Senate confirms Geithner as Democrats blindly follow their leader...
By Taskr36
@Taskr36 (13963)
United States
January 26, 2009 6:24pm CST
So it's official. Tim Geithner is our new Secretary of Tax Evasion. The Senate voted to confirm him 60-34 with 4 not voting. Democrats voted to confirm him 50-3 with 3 abstaining so the Republicans just made a ceremonial appearance when voting. Well this is what we have. Obama can just ram his own agenda on the American people thanks to the one party rule.
I both emailed and called my US Senators Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez to strongly voice my opinions prior to the confirmation. Mel Martinez, who sadly isn't planning to run for reelection, voted against, and Bill Nelson just towed the party line by voting to confirm Geithner. I can certainly tell you who I will DEFINITELY be voting against in 2010.
How do you guys feel about this? Is there ANYONE who honestly thinks Geithner was a good choice? I started one thread on this topic and not one person came out in support of Geithner so it really sounds like the Democrats in the senate are serving Obama when they should be serving the American people.
If you'd like to know how your senators voted here is the list. Remember this during the next election.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00015
2 people like this
7 responses
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Well, your title isn't EXACTLY accurate since six Democrats didn't vote for him and ten Republicans did. For the record, did you get upset when the GOP ran everything and the Republicans "blindly" followed their leader? Just asking, with all due respect.
Annie
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
27 Jan 09
90% of the democrats voted for that a$$ with only 5% voting against him.
I get upset any time elected officials blindly follow their leader and/or ignore their constituents. That goes for the bailout as well which was supported by a substantial number of republicans although not the majority. The 10 republicans who voted yea failed miserably in their duties both as senators AND as republicans by siding with Obama as he chose a horribly incompetent person for an important job. The cowards probably realized there was no way they could stop the confirmation and voted for it just to get favor with the messiah.
Annie, did you think Geithner was a good choice? Would you have voted to confirm him? I'm asking because I have not found a single person, i.e. non-politician, who thought that he should be confirmed.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Jan 09
Annie, if it was once, it would have been a bone headed thing. If their excuse wasnt' a blatant lie, it would have been a bone headed thing. However, he has been caught at it several times. You can't tell me that he didn't know he was supposed to pay his self employment taxes after being caught evading them before.
He has been given special treatment by the Obama administration, the Senate and the IRS. In other words, Geitner might be a fun guy to be around and a competent man, but he's as dirty as they come... and everyone knows it.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Would I have voted to confirm him? I'm really not sure and that's the truth. Probably not but I've heard people from both parties speak highly of him. Do I wish President Obama wouldn't have appointed someone who had done such a boneheaded thing? Of course I do! However, he's in now so I'll just hope for the best.
Annie
1 person likes this
@Bd200789 (2994)
• United States
28 Jan 09
Obama can just ram his own agenda on the American people thanks to the one party rule? Then why hasn't his stimulus plan been passed? It looks like there are still enough Republicans in the Senate to block anything he tries to do. As for the Republicans making "a ceremonial appearance when voting", it takes a 2/3 majority to get anything passed, and fifty Democrats don't make 2/3.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
27 Jan 09
Yup, the Senate Democrats have spoken loud and clear, Prs. Obama can nominate a known criminal and get their blessing.
Prs. Obama can lie to the American People all he wants and his little Obamabots will wet their pants in excitement.
Tim Geithner is a criminal, not a person to be nominated, much less confirmed. From here on out every case of tax evasion held against anyone in America is a case of "do as I say, not as I do" for the entire Obama administration and the Senate Democrats.
Honesty and integrity have no place in the Obama administration.
@xfahctor (14113)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
27 Jan 09
I just watched the crook get sworn in, I'm nausiated. I was shocked to see BOTH my senators voted yea. Shaheen I was sure would aprove him but I was stunned to see Judd Greg vote yes. I fired off a leangthy email to him expressing my disgust and that there was no excuse and no way he could ever justify his yea vote. I couldn't reach Jean Shaeen by email, conevniently there is no contact form on her page (suprise suprise), so I left a pretty angry message on her answering machine and told her I thought she was a disgrace to the people of New Hampshire.
This marks the beginning of new lows for this government. Who's next? Why not just put Bernie Madoff in charge of something while we're at it? Come on America, why are these people in congress again? What is it going to take?
I'm FURIOUS.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
27 Jan 09
I feel the exact same way. I went out of my way to contact my senators and I truly expected better of Bill Nelson. I'm sickened that they could ignore the will of the American people this way. Just look at the threads where I've discussed this. NOT ONE PERSON I've talked to, here or elsewhere, has supported Geithner's confirmation. The senators who voted to confirm him blatantly ignored the will of the people and violated the trust put in them by their constituents. Bill Nelson is going to get a nasty email and an earful on the phone (likely through his answering machine). I will be sending an email to Mel Martinez to thank him for his vote against Geithner, despite the futility.
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Taskr,
I don't know why people are so surprised or outraged at this turn of events. After all, we have a president from a city (Chicago) and state (Illinois)where shady, underhanded and deceitful politics are the rule rather than the exception. Just look at the president's first political "victory"! You know, the one where he had a ton of political lawyers scour and nit-pick another candidate's petition to run against him until they found enough discrepancies to get her removed from the ballot?
This is only the 27th of January, one week into the Obama presidency and all I can say is; you ain't seen nothin' yet!
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
27 Jan 09
Yeah, I've brought that up before as an example of how Obama isn't really interested in what voters want. He got his opponents removed from the ballot because some of the signatures were printed rather that written in cursive. It's ridiculous. My big issue is that I still haven't found one person, EVEN A DEMOCRAT who isn't a politician that wanted this guy confirmed. The best I can find is a few people who are just in the "trust Obama" trance.
@bestboy19 (5478)
• United States
27 Jan 09
He may fool us and turn out to do a wonderful job. One thing about it, if he screws up royally, we can put the blame on one party.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
27 Jan 09
ALL of the votes today have been straight down party lines. Even better, dems are voting against Obama's campaign promises that Republicans put up! Specifically taxing unemployment benefits! LMAO what a bunch of idiots! I hope people are watching this!
