If McCain had won, this would not stand....

Look, folks. I am a conservative libertarian. I don't apologize for that. There is far too much about Bush's Compassionate Conservatism that I did not like. But as a wartime President, I think--and disagree with many other conservative libertarians on this point--that Bush's foreign policy has been nearly perfect. Churchillian.

Of course, there is almost no topic for me to agree with Obama.

That said, I do not wish him to fail. While I may disagree with his every decision, for the sake of the country, I don't want him to stumble.

But had a Republican tried this stunt, it would never stand.

Obama has already lost Richardson (rightly). On her merits, Clinton should have probably gone too, but because of her name, she will be confirmed. I'd like to see Holder go too.

Some may say that Geithner's tax problem is no big deal, and that in the interest of allowing Obama to get on with his administration, and especially for a SecTreas in the middle of a horrible economy in recession, after the Senate touches him up a bit, they should confirm him.

I disagree.

We're talking about a tax problem from the Secretary of the Treasury, for chrissakes. And not just a SecTreas-nominee. A former Governor of the Federal Reserve. Of New York--center of the financial world. Imagine a nominee for head of the EPA having a "forgotten" arrest for polluting or a draft dodger named to be Secretary of Defense.

Outside the serious misgivings I've had about Obama--Ayers, Rezco, Wright, Marxism, the Chicago Way, etc.--Geithner's tax problem should be enough to cause serious questions about his fitness for the office.

Update: John, over at Powerline, in an addition to a post begun by Paul, which makes this exact point.

"[I]f Geithner were a Republican with the same tax-scofflaw record, there is not the chance of a snowball in Hell that he would be confirmed."