Only In America Could Charles Rangel Keep His Chairmanship of House Ways and Means Committee
[Posted by WLS]
Come on — how much of an idiot does a guy have to demonstrate himself to be before election officials in the Democrat party conclude that leading one of the most important Committees in the House of Representatives outweighs the spoils system of Congressional seniority?
Here’s the latest on Lord Charles:
Rangel, the head of the committee that writes the tax code and oversees the budget, now admits his own tax records are in such disarray, he’s had to bring in a forensic accountant to find out just what he owes on items like unreported income on the building he and his wife once owned, or the possible ethical lapses in perhaps getting a favor to combine three condos into one, below-market apartment. Or explaining just how another Dominican condo was financed.
From last week’s WaPo article on the subject:
Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) acknowledged yesterday that he had not lived up to the “higher standard” expected of members of Congress, but he maintained that he should not be punished politically for failing to disclose and pay taxes on rental income from his Caribbean resort property.
The Ways and Means Committee chairman, who is battling three ethics controversies, said he would file amended tax returns and pay federal, state and local taxes he owes — an amount that his attorney, Lanny Davis, estimated at more than $10,000 for 2004 to 2006. Rangel’s accountants are working to determine his tax liability for the rest of the 20 years that he has owned the three-bedroom villa in the Dominican Republic, Davis said.Rangel said he paid $88,900 for the beachfront villa in 1988, financing it with a down payment of $28,900 and a loan from the developer to cover the rest. After two years, he said, the developer decided to waive the interest on loans for Rangel and other early investors. Rangel later borrowed an additional $23,000 — with interest — to add the third bedroom to the unit. That mortgage also was paid off with rental proceeds, he said.
Rangel’s dodge of an explanation is that the rental income generated by the management company was applied against the mortgage principal. He claims that he received infrequent financial reports on the status of the financing and didn’t stay abreast of the tax consequences of that income.
To all of which I say — meaningless bullshit.
This ain’t complicated and it certainly shouldn’t be to a near 40-year member of Congress who proposes to re-write the tax code for the entire nation.
His ultimate unpaid tax liability is going to be six figures.
Dan Rostenkowski and Charlie Rangel — the Dem Party’s gifts to tax fairness.
Rostenkowski lived the high life for years spending campaign funds on his meals and travel, never for a minute thinking to wonder how it is ordinary citizens can’t manage to get lobbyists and fatcats to finance a lifestyle which their incomes would not allow.
Now Rangel thinks no consequences should follow from a failure to pay income taxes on income for a period of more than two decades —
“I really don’t believe that making mistakes means that you have to give up your career,” Rangel said. Later, he added: “I personally feel that I’ve done nothing morally wrong.”
The “Best and Brightest” of the Democrat party. Now we have Obama, who learned at the foot of the master – Emil Jones Jr. of the Illiniois State Senate:
From the Chicago SunTimes:
The Senate president also came under fire for taking $120,000 in interest-free personal loans from his campaign fund over the years. Jones currently owes the fund $30,000.
But — providing he stays out of politics — Jones will have plenty of cash available to repay that debt. Jones had $577,605 in his campaign fund as of June 30, 1998, according to the Illinois Campaign for Political reform. State law allows contributions amassed until that date to be spent on personal items, provided income taxes on the campaign cash are paid.
As one of the longest-serving members of the General Assembly, Jones also is positioned for a six-figure pension under a formula that was phased out because it was deemed by critics as too generous.
If Jones does not take any other state positions and retires at the end of his term in January, he would begin drawing a state pension of $81,016 annually in addition to having free state health insurance for life.
But, a year later, he would see that total increase by 48 percent because he will be grandfathered in under an otherwise defunct retirement formula that rewarded service beyond 20 years.
The boost for Jones, who has served in the General Assembly 35 years, would take his pension all the way up to $119,903 a year. That’s nearly 26 percent more than the $95,313 he is now being paid to wield the Senate gavel.
The nearly $120,000 pension he could draw is more than double the median amount that two households in his Senate district earn combined, according to 2000 Census data.
There is potential that Jones could draw far more than that if he gains an appointment under Blagojevich or in the state university system. Jones has been a major benefactor to Chicago State University, and other retired Illinois politicians, most notably former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Glenn Poshard and former GOP Gov. Jim Edgar, have jumped from political life into academia.
State law would enable Jones to base his pension on his final government paycheck outside the Legislature if he serves for at least one year in a different government or university post.
Cindi Canary, director of the of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, said Jones’ pension and campaign-fund deals are likely to keep him a target for criticism.
“It really infuriates people when you’re looking at a state that can’t fund education, that can’t get it together on capital and that’s struggling to meet its pension obligations in a broad sense for all of our state workers. Then we see legislators who seem to have concocted the sweetest deals imaginable,” Canary said. “He’ll be sitting pretty.”
If he has trouble with his taxes, maybe Rangel can recommend someone to him.
