Kundra’s record?

posted at 8:52 am on March 16, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Vivek Kundra took a leave of absence from his new job as the Obama administration’s Chief Information Officer after the FBI raided the offices of his last position, Washington DC’s Chief Technology Officer, in a bribery and corruption sting.  That, however, doesn’t appear to be Kundra’s first brush with the law.  After getting a tip, I checked Maryland’s on-line database of criminal records and discovered an entry for a Vivek Kundra, born in 1974 and living in Gaithersburg, in Montgomery County’s criminal district court.  According to the data, Vivek Kundra got convicted of misdemeanor theft (for less than $300) on July 31, 1997, in case #0D00031388.

Should this be a disqualifying event for high government office, however?  One has to believe that a background check would have uncovered this conviction and the resultant low fine of $530, with $400 of it suspended.  The comparison to Tim Geithner, who evaded paying tens of thousands of dollars in taxes, makes Kundra’s misdemeanor look like a merit badge, but Geithner never got convicted in court, either.

According to the White House press release for Kundra’s appointment, Kundra had quite a resume for the job.  Not only had he served essentially the same role for DC, but also served a dual role in Gov. Tim Kaine’s administration in Virginia:

Vivek Kundra formerly served in Mayor Fenty’s cabinet as the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) for the District of Columbia, responsible for technology operations and strategy for 86 agencies.  He has been recognized among the top 25 CTO’s in the country and as the 2008 IT Executive of the Year for his pioneering work to drive transparency, engage citizens and lower the cost of government operations.  Kundra is also recognized for his leadership in public safety communications, cyber security and IT portfolio management. Before Kundra came to the District, Governor Timothy M. Kaine appointed him Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Technology for the Commonwealth of Virginia, the first dual cabinet role in the state’s history.  Kundra’s diverse record also includes technology and public policy experience in private industry and academia. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia’s Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership and holds a MS in Information Technology from the University of Maryland.

Taking all of that at face value, should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft, from 12 years ago, keep someone with his talents out of government?

I’ve contacted the White House for comment.  When I hear back, I’ll update the post.

Update: No response yet from the White House, but I’ll add this from my own experience in the security industry.  I ran burg/fire call centers for 15 years, and our employees had to get licensed in several states.  In a couple of those states, any adult theft conviction at all would be disqualifying.  In some states, they didn’t care about misdemeanors after 10 years.  Kundra probably couldn’t get licensed to work in my call center, but apparently can get a job in the White House.  I find that fascinatingly ironic, even if it is explainable.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’ve contacted the White House for comment. When I hear back, I’ll update the post.

Hahaha! You’re funny Ed.

csdeven on March 16, 2009 at 8:55 AM

Theft at 23? No big deal. Stupid, but not disqualifier. The problem exists, however, when you are recruiting rookie talent in the thirty-something stage of life: There is too short a time between the indiscretion and between the time they are picked to serve by the Obamessiah..

CapitalistPig on March 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM

A 23-year-old conviction for misdemeanor theft keep someone with his talents out of government?

No.

Had it been within the past several years or decade?

Yes.

coldwarrior on March 16, 2009 at 9:00 AM

Nobody has a clue what Obama is going to do next. Even Obama hasn’t been told yet what to do next. Those controlling the White House are rolling the dice.

volsense on March 16, 2009 at 9:02 AM

Theft at 23? No big deal.

CapitalistPig on March 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM

I thought just the opposite. At 18 or 19, maybe not such a big deal. At 23, old enough to have graduated from college, there is no excuse for such a thing.

BigD on March 16, 2009 at 9:02 AM

Theft at 23? No big deal. Stupid, but not disqualifier. The problem exists, however, when you are recruiting rookie talent in the thirty-something stage of life: There is too short a time between the indiscretion and between the time they are picked to serve by the Obamessiah..

CapitalistPig on March 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Theft on a small scale is not a disqualifier for the Obama administration, it is a resume bulletpoint. “Teach me to do it bigger”, is a nice interview technique.

sven10077 on March 16, 2009 at 9:03 AM

I’ve contacted the White House for comment. When I hear back, I’ll update the post.

Uh yeah – good luck with that.

tru2tx on March 16, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Our president is an admitted dope peddler, what moral authority does he have besides his worn, tattered, scotch taped together, race card?

