Yesterday, the NYT produced an editorial calling on Tom Daschle to withdraw his nomination:

Unfortunately, new facts have come to light — involving his failure to pay substantial taxes that were owed and his sizable income from health-related companies while he worked in the private sector — that call into question his suitability for the job. We believe that Mr. Daschle ought to step aside and let the president choose a less-blemished successor.

Curiously, though, they seem to be saying that if it weren’t for Tim Geithner‘s previously disclosed tax games, they wouldn’t be too troubled by Daschle’s:

Mr. Daschle’s tax shortfall is particularly troubling because it comes on the heels of another nominee’s failure to pay taxes due. We were not pleased when the president’s Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, admitted that he had failed to pay tens of thousands of dollars in federal self-employment taxes while working for the International Monetary Fund despite having signed paperwork acknowledging the obligation.

Now we are confronted with an even larger lapse by Mr. Daschle, who failed to pay $128,000 in taxes, primarily for personal use of a car and driver provided to him by a private equity firm for which he consulted. Although the firm — headed by a major Democratic donor — had not issued a form 1099 for the value of the car service, Mr. Daschle said he became concerned last June that he might owe taxes on it and instructed his accountant to investigate. Neither was concerned enough to actually pay the taxes.
[...]
In both the Geithner and Daschle cases, the failure to pay taxes is attributed to unintentional oversights. But Mr. Daschle is one oversight case too many. The American tax system depends heavily on voluntary compliance. It would send a terrible message to the public if we ignore the failure of yet another high-level nominee to comply with the tax laws.

I didn’t realize there was an informal limit of just one tax evader in the cabinet at a time. But maybe Geithner and Daschle can still be tag team cabinet secretaries? That would make everyone happy, right? Obama would get what he wants: the uniquely qualified savior of the economy, and the best man in the country for health-care reform. And the NYT‘s lofty principles wouldn’t be compromised either.

(I wanted to link to the transcript of yesterday’s White House press briefing, where Robert Gibbs described Daschle several times in these terms. But the transcript of the early afternoon briefing is still not up on the White House web site. And I couldn’t find any unofficial transcript either.

Speaking of this “best man in the country for health-care reform” nonsense, surely the real issue isn’t how great Daschle would be but how almost equally good the second-best choice would be?)