— WLS
Can’t he just call Roni Deutch and settle for PENNIES! ON! THE! DOLLAR! ?
Oh man, tax cheats irritate the hell out of me. Those ads on daytime TV, targeting the unemployed, either telling you how you can get Social Security payouts for having hepatitis (not kidding) or how you can get out of enormous tax payment failure. How strange that Rangel, such a prominent and powerful man, telling me I owe the government more money as he spends it on ridiculous earmarks, is at the front of the march of lazy cheats.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 9/15/2008 @ 3:35 pmMost ethical congress ever, right Nancy?
Charlie (8546d8) — 9/15/2008 @ 3:40 pmOnly in Pelosi’s “House” could Charles “biggest fucking political joke since Marion Barry” Rangel remain in the Congress, let alone keep his chairmanship.
Icy Truth (db1823) — 9/15/2008 @ 3:50 pmNancy Pilosi’s word is worth about exactly what Bill Clinton’s sworn testimony is worth: zero!
Ropelight (921f6e) — 9/15/2008 @ 3:55 pmY’all are being too tough on Charlie. He wanted to do the right thing, but when he went to the meet with the accountants for the Dominican villa, they all spoke Spanish. So what could he do? It’s not his fault.
capitano (211a15) — 9/15/2008 @ 3:55 pm— Most ethical congress ever —
cboldt (3d73dd) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:05 pm.
Most ethical Democratically-led Congress ever.
.
Ethics is for chumps – and all Republicans are chumps.
Only In The DemocRat Party Could Charles Rangel Keep His Chairmanship of House Ways and Means Committee
I fixed it for you.
thebronze (90b755) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:29 pmPeeeloshi just gave every tax cheat in the country a free pass. All they have to do is plead the ‘Rangel’ defense. Why would anyone pay taxes since they will be excused by congress?
Scrapiron (d671ab) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:36 pmSo is it possible for one of you law-talking types to get some of the information generated by Rangel’s forensic accountant? I think it’d be educational to get detailed financial information from a prominant Democrat who may/may not have done double dealings to be in power for so long.
bonhomme (766133) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:42 pmI just hope there isn’t any racism going on here.
Old Coot (2f3a50) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:45 pmReminds me of Hillary clintons statements back in 1992 – They will have the most ethical administration in history
Joe - Dallas (70513b) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:47 pmBarack Obama could change this election immediately by demanding Rangel’s resignation. John McCain can’t do it because the race card would be thrown immediately. Of course Obama does not have the sack to do it.
rockmom (e42807) — 9/15/2008 @ 4:53 pmGive the guy a break. He “feels he has done nothing morally wrong”. Of course, as a brown colored member of the demonrat party, he understands that him doing something morally wrong is a metaphysical impossibility.
ccoffer (5d37a3) — 9/15/2008 @ 5:00 pmRangel’s tax situation is made more interesting by the involvement of union thug lawyer Ted Kheel who was a major investor in the property. Kheel and his wife are longtime supporters of Rangel, includinging diving $440,000 to Rangels monument to himself at City College. Kheel is a big time player in the labor scene in NY.
Also don’t forget about Rangel’s recent violations of rent control laws in NYC.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/15/2008 @ 5:02 pmJoe, its no accident that Rangel has the Clintons’ crooked fixer, Lanny Davis.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:10 pmMaybe “Dollar Bill” Jefferson will help Charlie pay off his tax debt.
tmac (86debe) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:20 pmThe Democrats put a man who was impeached from the bench for bribery onto the most sensitive committee in Congress. Rangel is par for the course.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:36 pm“Rangel’s dodge of an explanation is that the rental income generated by the management company was applied against the mortgage principal.”
As a real estate investor who had to hire an accountant to make sure we were dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s on how we amortized expenses and set up niggling details of a real estate LLC … I AM AGHAST. I pull my hair out over the arcane minutiae of tax law and try to follow the law – and these POS Congresscritters are doing *that* for 20 years! Just plain cheating?!?! If I knew I could pretend to call principal payments a ‘cost’ I’d have *great* tax savings!
Rangel is a liar or a cretin. I am inclined to think … both.
Charlie Rangel you moron: If you can’t do your own taxes rights, step aside from office and/or admit that we need tax simplification. YOU ARE UNFIT TO WRITE OUR LAWS WHEN YOU DONT FOLLOW THEM!
BTW THIS IS WORSE THAN MARK FOLEY TEXTING TO YOUNG MEN: ITS A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW. WILL THE MEDIA MAKE THIS A FRONT PAGE SCANDAL FOR THE NEXT MONTH? DO WE GET TO TOSS THE DEMOCRATS OUT OF OFFICE OVER THIS CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR???
Freedoms Truth (cfa2f1) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:37 pmGolly, I’m shocked, shocked to learn that a politician is a tax cheater . . . and a liar! How can it be????? And, of all people . . . Charlie, “Big Bucks”, Rangel? Just another example of the cess pool that is better known as “Congress.” Our tax dollars in action . . .
jkw (858140) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:42 pmThis could be BHO’s Sister Soulja moment. Denounce the tax cheat, now and often.