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 9:04 AM

Theft on a small scale is not a disqualifier for the Obama administration, it is a resume bulletpoint. “Teach me to do it bigger”, is a nice interview technique.

sven10077 on March 16, 2009 at 9:03 AM

“I’m mot a good theif, but I am a fast learner.”
Vivek Kundra

thomasaur on March 16, 2009 at 9:08 AM

Theft at 23? No big deal. Stupid, but not disqualifier. The problem exists, however, when you are recruiting rookie talent in the thirty-something stage of life: There is too short a time between the indiscretion and between the time they are picked to serve by the Obamessiah..

CapitalistPig on March 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM

Very good point.

myrenovations on March 16, 2009 at 9:10 AM

Considering that the dems blew the whistle on George Bush’s midemeanor DUI fifteen years old a week before the 2000 election, I’d say yes disqualify him, cause the new charges and the old charges make the candidate unreliable and untrustworthy.

eaglewingz08 on March 16, 2009 at 9:10 AM

Taking all of that at face value, should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft keep someone with his talents out of government?

No. From the facts presented it appears Kundra made a mistake in his youth, faced the consequences and worked to redeem himself. It’s the intervening 11 years that I would look more to, did Kundra learn from his error and work to better himself and be a contributing member of society.

I would normally be willing to give an administration a pass on this, if it seems that Kundra had fooled lots of people that he had reformed. But given the number of failed appointments Dear Leader has had, and factoring in the new and improved transition process, I really have to question The One’s competency and wonder whether or not President Biden wouldn’t be a better option.

Yeesh. President Biden?!

rbj on March 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

A 23-year-old conviction for misdemeanor theft keep someone with his talents out of government?

He was 23 years old at the time of the theft conviction.

I would have to know more about the crime before saying it’s a disqualifier just because there may be details that aren’t apparent from the simple online database check.

Still, are we to have any standards for our reps at all? If the guy intentionally stole at age 23 then he shouldn’t be acceptable, period.

Bishop on March 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

The Theft is not an issue in my mind. His qualifications are. He has no major corporate experience in a large IT environment. Working only in government does not qualify one to be the chief technology expert for the entire government. Having worked in and consulted for both, I can assure you that government IT is years behind corporate IT! They lack the cutting edge technology, the brain power, the drive and the initiative requisite to compete. Be VERY afraid that our nation’s secrets are being protected by a government guy who hasn’t worked in say a bank or a brokerage environment where security is a real life big boy issue EVERY DAY. That is where they are hacking your environment every day for real and you must keep them out!

sabbott on March 16, 2009 at 9:15 AM

Still, are we to have any standards for our reps at all? If the guy intentionally stole at age 23 then he shouldn’t be acceptable, period.

That’s the thing…he isn’t a rep…I imagine he is the White House version of the Computer Guy Who Knows Why Your USB Drive Isn’t working. I dunno.

But RBJ makes a very good point..It’s the Incompetence, stupid. A very important point that conservatives need to start hammering away at like mad. Is Barry O likeable? YES….Heck, I’d have a beer with him. But coating someone as incompetent is a hard stain to wash off…

CapitalistPig on March 16, 2009 at 9:17 AM

Gosh, I don’t understand why Obama is having all this trouble with appointments?

I mean, it’s like he is a criminal magnet….

/

katy on March 16, 2009 at 9:17 AM

I heard that he was in the moderate wing of the KKK.

Akzed on March 16, 2009 at 9:19 AM

hmmm..what a bunch of thugs.

becki51758 on March 16, 2009 at 9:19 AM

Vivek (per Barack, via Rahm) is going to use the “funny name” diversionary tactic.

qestout on March 16, 2009 at 9:20 AM

Still, are we to have any standards for our reps at all?

This is a Democrat Administration, remember.

They have to fill these jobs with someone.

And since all Democrats are either corrupt criminals or a brainless legacy/trophy spouse, at some point, Obama has to appoint someone who can utter a complete sentence.

I mean, if the choice is either a guy with a criminal record or some Kennedy third cousin with an IQ of 35, Obama will have to appoint someone who isn’t drooling.

Let’s be real here. We can have a few droolers, but they must be led by the juvenile delinquents.

Worst Administration EVAH!

