Political & Elections

Billy · Senior Member

RE: Rangel: guilty, guilty, and guilty

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/591fdd87-84b3-4e65-b3b1-f17ff8229e69.jpg

I think that picture sums things up quite nicely.

Billy · Senior Member

Wow, pretty messed up.

What can you say about the voters who voted him back in ?
They prefer Democrats to Republicans by A LOT. You could blame the Democrats for not having a strong primary challenge. Ah, the woes of a two party system. A mostly poor, mostly minority district knows that Democrats do better for them, and thus prefer this corrupt guy over a non-corrupt Republican. I mean hell, percentage and number wise, the Democratic candidate beat the Republican candidate in 2008 by a greater margin than the Republican Candidate beat the Socialist Workers' Party Candidate.

poetgrl · Senior Member

That's what I was thinking. Before you drop your career for a congress person's pet project, you'd better get a copy of thier physical and the latest polling data. evileye

-- Edited by poetgrl on Sunday 21st of November 2010 02:25:49 PM

busdriver11 · Guru

Well, those people ought to think about their earmarked pet projects before they go ahead and decide to die! Get that bridge to nowhere completed first. Then die.

poetgrl · Senior Member

Yes, it's interesting about how they get the money back to thier state.

I was reading an article the other day, and I will try to find it, where they were discussing how the "pet projects" of newly dead or unseated or retired congress people are being re-evaluated and cut off. Not so much with those still in office.

busdriver11 · Guru

"I think they vote them back in because they "bring back the money."

Yep, that's why Patty Murray gets voted in, time and time again. Of course, alot of that money is for earmarked projects that are completely unneccessary...but she gets great campaign contributions from those companies.

Abyss · Senior Member

Honestly, I love that he was reelected. Such a shining example of Democratic tradition.

poetgrl · Senior Member

Yes, well, I'm from Chicago, so........You can imagine.

I think they vote them back in because they "bring back the money." Plus, the more corrupt they are, imho, the better thier get out the vote machine.

busdriver11 · Guru

"What can you say about the voters who voted him back in ?"

Crazy, crazy, and crazy. Or just not paying attention. Or don't care anything that he's a crook, but he's our crook. I spend alot of time in Memphis, and there have been so many blatantly corrupt politicians there. And people keep voting em in, term after term (until they go to jail).

cbreeze · Veteran Member

What can you say about the voters who voted him back in ?

busdriver11 · Guru

I know, those guys are completely shameless. It is amazing. I swear, they seem perfectly convinced they have done nothing wrong. Perhaps the proper name for them is psychopaths? Where is Shrinkrap when you need her?

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

Seriously, they should throw him out.

Congresscritters who are this shamelessly lawless tend to be from very safe districts. Remember that freezer guy from Louisiana, and Duke Cunningham with the bribe menu?

busdriver11 · Guru

I watched some of his comments on tv today, in front of the committee. It was extraordinary. The showmanship, the self promotion, the ego, the spin. I was completely....in awe. And not believing a single word. But he is really impressive, gosh, if politics end for him soon, I'd say he has a promising career as an actor.

soccerguy315 · Guru

voted 9-1 for censure... honestly I don't think there's any reason this guy should still be on the Hill. He didn't follow the laws that the committee he was in charge of wrote. It's honestly just ridiculous (and I'm sure he's not the only one)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101118/ap_on_go_co/us_rangel_punishment

---quote---

"Failure to pay taxes for 17 years. What is that?" McCaul asked, referring to Rangel's shortchanging the Internal Revenue Service on rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic.

McCaul also noted the committee's finding that Rangel solicited donors for the Charles B. Rangel Center at City College of New York from donors who had business before the Ways and Means Committee.

After an investigation that began in summer 2008, Rangel was convicted Tuesday by a jury of his House peers on 11 of 13 charges of rules violations.

He was found to have improperly used official resources — congressional letterheads and staff — to raise funds from businesses and foundations for the Rangel Center. A brochure with some of Rangel's solicitation letters asked for $30 million, or $6 million a year for five years.

He also was found guilty of filing a decade's worth of misleading annual financial disclosure forms that failed to list hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, and failure to pay taxes on his Dominican unit.

Chisam said donations to the Rangel Center were going poorly, then spiked after Rangel rose to the top of the Ways and Means Committee. He noted the center would benefit minority students and asked, "What kid of example is that of what public service ought to be?"

----end quote---

struggling with trying to quote from an outside source right now, apologies for that