Viktor Nehring (6c107f) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:48 pmI’ll vote for Mac regardless, but here’s B’s chance to show some “change”.
“The blacks in his district are behind him”. Don’t they realize that it only takes a few million Rangel’s not paying taxes and there goes the welfare check, and they will be the first thing cut. Working people have power is the choose to use it. Welfare riders only have promises which I have seen broken dozens of times by the leading democrats in the past few weeks.
Look how well the democrats threats to raise taxes out of sight on the rich and most corporations are working out. Most of the ‘rich’ money disappeared from the stock market and will appear in overseas accounts, and I don’t blame them. The Kennedy’s/Clinton’s have kept their funds in oveerseas accounts for years to avoid the taxes they levy on the rest of us. They have been joined by several million not quite rich folks. I invest solely in ‘metal’ (gold and silver) that I can keep in a safe deposit box. $4-5 per ounce silver from a few years ago is what today???
Scrapiron (d671ab) — 9/15/2008 @ 6:56 pmI dunno. Rangel seems like small fish to me right now. While there may be some small malfeasance there, I think we can chalk it up mostly to an overweening sense of entitlement and a vast reservoir of incompetence.
Translation: yeah, kick him out, but I don’t think any of this was deliberate. Addendum: it strikes me that, at the time he got the job, he actually may have been the best person available. Can you imagine Nancy Pelosi doing Rangel’s job any better?
My two cents, anyway.
Marco (5f7986) — 9/15/2008 @ 7:02 pmMarco, he’s not a small fish, and yeah, lots of dmeocrats could do a better job.
What are you saying wasn’t deliberate? His cheating on taxes? You’re crazy if you believe that… given all we know now about his sleazy apartment deals. Or perhaps you mean leniency? The dems tolerate ethical lapses because it’s not unethical unless they can make a campaign commercial demonzing all Republicans… pure and simple, even if the dems want to can Rangel, they can’t because it hurts their ‘culture of corruption=GOP’ myth.
And Rangel is a huge name in New York, a state that has gone for the GOP presidential candidate in recent history and is possibly going to do so ahead. If you give Mccain a 5 point Bradley effect, it’s a tie in polls today. Can Rangel publicly, with Mccain speaking loudly about his ticket’s reform experience, and I think Mccain takes New York.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 9/15/2008 @ 7:27 pmThe tie in to Theodore Kheel on the investment make it a guarandamtee scam, IMHO.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/15/2008 @ 7:53 pmBetcha Rangel is thanking the almighty he wasn’t born a New York Republican!
EricPWJohnson (c00a5d) — 9/15/2008 @ 9:15 pmWLS et al,
You may be interested to know that the actual name of the Democratic Party is the Democratic Party. Not “Democrat Party.”
I’d sure hate to see my favorite conservative blog fall prey to cheap partisan nonsense by accident.
Peace,
Tom (7dfd09) — 9/15/2008 @ 9:52 pmTom
DemocRat, DemocRatic, Repression, Recession…
thebronze (90b755) — 9/15/2008 @ 11:50 pmAfter looking at Wikipedia, I’d say we were correct.Wikipedia
thebronze (90b755) — 9/15/2008 @ 11:53 pmWell, that link didn’t work out that great, but you get the pic.
thebronze (90b755) — 9/15/2008 @ 11:53 pmJust continuing politics in NYC in the fine tradition of Adam Clayton Powell, Jr.
Another Drew (0c2530) — 9/16/2008 @ 12:46 amTom:
Why do Democrats resent it being called the Democrat Party?
And why aren’t they Democratics?
Lord Nazh (899dce) — 9/16/2008 @ 12:56 amTroublemaker
Icy Truth (31efee) — 9/16/2008 @ 1:14 amAnd why aren’t they Democratics?
Because they’d be sued for trademark infringement by a band from Cheltenham.
Apogee (366e8b) — 9/16/2008 @ 1:26 amTom,
Saying ‘Democrat’ Party is a way to protest the extremely undemocratic present and past of that organization. It’s an utterly terrible history, tracing closely with the very worst things tthis country has done.
Look at how Obama was nominated… by caucus cheating. Look at ACORN. Look at how Democrats fight hard againt equality and protecting my vote by preventing vote fraud. There’s very little democratic about this bribed party of the elite. Sure, there’s plenty of problems with the GOP, though its history is much better, but ‘Democrat’ Party is much kinder and more professional a taunt than ‘Rethuglican Bushitler Party of Amerikkka’. It’s actually based on the argument that the party is not Democratic.
Juan (4cdfb7) — 9/16/2008 @ 1:47 am#18 ” YOU ARE UNFIT TO WRITE OUR LAWS WHEN YOU DONT FOLLOW THEM!