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM

I’m less concerned with an old charge that could be as little as a frat-boy prank than I am with him topping a city agency that is in the midst of an investigation for defrauding the taxpayers by his underlings.

snickelfritz on March 16, 2009 at 9:24 AM

Ed,

Minor point, but rarely do tax cases show up in criminal court. Most tax cases are adjucated in Federal Administrative Court, tax and liens.

——————————————————-

I would normally be willing to give an administration a pass on this, if it seems that Kundra had fooled lots of people that he had reformed. — rbj

I disagree. Kundra had 300 IT staff under his control. I have had that much staff in the past. I knew who the people were by name and what they did by position. Yet Kundra does not know what his right hand man and his primary labor contractor are doing? Either amazingly naive or criminally complicit.

At a minimum it is an indication of his shirking his federal oversight duty as a federal employee. That alone would be a terminator in the private sector.

Dr. Dog on March 16, 2009 at 9:24 AM

That’s the thing…he isn’t a rep…I imagine he is the White House version of the Computer Guy Who Knows Why Your USB Drive Isn’t working. I dunno.

I was referencing President Ogabe being willing to appoint and hire people who have spurious incidents in their past, with theft seeming to be the usual transgression with his people. Whether it be tax cheats or whatever, Ogabe’s administration is filled with thieves of one sort or another.

I don’t really care what this dude’s job is, he could very well be privy to secret and sensitive information. People can’t get cop jobs with theft convictions in their past, why should we be content to allow government insiders to get a pass?

Bishop on March 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM

The fact that he was actually caught doing should be a strike against him in the eyes of Uhh One.

AubieJon on March 16, 2009 at 9:25 AM

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM

Is it possible you and I were separated at birth? We seem to think identically quite often.

Bishop on March 16, 2009 at 9:27 AM

He was 23. Would it have been worse at 24? 25? When does it become BAD?

Last I knew, 18 was the upper age limit for YOUTH.

Oink on March 16, 2009 at 9:27 AM

Whether or not it’s a disqualifier depends upon what happened – there’s no way to know how severe it was unless the details are known. In a lot of these situations, defendants will accept a lesser charge to avoid the hassle of a trial, whether they’re guilty or not. The DA says, plea to a misdemeanor, no jail, minimal fine and go home OR go to trial, possibly lose and spend 90 days in the pokey. Kind of a no brainer for me.

volnation on March 16, 2009 at 9:28 AM

He was 23. Would it have been worse at 24? 25? When does it become BAD?

Last I knew, 18 was the upper age limit for YOUTH.

Oink on March 16, 2009 at 9:27 AM

Exactly. I am amazed that some here consider a criminal act at 23 to be a youthful indiscretion.

BigD on March 16, 2009 at 9:29 AM

People can’t get cop jobs with theft convictions in their past, why should we be content to allow government insiders to get a pass?

Bishop
————————————————-

Not true. Contact the HR dept of Atlanta, Dallas, or LA PD. Repeated misdemeanor offenses are not a disqualifier for being a cop.

Dr. Dog on March 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM

A thief is a thief. He got caught at 23 and that was his first theft? Yeah, right. He probably never told a lie either. Morals, you have them or you don’t. Really complicated, don’t you think?

volsense on March 16, 2009 at 9:31 AM

Theft at 23?,13?,33?,43?
A person who would steal at any age starts out with the mind
set that he’ll get away with it, or he wouldn’t attempt it in the first place.
If you couple that with the FBI raid on his office, I would be very leery about
appointing him to a public office.
Yes, he paid for his crime.
Yes, he wasn’t the target of the raid. The administration should however withdraw the nomination because of the suspicions that will be in minds of the people.

oldernwiser on March 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Taking all of that at face value, should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft keep someone with his talents out of government?

Sorry, I’m a little more unforgiving.

Up to age 18, so long as the crime isn’t serious, I’m all for the “youthful indiscretion” characterization. But once you hit your early 20s, a crime involving theft invariably entails an informed and conscious plan to steal something that’s not your own. If you’re character is not formed by that time to inform you not to steal, I think you have some problems.

