Shot in the Dark

Ethics For Ye, But Not For We

As far as the mainstream media is concerned, there is one standard of ethics for Republicans…:

In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated Chavez to a post in his cabinet as Secretary of Labor. Chavez was soon forced out because it was alleged that she had employed an illegal immigrant 10 years earlier. Subsequent investigation uncovered that Chavez had not, in fact employed the woman in question, but had sheltered her and given her some emergency assistance because the woman was threatened with domestic abuse. The woman, Marta Mercado, is now a U.S. citizen.

…and another for Democrats:

Contrast the political uproar and media storm over Chavez’ nomination with the quiescent reaction of our electeds in the halls of Congress and our pals over at CNN and the New York Times regarding President-elect Obama’s nomination of Timothy Geithner to be the Secretary of the Treasury.

Geithner, you may recall, is the man who may soon be in charge of trillions of our tax dollars who thinks paying taxes is only for the little people. While working for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) from 2001 to 2004, Geithner failed to pay self-employment taxes totaling more than $45,000 including interest. Interestingly, the IMF, an international entity, pays its employees’ taxes and even sends them a notice regarding the taxes owed.

“But it’s not really the same kind of thing!”

Well, yeah.  It’s actually more than the same:

Just to ram the point home that laws are meant for some and not for others, Geithner also employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper (“Haven’t we all?” the U.S. Senators conducting the confirmation hearing must be thinking to themselves.)

You might be saying to yourself “News flash, Berg; duh.  Of course there’s a double standard!”.  And you’d be right.

My real question:  under these circumstances – where the major media refuses to point out ethical lapses (to say nothing of double standards) on the part of the incoming administration, can you imagine them not trying to shut down talk radio and the blogs, the conservative alternative media that are the only people that ever really question Obama on anything?

Posted

in

,

by

Mitch Berg

Tags:

Comments

3 responses to “Ethics For Ye, But Not For We”

  1. angryclown Avatar
    angryclown

    Echo, echo, echo!

    You’re using somebody else’s blog to establish the facts, then skewing the analysis further to the wacko right.

    Here’s an editorial in the New York Times raising questions about Geithner’s failure to pay taxes – izzat MSM-y enough for you? Of course it doesn’t say he should be tarred and feathered and held up to public ridicule until the facts are determined. You’ll have to continue to rely on your wingnut blog friends for the kind of biased information you need to ensure your judgments all come out the right(wing) way.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15thu1.html?_r=1&scp=7&sq=geithner&st=cse

  2. Bill C Avatar
    Bill C

    Of course it doesn’t say he should be tarred and feathered and held up to public ridicule until the facts are determined.

    As opposed to how Chavez was tarred and feathered and ridiculed before the facts came out that she did NOT do anything wrong, unlike Mr. Geithner.

    It doesn’t matter whether these facts came from the Anti-Strib, Daily KOS (yeah, right), NyTi, WaPo, WaTi, NyPo, or the Farmer’s Almanac. The fact remains, Chavez got pilloried based on incorrect and incomplete facts, while Geithner is being given a pass after ADMITTEDLY committing a crime.

    That is a double standard, and the title of this post is 100% appropriate.

  3. Seflores Avatar
    Seflores

    John Wayne Gacy has a point Mitch. The NYT (“MSM-y enough for” me)does point out the troubling aspects of a potential Treasury Secretary being/having been a tax cheat. And even MSNBC – the morning show anyway – has discussed Mr Geithner’s tax “troubles” (an aside – Mike Barnicle questioning dishonesty, what a laugh. Since Carlin died he has been without a source for new, unattributed material).
    The NYT, in the opinion piece noted by Angryclown, calls for Mr Geithner to be “questioned forcefully” whatever the hell that means. Is that like when Demi Moore’s character in “A Few Good Men” “objects” and then “strenuously objects”? The overall point is that no Republican with even a whiff of scandal like this could get this far along in the nomination process (except Governor Richardson who was deemed too crooked – allegedly – for D.C., but just right for New Mexico!) and the MSMies not call for withdrawal of the nomination.
    Personally, I hope Geithner gets the job. I have a small side business that I own and it’s up to me if I want to file and pay the taxes related to the income I receive from it. I think, if, I stop filing and, if, I ever get popped by the Authority’s, I’ll join the Democratic party and use the “Geithner did it too” defense. To paraphrase “Otter” in “Animal House” – we can do anything we want, we’re Democrats!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.