BTW THIS IS WORSE THAN MARK FOLEY TEXTING TO YOUNG MEN: ITS A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW. WILL THE MEDIA MAKE THIS A FRONT PAGE SCANDAL FOR THE NEXT MONTH? DO WE GET TO TOSS THE DEMOCRATS OUT OF OFFICE OVER THIS CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR???”
Just another glaring example why we need TERM LIMITS on congress critters that actually think they deserve to hold any office for life or such. Actually on the totality of congress, they all say they desire to serve the country, but end up serving only themselves! Directly or indirectly!
Self serving, selfish = Congress!
Throw the bastards out! I care not the party affiliation!
Bush may or may not be very smart, but BUSH does NOT control the budget! But the 535 members of congress do!
FLUSH all incumbents over two terms!
Get in, and do not forget to GET OUT! If they do, throw them out!
TC (f398ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 1:59 amrockmom wrote: Barack Obama could change this election immediately by demanding Rangel’s resignation. John McCain can’t do it because the race card would be thrown immediately. Of course Obama does not have the sack to do it.
If McCain can’t make something of the exposure of Rangel, he’s got no sack either.
This isn’t an insignificant Cynthia McKinney incident with manufactured racial overtones; Rangel is a big-time Washington player and he is (IMHO) a big-time crook. What liberals said Tom DeLay was, Rangel is. He is the archetypal Washington politician that sucks off the public teat and isn’t afraid to imply he is invulnerable because he’s been around so long, his constituency worships him, and everybody’s gotta kiss his…ring because he’s such an important committee chairman.
This is a winning issue for Republicans. Dems should fear having to defend Rangel’s record on its merits (or lack of same). Their only way of covering for his corruption is to accuse McCain of racism. That WON’T fly with independents.
I am a black man and I’m pissed about how McCain kowtowed to Whoopi Goldberg’s brain-dead slave remark on The View instead of giving her a quick, polite education on the Constitution.
L.N. Smithee (27530b) — 9/16/2008 @ 3:04 amSo Rangel appears to have made a good-faith mistake that’s easily remedied by amended filings.
Why should he resign again? I just don’t see the argument for it.
jpe (bd88bc) — 9/16/2008 @ 4:35 am#34: Juan, you seem to be working with the assumption that the Democratic Party of today is the same as the Democratic Party throughout history. I disagree. As an example, the most recent reorganization occurred in the 50s and 60s with segregationists switching parties, becoming Republicans and capitalizing on the “Southern Strategy.”
Messing up the name may be a “protest,” but it’s extremely partisan (the idea comes from Newt and Luntz for Pete’s sake). Furthermore, it’s just plain inaccurate, and doesn’t quite seem to fit in with the broader tone on this site. I suppose the bigger issue here is that WLS as a front-page contributor is much more partisan than Patterico or DRJ, but I guess that’s his/her role. I happen to find unfiltered GOP talking points off-putting, but then again, it’s somehow not about me on patterico.com…what a pity.
Tom (7dfd09) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:49 amFry Rangel. Fry him hot and nasty. What would the Dems have done were he a Republican?
Paul from Fl (12026e) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:55 amjpe is you don’t see the “argument”, then you must also be a Lefty. BTW, you are only allowed to “amend” for a specific number of years..3? Anyone know the new rules on that?
Sue (4d3ef7) — 9/16/2008 @ 8:35 amSue: it’s a 3 year statute of limitations that runs from the date of filing.
jpe (08c1dd) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:08 amCompare and contrast how Rangel is treated by the media, and any of the psuedo-scandals that they make up about Republicans.
JD (41e64f) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:25 amTom @ #38…
There is nothing “50’s” about the Southern Strategy. In the 50’s, Ike (R) sent the Army to Little Rock to enforce desegregaton.
The changes in the South during the 60’s were triggered by the Civil-Rights and Voting-Rights Acts rammed through Congress by LBJ; but were, in great measure also, a response to the encroachment of the Fed. Govt. into the everyday lives of people who still had the silly notion that they lived in a Republic.
The “Southern Strategy” was from the 1968 election, and was designed to re-make the South into a competitive electoral battlefield for a GOP that had shown no strength there since Reconstruction. When people spoke of the “Solid South”, they weren’t talking about a place that was colored red on a map.
And, KKK members were not welcomed into the GOP unless they had publicly denounced their previous stances on race.
Another Drew (1b62fd) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:55 amIf only there were dots to connect the MSM would be connecting them right now……………….
Bel Aire (2fd7f7) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:54 am“the most recent reorganization occurred in the 50s and 60s with segregationists switching parties, becoming Republicans”
From Wikipedia, here’s how the parties voted on the Civil Rights Act of 1964:
“The original House version:[9]
Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39%)
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20%)
The Senate version:[9]
Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%-31%)
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%)
The Senate version, voted on by the House:[9]
Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%-37%)
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%)”
Which party was the racist party again?