If that’s not convincing, let’s ask the following question: Theft of what kind? I’m assuming his crime didn’t involve the use of a weapon–in which case, I’d automatically dump him. In contrast, if he ripped off, say, an electronic appliance store, feel free to exercise your “youthful indiscretion” characterization, though I still say he was too old for that label by age 23.

But what if the appointee to chief information officer was guilty of theft involving technology of some sort? In that case, there has to be someone with a cleaner background than his, if that’s what the theft involved.

BuckeyeSam on March 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM

rbj on March 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

All the failed appointments tell me that Obama is a poor judge or character and that he has low standards. He obviously doesn’t realize that being a petty criminal or even a major criminal/wrongdoer (Rezko, Ayers, Daschle, Geithner, etc., etc., etc.) is WRONG! We have rules, laws, and we used to have a sense of decency in this country although it obviously just doesn’t matter to Team O.

I’ve despised Biden’s pompous a$$ attitude for a L.O.N.G. time, but I believe even he’d be better than Obama.

Oink on March 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM

oldernwiser on March 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM

Good point OW.

volnation on March 16, 2009 at 9:34 AM

Bishop on March 16, 2009 at 9:27 AM

Perhaps. Though, I was raised watching Loony Toons, which gives me a lot of insight into this Administration and may be a common experience.

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM

He’ll be there ready to step in if Biden has another aneurysm. The perfect team. A thief and a pusher.

Griz on March 16, 2009 at 9:35 AM

I just read on MSNBC that Obama has activated his “campaign army” to assist him in his fight to bring Marxism to the country. It’s time to counter and neutalize this so called “campaign army” before it gains another foothold.

rplat on March 16, 2009 at 9:36 AM

Stealing is always stupid, and I’d like think by the age of 23 a person is old enough to know right and wrong. But how stupid was it? What was stolen? It reminds me of an incident here in VA recently where a college grad student, certainly old enough and smart enough to know better, stole a framed poster from an exhibit. The college caught him on surveillance camera and he was arrested. The poster was found in his apartment, and he had cut off the top which would have identified it as belonging to the college exhibit, so he could have been charged with destroying state property. He was extremely sorry for doing it, he claimed he just loved the poster and “had to have it.” He could have been charged with a felony, depending on the value of the poster. The college decided to give him a break and valued it at whatever made it a misdemeanor. If it was something like that I’d say Kundra deserves a break.

scalleywag on March 16, 2009 at 9:36 AM

Not true. Contact the HR dept of Atlanta, Dallas, or LA PD. Repeated misdemeanor offenses are not a disqualifier for being a cop.
Dr. Dog on March 16, 2009 at 9:30 AM

I doubt those misdemeanor offenses which are allowed are theft related. It has been my experience that any theft crime is an automatic disqualifier because of the situations cops find themselves in.

Not saying it’s true across the board, but every department that I dealt with it very clear that theft or swindle crimes instantly disqualified a cop candidate because it is a ‘trust’ crime. Maybe Atlanta or LA are different, but that would surprise me if they allowed such a thing.

Bishop on March 16, 2009 at 9:37 AM

I’ve despised Biden’s pompous a$$ attitude for a L.O.N.G. time, but I believe even he’d be better than Obama.

That’s a pretty low bar, which I think Biden is quite capable of tripping over after he has a few drinks on it.

The situation is clearly hopeless.

There is not a Democrat in Washington who is worth the urine it would take to put them out if they were in flames.

And next you’re going to ask “why would anyone want to?” and I’ll sadly shrug my shoulders and say, “you’re right”.

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 9:38 AM

Bigger question is, if one cannot find qualified Democrats to fill government positions then should the electorate even consider the party to be something to vote for? I don’t think the question is whether Obama/Biden are qualified but is the Democratic Party qualified to lead a nation.

At this juncture I would have to say no.

Dr. Dog on March 16, 2009 at 9:42 AM

I would want to know the circumstances… Hell, at 23 it might have been a prank type thing. But if it were ‘run of the mill’ crime, then it might disqualify him… He’ll be the first CIO everything he says or does will set precedent.

darkpixel on March 16, 2009 at 9:43 AM

Vivek Kundra took a leave of absence from his new job as the Obama administration’s Chief Information Officer after the FBI raided the offices of his last position, Washington DC’s Chief Technology Officer, in a bribery and corruption sting.

After all their missteps, surely Obama and his vetting team knew about this.

