Rebuke Joe Wilson, Leave Rangel Alone
by Big Dog on Feb 25, 2010 at 22:23 Political
The Democrats voted to rebuke Joe Wilson after he shouted “you lie” during Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress. The Democrats did not like what Wilson did and they will not stand for that kind of behavior. People who do wrong must be punished.
Charlie Rangel was found to have violated ethics rules when he accepted travel from a corporation that routinely lobbies Congress. The ethics panel found that the financing of the trip was improper for all members of the Congressional Black Caucus who went on it but Rangel was the only one found in violation because the others did not know the corporation paid for the trip.
So what did the Ethics Panel do about this infraction (one of many involving Rangel)? The Panel decided not to issue formal charges:
The committee decided against issuing formal charges against Rangel that could lead to punishment such as a censure.
The Panel decided against formal charges that could lead to punishment. Charlie Rangel deserves to be punished.
How is it that Wilson gets rebuked for shouting “you lie” but Rangel escapes charges?
This kind of puts Nancy “most ethical Congress” Pelosi in a bad position. What will she do with Rangel during this election year? He is sure to be a lightning rod during the upcoming campaign season.
If we are lucky this jive talking Don will not be in office next year.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: charlie rangel, ethics, guilty, joe wilson, rules
Jive talking? Say what?
What don’t you understand about that?
Bigd: “Rebuke Joe Wilson, Leave Rangel Alone”>>
DAR
What a bizarre and strained comparison. As if all ethics violations are equal.
Here is a much better and more similar comparison:
Time for a flashback. September:
***
“The Democrats asked Joe Wilson to apologize on the House floor for his outburst and he flat out refused.
What happened with Pete Stark?
“…the minority party [republicans] introduced a resolution of censure, which was killed. Stark ended up doing the right thing and apologizing to the House and President. Wilson is refusing to apologize to the House.
If there is any hypocrisy here, it is on the part of Republicans. They wanted to censure Pete Stark, but couldn’t do it since they were in the minority (remember – elections have consequences). But when it comes to Joe Wilson, they are circling the wagons. They haven’t pushed him to apologize on the House floor, but the Democrats did and he refused.
The Republicans wanted to censure Pete Stark. That’s the second highest level of punishment in the House, with expulsion topping it. For Joe Wilson, the Democrats are wanting a resolution of “disapproval”, which is the most minor disciplinary action in the House – essentially a slap on the wrist.”
LINK
Only you could make poor taste a worse thing than an ethical violation.
While you are at it, why don’t you go ahead and make excuses for the criminal behavior as well.
The Democrats worked to get Wilson punished and worked to keep Rangel from being punished. There is no elections have consequences when it involves ethics. All should be held to a high standard.
Is that too much to ask?
Wilson apologized to the person he insulted. He refused to apologize to the House and accepted the punishment. Rangel broke an ethics rule and was not required to be held accountable.
If it was right for Wilson to apologize to the president, why was it not right for him to simply apologize to the house for breaking house rules? It’s a joke to say he was punished. He wasn’t at all.
You didn’t address my example which was a near exact comparison (both called the president a liar). Anyone can see above how the two parties handled the very same situation and the double standard your party applied.
You don’t address my example because it plainly reveals the republicans to be flaming hypocrites, once again.
D.
He was not punished at all? While what he received was light, it was a punishment under the rules.
And the Democrats all lined up to defend Stark and he resisted until faced with the punishment and apologized.
Wilson decided he was not going to do so and accepted the slap on the wrist.
Both incidents, as far as I am concerned, were minor and warranted little attention. They were matters of protocol and should be handled by the chamber involved.
Rangel’s issue is about potential law breaking and ethics violations which are much more serious than calling someone a liar and apologizing for it.
Rangel should have had formal charges leveled and Pelosi should remove him from leadership positions he holds.
“As if all ethical violations are equal-”
You are right- Joe Wilson told the truth about a lying, POS Resident, but Rangel has STOLEN over a million dollars in collective tax revenue from this government, AND HE SITS AND CHAIRS THE WAY AND MEANS COMMITTEE, THE COMMITTEE THAT WRITES TAX CODE!!!
That brings the meaning of the word “Hypocritical” to a WHOLE new level.
I don’t address your example because you used it to deflect from the real issue which was how Wilson was treated fr a minor things compared to Rangel which is a major thing.
I know that BOTH parties are hypocrites. look at the video I posted of Obama, Biden and the gang decrying the nuclear option and how a simple majority is bad. Now they want to do that with reconciliation.
Look at the most ethical Congress and see how Pelosi failed to remove Jefferson and how she has not removed Rangel.
Both sides have hypocrites. That is why I want ALL of them to be replaced.
The problem is, you always excuse the hypocrisy from the left and find some reason it is acceptable. You excuse the same behavior you criticize for by calling it something different.
You brought up Stark and ignored the more serious issue of Rangel because there is no excuse for what he did. We could excuse it if this was an isolated issue but given his criminal activities it is serious.
Though if an excuse is out there I am sure you will come up with it.
Bigd: “The ethics panel found that the financing of the trip was improper for all members of the Congressional Black Caucus who went on it but Rangel was the only one found in violation because the others did not know the corporation paid for the trip.”
DAR
Wrong. You can’t show Rangel knew:
“Rangel’s staff knew that corporate money paid for the Caribbean trips, the committee said. The panel said Rangel should have known because he’s responsible for actions based on what his staff knew, but it added that investigators could not determine exactly what he did know.
“Common sense dictates that members of Congress should not be held responsible for what could be the wrongdoing or mistakes or errors of staff unless there’s reason to believe that member knew or should have known, and there is nothing in the record to indicate the latter,” Rangel said at a news conference Thursday evening.”
Link.
Hmmm, from the NYP:
So Rangel was cc’d on this letter but did not know. I find it strange he did not read it and even stranger that his people did not tell him.
Scum.
The statement you claim is wrong is absolutely correct. You cannot show it to be wrong. I never said Rangel knew. He claims he did not but he did. They just could not prove it and he laid it on staffers. If he did not know (and he did) then he should not be in Congress.
Did he think the trip was a magical express paid for with money out of nowhere?
And Darrel, this is a guy who has continually lied about his taxes, his assets, his property and his dealings and he used Congressional stationary for fundraising.
Don’t act as if he has a moral high ground. He is a jive talking moron who knew exactly who paid for that trip contrary to his claims.
I would love to know if he has ever heard of “The Buck Stops Here”- he is so busy blaming everyone else, INCLUDING his wife- how does that SOB sleep at night?