Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Rangel performance cheers GOP readers

The declaration "I am not going away" that Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) delivered on the House floor yesterday in response to his ethics issue has dampened the spirits of our Democratic Readers Who Comment, pleased those of the Republican persuasion and given the term limits crowd another strong talking point.

Rangel's speech -- a combination of defense, apology, refusal to resign and appeal for an early trial -- is seen by readers of both parties as good news for the GOP in its hopes of recapturing the House in the mid-term elections.

As Paul Kane and Ben Pershing wrote, "Rangel admitted to his colleagues that there were sloppy mistakes in filing his personal financial disclosure forms -- the basis of several counts against him, for not revealing more than $600,000 in income and assets -- and acknowledged that he should not have used congressional stationery for raising money for a wing at the City College of New York. But he said these were unintentional errors."

We'll start with MikeKelly45, who wrote, "Give Charlie his day in court. No wonder he took to the floor to make his case with the next hearing set for the day before the General Election, Charlie has been sentenced to political death by innuendo... Justice is as it appears. This appears to be an execution, not a hearing."

But sportsfan2 said, "He did'nt know he had to declare $600,000 in income? He is either stupid or devious. In either case, he does not belong in congress."

phines1 wrote, "Maybe I'm just too soft, Chuck has represeted New Yorkers probably better than anyone. Let the old man go out with dignity, tar and feathers would be appropriate."

HoyaSaxa78 said, "What a disgrace -- this guy is a walking advertisement for term limits..."

sambird agreed, writing, "What don't you stupid people understand. The Congress doesn't have to live by the rule of law the rest of us do. That's how the so called lawmakers wrote the laws... Term limits is the answer, if they won't do it we can with our votes..."

pjsilva said, "So much for party loyalty. Wasn't Charlie Rangel close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - yet she walked out of the chamber while he spoke? Rangel has a right to a fair hearing but like the late Sen. Ted Stevens, Rangel has been in office too long. Power corrupts absolutely. Rangel's career has been forever tarnished, as was Stevens' by his corruption trial."

kiltedknight wrote, "Charlie Rangel is one of those who constantly claims that the rich should pay their fair share of taxes. So now that he's one of them, he's given a bye on paying his taxes, never mind his "fair share"? If I were Adam Clayton Powell IV (Rangel's primary opponent), that's *EXACTLY* what I would be continually telling the constituents. He's a wealthy tax cheat. He wants the rich to pay their fair share but won't do it himself."

jbentley4 said, "I'm a die-hard Democrat and to see this is painful. Charlie has had a long and distinguished career. He should do a favor to his constituents, his party, his country, and himself by resigning now and just going away. This serves nobody except the partisan right. Period."

Kansas28 wrote, "Charlie Rangel served Harlem well when they needed support most. He has paid his debt to society, given up an important committee post so leave the guy alone. No, I am not black. I am a white, female Republican."

Leo10 said, "Here is a prime example of a greed and power junkie.He cannot let go of his addiction no matter what.He has all the money he could possibly use and a retirement package most people would kill for, yet he must hang on for that next greed and power fix."

gitarre wrote, "Rangel was merely pathetic. What was truly disgraceful was the applause for him. Perhaps he can enlist O.J. Simpson in the search for the real culprits ..."

bmadden3 said, "I hope his trial carries over until November."

TexRancher wrote, "Just shows what an idiot he is. A self-serving 30 minute speech won't help his trial. So let's get on with it! Give him the trial he's demanding and let the American public see him in all his pathetic political glory and if found guilty, hang him out to dry!"

We'll close with Sproing, who said, "Excuse me for being dense about this. The bi-partisan ethics committee has brought charges against Rep. Rangel on 13 counts of behavior that breaks their rules of conduct. That committee recommends that their be a reprimand issued which is the leanest sentence they can recommend and is essentially about as hard on Mr. Rangel as a parking ticket. Is all that reasonably correct? O.K., then why in the hell didn't he take a deal to do a mea culpa to these charges and accept the slap on the hand that would go with it? Seriously? Why?... This will not end well for him or his party."

All comments on this article are here.

By Doug Feaver  |  August 11, 2010; 9:33 AM ET
Categories:  Congress  | Tags: House Ethics Committee, Rangel, Term Limits  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Afghanistan massacre and religious intolerance
Next: Waters, OneUnited Bank and Ethics Committee

No comments have been posted to this entry.

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company