It looks like Kundra was the ‘cleanest’ Democrat that they could find.

Uniblogger on March 16, 2009 at 9:44 AM

Should this be a disqualifying event for high government office

Theft?? A disqualifying event for public office?? Your kidding right?

DamnYankee on March 16, 2009 at 9:46 AM

He’ll be the first CIO everything he says or does will set precedent.

darkpixel
—————————————————-

Not really. CIA has more computational power siting at Langley and top IT staff and they ain’t going to open up the kimono for this guy.

Dr. Dog on March 16, 2009 at 9:47 AM

should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft, from 12 years ago, keep someone with his talents out of government?

No, an indiscretion at the age of 23, hardly a reason to disqualify him for life.
But…having no executive experience, and never having a job for more then 3 years, should disqualify you from choosing someone like this.
The whole administration is full of losers…this one incident is minor compared to what Barney has done, or most any of Obama’s appointments…we even have a senator that refuses to pay any tax fines…and a representative dissing money off to the company where her husband is working for.

We even have a president that during our “worst economic crisis” does what? Convenes a panel to study how to attack a radio talk show host and they meet every morning…and he can’t fill the economic positions needed to “bail us out”.

right2bright on March 16, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Kundra probably couldn’t get licensed to work in my call center, but apparently can get a job in the White House. I find that fascinatingly ironic, even if it is explainable.

Why is this surprising? Many of our President’s past (and possibly current) associations would disqualify him from FBI clearance.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on March 16, 2009 at 9:56 AM

Size matters. small thefts lead to larger bribes. Don’t all crooks start small? Isn’t his agency being investigated for financial problems of an illegal nature.

seven on March 16, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Convenes a panel to study how to attack a radio talk show host and they meet every morning…and he can’t fill the economic positions needed to “bail us out”.

You have to set priorities and right now, Republican-Americans are the biggest threat to the Obama-Mugabe regime.

The economy? Is that thing still here?

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 10:02 AM

He wouldn’t have been able to get a CCL from the State of Texas with that conviction on his record. Personally, I feel those who are in charge of the infrastructure needs to be on par with some of our best citizens. Certainly a theft of something less than $300 (could be a pack of gum for all we know) seems like a petty issue to bar someone from serving at the White House, but the more important aspect of the conviction is the fact that he’s once sold out his own morals and been tempted to break the law for less than $300.

smfoushee on March 16, 2009 at 10:12 AM

Size matters. small thefts lead to larger bribes. Don’t all crooks start small? Isn’t his agency being investigated for financial problems of an illegal nature.

seven on March 16, 2009 at 10:02 AM

So you are saying that every small crime leads to a larger crime?
Pretty high standard…

right2bright on March 16, 2009 at 10:15 AM

I really have to question The One’s competency and wonder whether or not President Biden wouldn’t be a better option.

Yeesh. President Biden?!

rbj on March 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

President Biden would just be a different flavor of suck.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2009 at 10:20 AM

So you are saying that every small crime leads to a larger crime?
Pretty high standard…

Not saying that at all. Large crimes usually preceded by smaller criminal acts.

In the course of blackmail. Chicago mob type circles use crimes as a lever in blackmail.

Of course Obama has felony drug use in his background. I don’t recall if he was convicted or served time.

Just to let you know, just because one is fouund not guilty doesn’t mean they did not do it. see the case on the bheading in canada found not guilty by reason of a Schizophrenic diagnosis.

seven on March 16, 2009 at 10:25 AM

So you are saying that every small crime leads to a larger crime?
Pretty high standard…

I’d say if they caught him for this, what haven’t they caught him on?

Seems to me you can get away with a lot in this country before you get convicted for anything.

This incident was probably the tip of the iceberg.

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 10:29 AM

. . . should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft, from 12 years ago, keep someone with his talents out of government?

Ask Linda Tripp.

Tinian on March 16, 2009 at 10:32 AM

“What’s the threshold for government service?”

With this administration?

The question is obviously a “false choice”.

Since so many Americans, like Geithner and Kundra, are forced into illegal activities by the oppressive wealthy white culture, any crimes they commit are not really crimes, but rather, normal responses to the intolerable oppression.

notagool on March 16, 2009 at 10:42 AM

Is there a disqualifier to work in government? Is this a joke thread? Seriously.

