Rangel: Not corrupt, just irresponsible

[Takeda Shingen]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20023283-503544.html

The new 'I am not a crook' speech. Give it up Charlie; you're poison to yourself and everyone around you.

[mookiemookie]

And censure too. Talk about a smack on the wrist. It must be nice knowing you can get caught committing fraud and get nothing more than letter and some procedural bullpoop as punishment.

I agree. He should show some integrity and step down.

[AVGWarhawk]

He should be tried in a court of law like the rest of us would have been. :03:

[Takeda Shingen]

He should be tried in a court of law like the rest of us would have been. :03:

Yep.

[Bubblehead1980]

Charlie Rangel has no integrity so no shock,.Yet the poor fools in Harlem will prob elect him until the day he dies.

[tater]

Step down? He should be booted from his party. Assuming they were not just as corrupt as he is.

[Takeda Shingen]

Step down? He should be booted from his party. Assuming they were not just as corrupt as he is.

If we boot all who are corrupt, there'd be no one left to run congress. That would be fine with me too.

[GoldenRivet]

a conversation i had with my mom on Tuesday:

HER: "The IRS has decided now all that i cannot write off the rental properties i own as part of a 'business', and they have also decided that i owe them $30,000."

ME: "Run for congress... then you dont have to pay ****."

[The Third Man]

His district re-elected him. Only congress can remove him now. It says something about his district. I think you can figure what that is.

[GoldenRivet]

His district re-elected him. Only congress can remove him now. It says something about his district. I think you can figure what that is.

I have a guess:salute:

[the_tyrant]

the method of combating corruption here is quite ineffective
because no matter how much you hate your local politician, they deserve to get payed more in real liquid capital
I believe that Singapore's method of increasing the wages of politicians is a good method

[Takeda Shingen]

the method of combating corruption here is quite ineffective
because no matter how much you hate your local politician, they deserve to get payed more in real liquid capital
I believe that Singapore's method of increasing the wages of politicians is a good method

Corruption has been around since the dawn of organized government. No policy is ever going to change it.

[The Third Man]

The neo-cons don't care. He is on the Obamacare death list.

[Takeda Shingen]

The neo-cons don't care. He is on the Obamacare death list.

You're right, they don't care, but if he was a fetus, gay or a stem cell, the Neo-Cons would be all over him.

[Platapus]

I think it is terrible the way Congress pushes this under the covers.

I can not understand any rational for not expelling him from office :nope:

And yet, we still keep re-electing these people into office. :nope:

What does that say about the average American voter? <and keep it clean>

I guess I am more bothered by the accepting attitude of

1. They all do it
2. The "other" side does it

Nether should be acceptable. :nope:

But as long as the people vote for the little "R" and "D"s little will change. And that makes me feel sad for my country.

[Takeda Shingen]

But as long as the people vote for the little "R" and "D"s little will change. And that makes me feel sad for my country.

If I were to put my political philosophy into a concise package, that would just about cover it. :up:

[the_tyrant]

I think it is terrible the way Congress pushes this under the covers.

I can not understand any rational for not expelling him from office :nope:

And yet, we still keep re-electing these people into office. :nope:

What does that say about the average American voter? <and keep it clean>

I guess I am more bothered by the accepting attitude of

1. They all do it
2. The "other" side does it

Nether should be acceptable. :nope:

But as long as the people vote for the little "R" and "D"s little will change. And that makes me feel sad for my country.

If you really want change, join your local communist party, get an ak47, and wait for the general workers revolution against the corrupt capitalists

failing at that, just be satisfied with what you have already
many people around the world already envy the US's democratic principles

[Takeda Shingen]

If you really want change, join your local communist party, get an ak47, and wait for the general workers revolution against the corrupt capitalists

failing at that, just be satisfied with what you have already
many people around the world already envy the US's democratic principles

Many loved Rome's democratic principles as well, but it was still weakened to the point of death by it's politicians.

[Soundman]

I think it is terrible the way Congress pushes this under the covers.

I can not understand any rational for not expelling him from office :nope:

And yet, we still keep re-electing these people into office. :nope:

What does that say about the average American voter? <and keep it clean>

I guess I am more bothered by the accepting attitude of

1. They all do it
2. The "other" side does it

Nether should be acceptable. :nope:

But as long as the people vote for the little "R" and "D"s little will change. And that makes me feel sad for my country.

