primaries to respond to all the concerns of the voters and the Democrats do nothing, and it's the Republicans that have the problems.

O'Donnell Talks the Talk...

Last night's big winner Christine O'Donnell certainly says all the right to endear herself to most conservatives. The question will be would she really be the fiscal conservative that she claims if elected.

That's a question that remains murky. O'Donnell has several income tax issues, a student loan issue, and mortgage issue. It doesn't appear as though O'Donnell is fiscally conservative with her own money. So, how can she be trusted with other people's money.

That's a question most of her ardent supporters not only won't answer but likely don't ask of themselves. Her main supporters at Tea Party Express are fond of calling her a true conservative.

On Tuesday night, Conservative Republican Christine O'Donnell won the nomination for U.S. Senate fair and square in the Republican Primary.

How did the Tea Party Express determine that O'Donnell is the conservative? It's certainly not from her voting record? After all, she has none. It's certainly not from her deeds. After all, her personal financial issues raise those questions. So, the only determination that she's a conservative is what she's said.

In that case, she's been determined by some in the conservative movement to be a conservative because she says what they want to hear. That's a huge problem. If all it takes to be considered a conservative is saying the right thing then anyone can jump in. It also means the vetting process leaves a lot to be desired.

I'm not saying that O'Donnell is not a conservative. My problem is just how easily some will swallow her conservativism without asking any questions of her. Sean Hannity is a cheerleader and not much else. Her scandals are nothing more than background noise.

Telling someone what they want to hear is what sales people do. It can be done by anyone. The inability to think critically is what zombies and sycophants do. Dismissing all of O'Donnell's problems because she talks like a conservative creates a situation where anyone can con their way into the movement.

Pavlov and the Progressive Tax

The Green Party has as part of its platform the support of the progressive tax system. The logic behind it is that the progressive tax is based on need. In other words, you need all of the first $20,000 you make. You need a lot less of the last $1 million of the $5 million you make, if you're fortunate enough to make that much.

I am a big believer in the principles of Ivan Pavlov. Pavlov did experiments on mice and dogs that showed that you can influence behavior based on what you punish and reward. The progressive tax system punishes success. In fact, Ronald Reagan, when he first became an actor, got a first hand taste of its corrosive nature. When he was first an actor, many of his colleagues recommended that he only make two movies a year. That's because by making a third he'd wind up in a higher tax bracket and actually take home less.

The progressive tax system is an incentive to make less because the more you make the less of that you keep. We want to encourage everyone to maximize their income and the progressive tax system does the opposite.

My Interview with Fred White Candidate for Mayor of Chicago II

We Can't Afford Tax Cuts for the Rich?

That's what the president says when asked why he won't extend tax cuts for the top two percent. Those tax cuts, according to his numbers, would cost the Treasury $700 billion over the next ten years.

So, the same person that spent $787 billion on a stimulus and a trillion over the next ten years on health care reform says we can't afford those tax cuts. Go figure.