Bel Aire (2fd7f7) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:59 amAs an American citizen I cannot use the excuse “I did not know” why should the scumbags who write these convoluted laws be treated better than me??
HBoulware (404969) — 9/16/2008 @ 12:06 pmThe DeLay Rule:
Not a defense of Rangel, by the way. Congressional ethics committees are a bipartisan disaster. They’re all protecting each other.
On the other subject, I think I’m going to start calling Juan “Ju-anne.” and Pat, Patriko. I don’t know, I just like them better that way. It might be simpler just to put the names in italics or quotes. “juan” “Patterico”
jAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 4:47 pmWhaddya think “WLS?”
I don’t understand why you are being so rude, JAR. Take a time out.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 4:51 pmActually, you probably could if you did so reasonably and in good faith. You’d still have to pay interest (and Rangel certainly will), but you probably won’t be penalized.
jpe (bd88bc) — 9/16/2008 @ 4:54 pmDRJ – It appears to be a different commenter – small j first letter.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:03 pmDRJ – It has been rude from its first comment.
JD (5f0e11) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:07 pm“DRJ”
jAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:10 pmWhy? What have I done wrong, other than be someone who votes for the “democrat” party. Besides “Pat’s” racism just pissed me off.
daley,
Obviously I don’t know if it’s the same person but it is the same IP address. Plus, I can’t really complain. I once inadvertently reversed two letters of my online name and it repeated every time I commented until I caught and corrected it.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:10 pm“It appears to be a different commenter – small j first letter”
The autofill isn’t case sensitive and doesn’t click in all the time on its own.
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:12 pmJAR,
First, please fix your name. Is it ‘jAR’ or ‘JAR’? It’s confusing people. [EDIT: Thanks for fixing that, JAR.]
Second, I explained on another thread that I don’t like to be called a liar and I’m sure other people don’t like it either. (And that goes for everyone else if they are calling you names.) We can talk about something if we disagree but please don’t call names.
Third, I don’t understand this comment and I don’t see anything in this thread that explains it:
It sounds like you are trying to pick a fight. If I’ve missed something, please explain.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:13 pmJAR — 9/16/2008 @ 5:10 pm:
Okay, I see now. Your moniker comment goes back to Tom’s comment 9/16/2008 @ 6:49 am, right?
As for “Pat’s racism,” Patterico hasn’t even been on this thread. I assume you meant that to insult WLS.
That makes a trifecta. You’ve call me a liar, Patterico a racist, and WLS a racist, plus. I suggest you try disagreeing without being so disagreeable.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:24 pmDRJ, in these sensitive times, you are as usual a Gentle-American of the first water (where did that “first water” business originate, I wonder?).
And since we all know that referring to porcine-Americans cannot be taken personally, I think that you are being very nice indeed.
In fact, you are casting pearls before swine in your conversation with JAR.
“Democrat” Party isn’t about “rats,” particularly if we keep getting told that “lipstick on a pig” isn’t a sexist comment about Govenor Palin. My feeling was that the term “Democratic” seemed to suggest that the other party was not ruled by democratic ideals. It’s just as valid a position as the “Democrat” – “rat” connection that was just presented as fact.
I would never refer to a person registered as a Democrat as a “rat”…just as I am certain JAR has never, ever said insulting things about a person registered as a Republican. Right?
It is interesting to see how very sensitive people can be when what they often do is applied to them. Catching the zoological metaphor train: what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
So JAR or jAR, or jaR, or JAr: please go have a beer, glass of wine, or maybe a shot of whiskey. Take a few deep breaths.
But if we are going to be all sensitive about language, we should do it in all directions, and not just in defense of one particular political philosophy.
Eric Blair (2708f4) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:29 pmRACISTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Democrat is racist !!!!!!!
JD (5f0e11) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:29 pmJD, I hope that you are ready to denounce yourself.
Eric Blair (2708f4) — 9/16/2008 @ 5:33 pmDRJ, this site as far as I can tell, has one purpose: to disseminate talking points and to encourage and “protect” the base. I don’t read Talking Points Memo for defenses of democratic corruption. I learned most of what I needed to know about William Jefferson from that site, and it’s not pretty, nor was it described in any other way. And I read plenty of criticism of Clinton’s triangulation and corporate hackery on liberal sites (not enough of course) but no such luck here, on this site, with Delay or
Duke Cunningham, or “Dusty” Foggo, or “big Time” and Haliburton any other subject concerning misbehavior by ‘Republicans.” and their pimps.
I can’t even find references to the most respected books on the Iraq mess on this site. “Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone” Nada. And then today “Patterico” Starts up with “Hussein” Obama, so why not remind him that 50 years ago that sort of reference would be to my father’s very Jewish sounding middle name? Pathetic. Disgusting. Racist scum.
“JD”, make your comment here.
And no I can not bring myself to believe that “WLS” is so out of it not to know that the issue is not that Sarah Palin as a teleprompter-user but that she lies and says she isn’t- that the machine was broken and that she ad-libbed. Others who were reading along with her say she did not. Google it, I’m not in the mood to deal with the spam filter again.