If a person started out to try to assemble the most incompetent, grossly dishonest, and dispicable group of people on the planet, one could do no worse than the current crop of nitwits in D.C. (with a few exceptions). If it wasn’t for the fact that they rule us, it would be the makings of a great comedy. Instead, I am laughing and crying at the same time.

King of the Britons on March 16, 2009 at 10:44 AM

Good grief! There are millions of people out there who don’t have a rap sheet and have never been arrested. Why is being a criminal a resume’ enhancement for the Democrat Party?

BetseyRoss on March 16, 2009 at 10:56 AM

Why is being a criminal a resume’ enhancement for the Democrat Party?

It gives them something in common with their voters and donors.

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 10:58 AM

I’d rather have Biden than Obama. At least you would know what you’re getting. With Biden you know you’re getting a piece of crap. With Obama you’re getting a phony piece of crap.

volsense on March 16, 2009 at 11:22 AM

Kundra probably couldn’t get licensed to work in my call center, but apparently can get a job in the White House.

Could Obama pass the security screening to be a Secret Service agent?

Jim Treacher on March 16, 2009 at 11:27 AM

23 years old for misdemeanor theft, from 12 years ago

Maybe he didn’t pay for his weed?

katiejane on March 16, 2009 at 11:37 AM

Eh, no big deal… if it was over 1-5 thousand then it would be something to harp about…

ninjapirate on March 16, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Eh, no big deal… if it was over 1-5 thousand then it would be something to harp about…

Can I borrow three hundred bucks from you?

NoDonkey on March 16, 2009 at 12:02 PM

. . . should a conviction at 23 years old for misdemeanor theft, from 12 years ago, keep someone with his talents out of government?

Of course a thief is a thief!

apoole on March 16, 2009 at 12:10 PM

A conviction for theft (in legal parlence, “a crime of moral turpitude”) – would prevent you from getting any type of job where you would conceivably be entrusted with others property. Police, fire, any type of “bonded” work.

GarandFan on March 16, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Its not the crime, it’s the rarity.

I know many, many people in high level jobs in business, academia and government. To my knowledge (and I feel secure) none of them has a criminal record of any sort. This fellow’s criminal past makes him an outlier when compared to the norm for those given similar job responsibilities. Concentrating solely on the gravity and context of the crime blunts recognition of its rarity among similar individuals.

Mason on March 16, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Ed’s right. I used to own a private security firm. Kundra wouldn’t be qualified to drive a pickup around parking lots as a security guard with that conviction. State licensing and registration requirements would prevent it.

I could be mistaken on this, but I think it would also prevent him from owning a handgun in most states, although I am sure that is a good thing to the Obama Admin.

More relevant, how did Kundra manage to get the requisite security clearance that would be required for his current role, much less a job in the White House?

Damiano on March 16, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Are these the same assclowns that could figure out how make MS Exchange, blackberries, and macs all work together?

liquidflorian on March 16, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Kundra probably couldn’t get licensed to work in my call center, but apparently can get a job in the White House. I find that fascinatingly ironic, even if it is explainable.

Why? His boss Obama could never get a Security Clearance. This is par for the new coarse.

TheBigOldDog on March 16, 2009 at 12:52 PM

This is in all likelihood a shoplifting conviction. Many states over 300 is a felony-under 300 a misdemeanor. Could’ve been a pack of gum. As long as it was one time and not part of an organized theft ring I say it shouldn’t be a disqualifier- but it is a judgment call. Not nearly as serious as Geithner in my book who as a large dollar tax cheat has no business heading the I.R.S.

Goodale on March 16, 2009 at 3:19 PM

I really have to question The One’s competency and wonder whether or not President Biden wouldn’t be a better option.

Yeesh. President Biden?!

rbj on March 16, 2009 at 9:11 AM

President Biden would just be a different flavor of suck.

hawksruleva on March 16, 2009 at 10:20 AM

.
Biden would be an improvement. He really is stupid, his attacks on America would’t be as well planned.

darktood on March 17, 2009 at 6:21 AM

We have a POTUS who couldn’t pass a security clearance, so WHO CARES about this guy?!! /sarc

ex-Democrat on March 17, 2009 at 10:24 AM