AMEN! From the results of the recent election, it would appear the country is becoming fed up, pissed off and waking up to the fact that major changes need to happen. What this says however is, it is obvious we have a long way to go and far too many are still sleeping. Wake up and smell the coffee folks! tHow could this guy be re-elected, let alone those who would give this guy a free pass and a slap on the wrist, still hold office. Like AVG said, he should have been tried just like anyone else would be, pay any fines, and probably go to jail. On top of that, the guy has the nerve to declare "I can't afford a lawyer" ... How about selling some of that property you didn't pay taxes on to pay for your lawyer. Give me a huge freak'n break.. I say THROW THE BUMS OUT!

[nikimcbee]

Duke needs to ask for a retrial after this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Cunningham

[Soundman]

Duke needs to ask for a retrial after this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Cunningham

Isn't that somthing? Good read and juxtaposition! So much for Charlie's plea for leaniency due to his military service eh? :03::D Of course it may also lead a person to ponder... Does party affiliation have anything to do with the outcomes? :hmmm:

[August]

I can not understand any rational for not expelling him from office :nope:

I'm no fan of Rangel (or Cunningham) but I prefer it to be extremely difficult to expel a person that the voters have elected to public office.

It's similar to a proposal that was recently defeated at our last town meeting which would have banned felons from running for town selectmen. Now it's highly unlikely that i'd vote for a person with a criminal record but I don't like the idea that my fellow citizens and I aren't allowed to elect anyone we want.

[nikimcbee]

I'm no fan of Rangel (or Cunningham) but I prefer it to be extremely difficult to expel a person that the voters have elected to public office.

It's similar to a proposal that was recently defeated at our last town meeting which would have banned felons from running for town selectmen. Now it's highly unlikely that i'd vote for a person with a criminal record but I don't like the idea that my fellow citizens and I aren't allowed to elect anyone we want.

What about finish elected time then go to prison?

[Platapus]

I'm no fan of Rangel (or Cunningham) but I prefer it to be extremely difficult to expel a person that the voters have elected to public office.



How about impeach?

[August]

What about finish elected time then go to prison?

Oh no you misunderstand Nik.

If whatever the scoundrel did rates a jail term I say the sentence should take effect immediately. Let a replacement be appointed or elected in special election according to state law like it would for a death in office or any other job incapacitating reason.

But I have a problem with government overturning the will of the voter for lesser reasons. Afaik Rangel didn't do anything that actually rates sending him to jail so while he probably ought to be the subject of a state impeachment effort, that should be for the voters of New Yorks 15th congressional district to make that call.

Imo of course.

[August]

How about impeach?

You mean like Clinton?

[nikimcbee]

I thought the tax thingy is a problem? That's why I like your signature.:D:salute:

[August]

I thought the tax thingy is a problem?

Could be I guess but so far he hasn't been convicted of tax evasion in a court of law or sentenced to a jail term by a judge.

That's why I like your signature.:D:salute:

Thanks! :up: I applied it earlier this month right down to town selectmen. Didn't do too much good here in Democratachusetts but i'll keep plugging and maybe someday pluralism will again be seen here in the nations Cradle of Liberty.

[tater]

August is spot on, IMO.

It is the State/constituency that has the final say on booting them. The party, OTOH, can and should be judged on their reaction. For minor infractions (this is major, IMO), they should boot them from committee or party leadership spots if they want the party to look clean. For stuff like this, they should boot him from the party. Failure to do so is an endorsement of his crimes.

[CaptainHaplo]

Censure was the most they could do without expulsion - which given that Mr. Rangel was just re-elected, should not occur. His constituents, regardless of his legal issues, decided to send him back to Washington. To expel him would be to ignore their choice.

Censure will assure that he is relegated to a minor role - his seniority is not technically stripped, but by tradition the party (either one) tends to shun a censured membor.

Now should there be a legal prosecution? Thats up to a Federal or NY DA I would think.

[Platapus]

You mean like Clinton?

No more like Andrew Johnson but I guess I have to give you credit for a cheap political statement. :nope:

<golf clap>

[Onkel Neal]

If we boot all who are corrupt, there'd be no one left to run congress. That would be fine with me too.


:haha: Agreed!

[Armistead]

Again, I'm ready for an honest King or Queen. I think one honest person could do more in a month that those nuts have done in a lifetime.

[mookiemookie]

Again, I'm ready for an honest King or Queen. I think one honest person could do more in a month that those nuts have done in a lifetime.