Sarah Palin did not “say no” to the money for the bridge to nowhere. Her little town was the only municipality that charged rape victims for their exams and a state law was passed to end the practice. Palin has not “refused to submit any earmarks as governor” though McCain said that more than once.
I’m tired of wading through the shit that’s spewed on this site.
Heres some fun I heard today
In fairness the reference to “Dude” and a lack of college education is not good. Dude? And Bill Clinton was what exactly?
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:17 pmLiberals annoy me, but I’m disgusted by the lot of you.
Maybe two beers. Half a bottle of wine. A Long Island Iced Tea.
To go with your own Kool-Aide, I mean.
It’ll help with that projection problem of yours.
Eric Blair (2708f4) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:21 pmTom, I don’t call the Dems the Democrat PArty. I’m just explaining the concept behind the taunt. It makes sense and is a legit protest of an extremely undemocratic organization that is opposed to free speech, fair voting, and democracy in Iraq.
You are wrong on the historical facts, but that’s been pointed out. As I said, it’s not as though the GOP has the best history either (though it’s soooo much better than the party of the KKK, for goodness sakes).
There is nothing wrong with the taunt originating with Newt Gingrich, a leader of the 1994 reform movement, and an avowed partisan, unless you think the GOP should run all it’s taunts by democrats.
You ignored the most salient points I made, so I guess you accept them. I just wanted you to understand that there’s a well thought out meaning behind ‘Democrat’ party. It’s not like calling Bush a chump.
Juan (ccd613) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:28 pmchump=chimp, of course.
Juan (ccd613) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:29 pmJAR,
There’s a simple solution for your disgust at the posts and comments at this website.
Leave.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:33 pmThis thread begins by noting the tax problems of Congressman Rangel. Even if his “mistakes” are not criminal, they are evidence that Congress has been happy to construct a code so complicated they can’t do it themselves. (But most people with complicated returns know this, which is why they hire accountants and lawyers to do it for them).
And somehow it morphs into a discussion on whether or not Gov. Palin lied about using a teleprompter or not, and criticism of using the term “Democrat” Party.
I don’t know about the teleprompter incident in question, but I believe it was well established that the teleprompter was not paused for applause the night that Giuliani and she gave their speeches.
As far as the “Democrat” Party goes, as said above, I don’t like the inference that the “Democratic” party behaves by more democratic principles than the Repubs, especially after seeing how their presidential primary race was conducted.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:54 pmJAR- did you post that bit of obnoxiousness here so you could make a post elsewhere of it being on this site.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 9/16/2008 @ 6:56 pmWhy would you use the phrase “only in America…” to talk about a colored man? It smacks of racism to me.
love2008 (1b037c) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:15 pmEither ban me again. or stop whining.
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:39 pm“FLUSH all incumbents over two terms!”
That may be extreme, but I certainly agree on the need for term limits. the Rangel scandal, Abramoff, Murtha, all are proof enough that the incumbent party is a corrupt party that take advantage and lives above the law.
The fact is the Democrats came in on the wave of dumping Republicans over corruption and incompetence and they are WORSE. There is a desperate need to FIRE SPEAKER PELOSI pronto and her drill-nowhere do-nothing tax-everything leftwing Kos-addled Congress.
That means dumping the Democrat majority in Congress by voting against any and all Democrat incumbents.
Freedoms Truth (cfa2f1) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:48 pmWhy is it that everyone assumes that when I say the Democrat party, I’m calling them something or have a ‘underhand’ reason to do so.
It’s natural to take a Democrat and assign it to party; it’s not an intentional put-down.
Victimizing is way to easy in this culture without taking everything harshly.
Lord Nazh (899dce) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:54 pmJAR writes, to the always polite and genteel DRJ:
Whining doesn’t get people banned. Being a jackass does. So, to coin a phrase, “move on” to another topic.
It sure seems like you want to get banned—I’m guessing so that you can, well, whine about how your ideas are squelched by those evvvvilll Rethuglicans.
Folks on the Left never do that, do they? Like at radio stations recently?
So rather than be rude and a projective pain in the metaphorical Andrew Sullivan, think back to the Partridge Family, JAR:
“C’mon get happy!”
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:56 pm“I am a black man and I’m pissed about how McCain kowtowed to Whoopi Goldberg’s brain-dead slave remark on The View instead of giving her a quick, polite education on the Constitution.”
After I collected my thoughts on this, I thought of how it would be brilliant to say “Well Whoopi, thanks to the Republicans who passed the 13th and 14th Amendments after the Civil War that abolished slavery and asserted equal protection rights for blacks, your consitutional rights are safe so long as we have good judges who properly interpret these Amendments . We didnt have a supreme court who always followed that because they put their personal view above what the Constitution says in these amendments, whose original intent was to end slavery and give equal rights to Americans of all colors. Those bad ruling let segregation fester. I will put good judges up who will properly follow the Consitution and thereby protect your equal rights under the law. ”
… but … Whoopi’s taunt was such a gobsmackingly absurd question, I’d be sitting there trying to pick my jaw up off the floor rather than coming up with a good response. It may be that McCain was similarly stunned.
