A good exchange happened last night on The Factor with that tax dodging, dishonest, franking abusing, bribe accepting, misuser of House resources Rep. from NY, Charlie Rangel and the host, check it out:
For those wondering why the dems had no time, sympathy or support for Anthony Weiner but kept this guy around, who did far worse, good question. Most know about Rangel’s involvement with income tax evasion, but the list of ethics breaches goes way beyond that, some highlights:
House Rules state that a Member “shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.”
Subcommittee finds Rangel violated this with the following offenses:
-Improper solicitations of potential donors to the Rangel Center
-Acceptance of favors and benefits from donors to the Rangel Center in a way that some might see as influence the job he does in Congress
-Knowingly accepting indirect gifts from donors to the Rangel Center
-Improperly using franking privileges to raise money for the Rangel Center
-Writing solicitations for the Rangel Center on House property
-Misusing House resources- staff, phones, e-mail and franking for work related to the Rangel Center.
-Misuse of Congressional letterhead to solicit donations to the Rangel Center
-Failing to disclose, from 1998 to 2007, full and complete financial statements
-Rangel’s pattern of submitting Financial Disclosure statements that were incomplete and inaccurate
-Failing to make sure his Financial Disclosure statements were complete and accurate
-Violating the Ethics in Government Act
-Failing to report rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic on his Federal income tax returns from 1998 to 2006
-Violating the Internal Revenue Code
-Receiving rent stabilized apartment, using it for campaign activities when the lease stated it should be used only for living purposes
-Accepting the rent stabilized apartment in a way that could look like he was influence in his government activities by the deal
-By breaking the law, Rangel violated the Code of Ethics for Government Service
For his offenses, Rangel got “Censored”:
The House voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to censure Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who pleaded for leniency but now finds his 40-year career tarnished after his colleagues rebuked him using a rare form of public punishment for ethics violations.
Some thought expulsion was more appropriate, but the voters get to decide and his public service record reveals a vice like grip on his constituency.
But back to the video. Is anyone else getting really tired by the still present slave references utilized by both sides in scoring points? I thought we moved way past these metaphors, and granted, the left goes to that well more often, but I think it is lame for any one in this day and age to plantation reference anything regarding the black community. Questions asking what has Obama done for the black community, has liberalism devastated the black community, has the war on poverty been a success or failure, has the democratic party sold the black community a false bill of goods, why success in inner city empowerment benefits us all, what steps are needed to defeat the welfare/dependent mentality and get folks motivated to enhance their own station in life, these are all legitimate questions of the day.
One tactic used by some politicians (maybe it is an Alinsky tactic) and one used by Barney Frank relentlessly is the question dodge/sympathy play. A question is asked whereby the guest goes off some primrose path, the host tries to rein him in and get him back to the question and the guest then complains that he is not being allowed sufficient air time to answer, weak. Rangel does this a few times here and finds himself behind 3 or 4 questions because he dilly dallied with the first one.
He also gives us another example of how some try to play the nonpartisan, who blames both sides initially but then can’t help themselves and goes to the familiar ,” America is made of people who dream and hope that they can have a better life, that was snatched from them and Obama has not restored that hope that was taken from them by George Bush”.
Charlie is right when he says that Obama inherited a bad economy, but it was bad when he was still campaigning, it was bad when he introduced the ARRA, it was bad when he launched the Financial Stability Plan (taking TARP money to bail out the banks), it was bad when he committed major cash to stabilizing AIG, automakers and Fanny and Freddie, it was bad when he decided on quantitative easing and buying trillions worth of treasuries, and it was bad when he decided to amend health care which turned out to not be deficit neutral after all. He inherited a lousy economy, and it is still lousy, only with a bigger price tag.