This is change?

One of President Obama's first nominees was Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. This nomination and the Senate's confirmation is a direct violation of Article 1, Section 6, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the United States. I contacted both of my Senators about this problem before the confirmation. The only one that responded was my Senior Senator. He said that Congress was talking about introducing legislation to reduce the salary of the Secretary of State so there wouldn't be a violation. The Constitution does not contain an exception policy that would eliminate the violation. Even if there were such and exception, to my knowledge no such legislation was introduced or passed. Both of my Senators voted for confirmation. This means that both my Senators and all the other Senators that voted for confirmation have violated their oath of office and the Constitution of the United States. If Hillary would have served out her term in the Senate which ends in 2012, she could have served as Secretary of State or any other post without violation.

Tom Daschle withdrew his name from consideration to become secretary of Health and Human Services for the Obama administration because of some unpaid taxes. After the withdraw, President Obama gave several interviews in which he said “there can't be the appearance of two sets of rules.” Obama's nominee for Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, also had some tax problems. In my view, his tax problems were much more substantial and likely, intentional. The statute of limitations had passed on a couple of the years that Geithner owed taxes. Would those taxes have been paid if he would not have been nominated? Doesn't the fact that Geithner was nominated and confirmed with tax problems also give the appearance of two sets of rules? I'm convinced that President Obama knew about the tax problems of all his nominees, he either didn't care or hoped we weren't paying attention.

It has been reported that President Obama has set the highest ethical standards of any recent administration. It has become obvious that what President Obama says and what he actually does are two different things. Even though they have the high ethical standards, they have written exceptions so that unethical people, that don't meet those standards, can still be in the administration. What good does it do to have the highest ethical standards in writing but have people that don't meet those standards in the administration? Doesn't this mean that you really don't have the highest ethical standards? The fact that he has nominated so many people that don't follow the tax laws or helped to pardon terrorists is a reflection of his judgment on the people he surrounds himself with. Many before the election brought this to the publics attention. He stayed in a church for twenty years with and had his children Baptized by a man who hates America and is a racist. He had terrorist Bill Ayers for a friend. Those patterns are continuing. He says that Geithner and Daschle are the best and the brightest and that we should over look their tax evasion. There are three-hundred-million people in this country. There is no way that Geithner and Daschle are the only ones that could do the job of secretary of Treasury and secretary of Health and Human Services. They may be the only people that can do it if you are stuck looking at the same pool of Washington insiders. Obama said he was going to change Washington, not just keep using the same corrupt crooks that have been their for years.