Freedoms Truth (cfa2f1) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:57 pmFor once I wish JAR had his way.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/16/2008 @ 7:57 pmLord Nazh: it’s an interesting business, psychologically. When Group A changes how Group B names itself, Group B is suspicious. So Republicans calling “the Democratic Party” something different— “the Democrat Party” —sounds like an insult to many folks on the Left.
Hence the silly “rat” suspicions.
Mostly projection, considering the volume of nasty things I hear about Republicans from the Left, you know?
I think, as I wrote above, that many Republicans wanted to remind Democrats that their party does not own the ideals of democracy. I actually don’t think any Republicans would mind their party name being changed by Democrats to “The Republic Party,” after all.
Again, I hear complaints about use of the term “Democrat Party” from people who don’t seem to mind the “pig and lipstick” or “smelly fish” metaphors from Senator Obama. In fact, many of these same sensitive souls have been telling Republicans to stop being….well…so sensitive.
Projection.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 8:03 pmJAR,
I have no desire to ban you and while I don’t think I’ve been whining, I will stop discussing this with you. You’ve convinced me it’s not worth it.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 8:12 pmJAR, as much as I know you are trying to make your own points and generally have a good argument, I would ask you to not insult DRJ. It would be nice if at this point you apologise to her. I am pro-Obama as you know, and I also hold DRJ in very high regards. If anything she is the best blogger on this blog. Don’t hurt her. Please?
love2008 (1b037c) — 9/16/2008 @ 8:31 pmlove2008, that was very polite and well spoken. It is possible to disagree fervently with one another…and still remain civil. I think that DRJ’s example is one we can all emulate more.
You don’t need any kudos from me, I know, but I was pleased by your post.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 8:33 pm#77
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 9/16/2008 @ 9:36 pmYes I don’t need any kudos from you but you still gave it and I am grateful. Thank you. You are very kind. 🙂
And Patterico chastised me for being mean to him. That’s his right of course, but I’m thinkin’ it might be time to take off the kid gloves.
Icy Truth (171310) — 9/16/2008 @ 9:55 pmI lay out a list of lies refuted elsewhere but still defended here, and then point out obvious race-baiting, and the only response is a request that I apologize… for being impolite.
That’s not even odd, that’s bizarre,
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:00 pmYou’re Welcome
Icy Truth (171310) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:17 pmWell, something is bizarre, anyway.
It’s not tough JAR: be polite to the folks who are polite. Be rude to the folks who are rude. But being rude to the polite folks?
If you have read this blog at all, you know very well that such a strategy is nonoptimal to Patterico’s very mild Rules of Conduct. And it turns out that many posters—including some folks who share your politics—agree.
You aren’t a tortured revolutionary speaking deathless Truth to totalitarian Power here, after all. You are just a fella with some political ideas, and who likes to argue about them.
So treat the nice people here with politeness. Save the anger and insults for the folks here who enjoy a good verbal wrestling match here.
Just be sure to wear a cup.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:21 pmI’ve been called a cocksucker, and a cunt, a bitch, and half a dozen other names. I’ve been called scum for politely making obvious logical points. But that was a long time ago, when I was polite.
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:32 pm“I’m thinkin’ it might be time to take off the kid gloves.”
Shit. I just spit out a mouthful of Glenfiddich.
“Mr Blair,” please stop.
JAR,
I never asked you to apologize and I’ve never called you names. I asked you to take a time out and when you didn’t do that, I asked you to disagree without being disagreeable.
DRJ (0754ed) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:32 pmLook, I’ve chilled on the name-calling, but you’re certainly not going to get any respect from me — and you know why. You’ve earned most of the negative comments directed your way.
Icy Truth (d50358) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:42 pmBarack Hussein Obama.
If someone uses that tone with those words in my presence, I don’t care if it’s a man, a woman, or US marine, or a cop. I will bring their face to my knee faster than you can say “Anderson Silva.”
“Why’re you so upset? You’re not muslim?”
I’m a white man and a jew who grew up around black people and racist white cops.
I don’t apologize to racists, to people who use racist language for political ends, or the defenders of such people.
If you’re too stupid to figure that out I can’t help you,
JAR (6b0755) — 9/16/2008 @ 10:58 pmJAR, you should do a favor for yourself and the rest of us, and just leave. Your continued presence, and your obnoxious manner, will only insure that the level of discourse will not be high. It would be better for everyone if you found some other place where your talents were more appreciated.
Another Drew (1b62fd) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:16 pmTo the now-banned (again) individual who called me “racist scum” for writing out Barack Hussein Obama and crossing out the middle name:
It was a joke, poking fun at the concept that we’re not allowed to use his name for fear of being called racist.