Tory loyalist! :O:

[Soundman]

Censure was the most they could do without expulsion - which given that Mr. Rangel was just re-elected, should not occur. His constituents, regardless of his legal issues, decided to send him back to Washington. To expel him would be to ignore their choice.

Censure will assure that he is relegated to a minor role - his seniority is not technically stripped, but by tradition the party (either one) tends to shun a censured membor.

Now should there be a legal prosecution? Thats up to a Federal or NY DA I would think.

Agreed, however that's part of the point I was trying to make earlier. Why the heck would anybody want to re-elect an obvious crook. Surely they must have heard about his issues beforehand and if not, they shouldn't have voted to begin with. People that vote, but do not know who or why they are voting for them, probably do more harm than good in elections. If they are not sure and/or don't study the issues and where the candidates stand on the issues, let those making an intelligent, informed decision do the voting. Otherwise, they may well be casting a vote (as in this case)for the wrong person.

[August]

No more like Andrew Johnson but I guess I have to give you credit for a cheap political statement. :nope:

<golf clap>

What political statement? Who was the last President to be threatened with impeachment? Andrew Johnson? I don't think so...

I responded to your three word question with a simple and unoffensive inquiry as to whether you had a particular person in mind, ie the most recent one threatened with impeachment. Now perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain to me how you could possibly see that as a "cheap political statement".

Personally I think you and the other liberals on this board have become so defensive now that you're side is in power and having to account for it's actions that you all see even the most innocuous things as a personal attack.

Now FWIW had you not gotten your panties in such a twist I would have told you that in my opinion Clinton should NOT have been removed from the Presidency, unless he was first convicted of perjury in a court of law AND sentenced to jail thereby making it impossible for him to finish his term.

But no, you were too eager to be insulted.

[mookiemookie]

Personally I think you and the other liberals on this board have become so defensive now that you're side is in power and having to account for it's actions that you all see even the most innocuous things as a personal attack.

I don't have to account for anything, as I'm not an elected official. I'm also not such a blind partisan hack that I'd go through mental gynastics to defend one party or another's actions just because they're the actions of "my team". If people stopped thinking of things like sports fans of opposing teams and used the brains in their head, things may be better off.

[SteamWake]

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh312/UlteriorModem/Rangel.jpg

[August]

I don't have to account for anything, as I'm not an elected official. I'm also not such a blind partisan hack that I'd go through mental gynastics to defend one party or another's actions just because they're the actions of "my team". If people stopped thinking of things like sports fans of opposing teams and used the brains in their head, things may be better off.

Your response belies your claim of disassociation mookie. Or in other words if the shoe doesn't fit then why are you trying it on?

[Platapus]

What political statement? Who was the last President to be threatened with impeachment? Andrew Johnson? I don't think so...

I responded to your three word question with a simple and unoffensive inquiry as to whether you had a particular person in mind, ie the most recent one threatened with impeachment. Now perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain to me how you could possibly see that as a "cheap political statement".

Personally I think you and the other liberals on this board have become so defensive now that you're side is in power and having to account for it's actions that you all see even the most innocuous things as a personal attack.

Now FWIW had you not gotten your panties in such a twist I would have told you that in my opinion Clinton should NOT have been removed from the Presidency, unless he was first convicted of perjury in a court of law AND sentenced to jail thereby making it impossible for him to finish his term.

But no, you were too eager to be insulted.

Perhaps your statements would have merit if I were a liberal and a Clinton lover. I happen to be neither. But I guess to you anyone who disagrees with you must be a liberal.

August, when you label people, you lose the capability of understanding them fully and from being able to critically examine what they say. Just some free advice.

[August]

Perhaps your statements would have merit if I were a liberal and a Clinton lover. I happen to be neither. But I guess to you anyone who disagrees with you must be a liberal.

August, when you label people, you lose the capability of understanding them fully and from being able to critically examine what they say. Just some free advice.

Uh huh. Dude, I simply asked you to clarify who you were talking about, and I did it in a totally neutral and inoffensive way. You just jumped to the conclusion that it was negative. Any time a Conservative mentions the word "Clinton" it MUST be negative, right?

So maybe you ought to follow your own advice Bud.

Because the ironic part is that, like I said, and you ignored, the only reason I asked was because I intended to use him as an example of who should NOT be expunged/impeached. Had you been actually reading my previous posts (instead of apparently scanning them for something to get insulted about) you'd have noticed that I was also defending Democrat Charlie Rangel against expulsion.

Think about it.