It Appears the Best Man for the Job was a Woman, Barack Obama's Daschle Mistake was actually preempted by Nancy Killefer's Decision to step down.

Barack Obama offers Nancy Killefer a newly created position called "federal government's chief performance officer", and she realizes the way to get chief performance is for her to resign because of past payroll tax issues.

Tom Daschle, who was nominated to head the Department of Health and Human Services, resigns shortly thereafter.

Barack Obama apologizes for not doing a better job of "vetting" Mr. Daschle. Barack Obama's supporters laud Barack's honesty and willingness to take the blame.

Are we to believe that Mr. Daschle was not properly vetted? Really? Or, is it more reasonable to assume that Barack Obama knew about the tax issue, felt it was not that big of a deal, and went ahead with his selection of Tim Daschle? If that is the case, then that means it took the bravery of Nancy Killefer resigning to get Mr. Daschle to see the light and resign as well.

Do I really have to listen to Barack Obama supporters once again cheer Barack Obama for his willingness to take the hit even as they ignore nor thank Nancy Killefer for her willingness to step down before the payroll tax issue grew in scope?

--------------------------------------------------

I wonder if the issue here is not that laws are being broken, but that these politicians seek to move upward with their careers without apologizing first, and then waiting to see if public opinion will forgive them before they go into the upgrade pool.

Did MSNBC & POLITICO.com CIRCUMVENT IRS TAX LAWS by BARTERING?

Sure looks to me in the image above that MSNBC and Politico.com are bartering their services back and forth, but are they reporting this barter to the IRS? MSNBC gets an "authority" on a subject to appear for free on their television station, and in turn the guest pimps the name of their website in the background the ENTIRE TIME the guest is shown as seen above. This appears to me to be bartering, an exchange of services, which can be construed as income and therefore taxable.

I believe in live and let live, but the method above was one of the prime ways that MSNBC defeated Hillary Clinton this year. Pundits from Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Time, and Newsweek would appear on MSNBC and act like they were an impartial observer when they usually had a preordained position of supporting Barack Obama or slamming Hillary Clinton and her supporters. Many times, it appears that in lieu of being paid, the "Pundit" had a book they had written that would be publicized during their appearance, and on top of that the company they worked for (such as Time or Newsweek) was publicized by MSNBC as well.

This is a form of bartering, and since this privilege was abused by MSNBC to help Barack Obama defeat Hillary Clinton, I think payback, IRS payback, is in order. What do you think? If you know somebody who works for the IRS, ask them what they think.