But to quote a now-banned (again) commenter: “If youre too stupid to figure that out I cant help you.”
Buh-bye.
Again.
Patterico (343c67) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:26 pmI’ve gotten less patient with jerks as time goes on. Used to be I’d agonize over banning someone. Now, it’s So Long, Sucker! I never regretted banning anyone but I’ve regretted not doing so.
I should have banned JAR the second he admitted he was AF/blah. Those guys were jerks too!
Patterico (5b51b5) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:32 pmPatterico – You have my sincere respect for banning JAR. As Another Drew said, “the level of discourse will not be high” with JAR around, and it is this level of discourse that is rare in blogging, and the preservation of such is important.
You have never banned anyone for their ideas or ideals. It is the continued lack of either and the substitution of verbal abuse that necessitates a ban.
Apogee (366e8b) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:49 pmYeah, calling people names in quotation marks is something I have seen before from very angry and rude people who are working out their personal issues electronically. I guess it is supposed to be an insult.
Patterico, this JAR fellow wanted to be banned; I’ll bet cash money for the reasons I theorized.
I’m reminded of one of my favorite Heinlein quotes: “I once met a sad little lizard who claimed to be a Tyrannosaurus rex on his mother’s side, twice removed.” Some people have to search far and wide and be creative to find their pride. So banning him probably makes him feel like a freedom fighter or John Reed or something.
I loved the comment about Glenfiddich. Amateur. He probably drinks vodka martinis, too.
Lots of different voices here, and plenty of room for different ideas. I’m glad that the bullies get shown the door.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:55 pmPatterico:
When you wrote:
I missed the reference, I’m sad to say. Maybe that is a good thing? He just seemed like an angrier, less boastful jharp to me. But perhaps he started off differently. Who knows?
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/16/2008 @ 11:58 pmI’m sorry, but that whole “bring your face to my knee” business made me laugh. You and I both know that the guy looks like Mr. Peepers from the Wally Cox Show. Sorry to show my age.
Think a less athletic Jon Cryer.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/17/2008 @ 12:01 amfor the record, I don’t mind if someone wants to call me Ju-Anne, or whatever that was. It’s just pixels to me.
🙂
Juan (4cdfb7) — 9/17/2008 @ 12:17 am“That’s Juan one, and Juan two.”
Free Kewpie to the first Geezer who knows the reference.
Icy Truth (d50358) — 9/17/2008 @ 12:24 amTom, no hard feelings about the ‘democrat’ taunt, by the way.
I just want you to understand that it’s meaningful, not just screwing up the name to be a jerk. I think these kinds of taunts are excellent ways of communicating. Everytime I hear that one, I recall that I also don’t think the democrats show respect for democracy as much as their moniker suggests they should.
Other thoughtful taunts: Voodoo Economics, Bridge to Nowhere, Pork, Mission Accomplished
I think the dems tend to be better at this, by the way. Sure, it’s a deadly serious charge for me to assert that the democrats often fight against democracy, but at least this taunt has the element of humor. It’s so much better than what usually passes for discourse, right?
Juan (4cdfb7) — 9/17/2008 @ 12:34 amStart up Lawrence Welk’s Bubble Machine, Icy.
My God, I’m getting old.
Eric Blair (81e599) — 9/17/2008 @ 1:32 amThat wasn’t what I meant, although it does fit — kinda.
Icy Truth (894e4f) — 9/17/2008 @ 2:16 amIcy,
I’m slow today. What’s Juan one and Juan two?
DRJ (8b9d41) — 9/17/2008 @ 9:13 amThey were characters on the TV show “Soap”; the henchmen of the character named El Puerco. In one of his earliest roles, Juan One was played by Joe Mantegna.
Icy Truth (7e1f91) — 9/17/2008 @ 9:25 amObcvious to whom? Can we borrow your super secret xrays glasses?
It is racist to say Democrat. It is racist to say Hussein. Care to expand on your list of verboten words, JAR?
JD (41e64f) — 9/17/2008 @ 9:29 amRACISTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1eleventy11111!!! one
JD (41e64f) — 9/17/2008 @ 9:29 amJD, the professor of JARbology is gone — discorporated. Relax.
Icy Truth (7e1f91) — 9/17/2008 @ 9:43 amStrange, I keep hearing a buzzing sound. Or maybe it is the sound of mournful violins.
I hope we don’t get more “I’m gone for good” posts. But I wouldn’t be surprised!
Eric Blair (2708f4) — 9/17/2008 @ 11:38 amWell, since obama has said those who are white that do not agree with him are racist, and since everytime he gets behind in the polls he uses the race card. I guess it must be true. I am a white racist that will never vote for a black power marxist, socialist racist fraud. Guess that makes me just as good as obama. Now I am free at last!
Used2bdemocrat (806b13) — 9/19/2008 @ 8:02 pm