Rangel to keep gavel in most ethical Congress evah

posted at 12:55 pm on March 1, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

When campaigning in 2006, Nancy Pelosi said that a vote for Democratic control of Congress would bring the “most ethical Congress ever.”  Now that one of their leadership has been caught violating ethics rules about accepting travel from lobbyists — precisely the kind of scandal Pelosi exploited in 2006 in the Jack Abramoff debacle — what does she plan to do about it?  Er … nothing:

The House ethics committee decision to admonish Rangel for taking two corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean has turned up the heat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee chairman — with even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying that Rangel’s actions don’t pass the “smell test.”

Several House Democrats have now joined Republicans in calling for Rangel to lose his gavel, and The New York Times has chimed in, saying the “arrogance” Rangel showed in the wake of Thursday’s ethics committee ruling provides “one more reason” for Pelosi to “stop protecting him and relieve him of his crucial role as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.”

In an interview with ABC’s “This Week,” Pelosi acknowledged that “what Mr. Rangel has been admonished for is not good.”

But the speaker also said that Rangel’s participation in the corporate-sponsored trips wasn’t something that had “jeopardized our country in any way,” and she made it clear that she has no intention of taking away Rangel’s chairmanship unless and until the ethics committee determines that he’s guilty of a number of ethics violations it’s currently investigating.

“Well, let’s … why don’t we just give him a chance to hear what the independent, bipartisan [ethics committee says] — they work very hard to reach their conclusions, and we … obviously, there’s more to come here,” Pelosi said.

That’s an interesting standard.  Did Abramoff’s corruption “jeopardize the country”?  Abramoff represented Indian interests (and his reach extended to several Democrats, including Harry Reid).  Yet Pelosi was among the loudest calling for resignations and prosecutions, and effectively used the scandals in her “culture of corruption” campaign in 2006.

Furthermore, while the ethics committee still does have more work to do with Rangel, it doesn’t mean that Pelosi can’t address the finding they’ve already reached.  Rangel chairs Ways and Means, the House committee that sets tax policy — a particularly juicy target for lobbyists, on par with Appropriations.  If lobbyists have wooed Rangel with illicit favors, then anyone taking a serious position on ending corruption would demand his resignation from the committee, or strip him of the position without it.  The fact that the House Ethics Committee has concluded that Rangel acted unethically by taking favors from lobbyists, according to rules Democrats themselves set, means that he is no longer suited for a position of trust in Congress.

Of course, Pelosi can’t tell the truth about why she won’t act, which is that she can’t afford to alienate the Congressional Black Caucus and expect to survive in her own leadership position, which is already precarious enough.  The CBC has closed ranks around Rangel already, much as they did with now-convicted former Congressman William “Dollar Bill” Jefferson when confronted with evidence of his corruption.  Pelosi therefore has to create thresholds of tolerable corruption in order to rationalize her inaction and hypocrisy.

If the standard for excising corrupt politicians is “jeopardiz[ing] the country,” then Pelosi proposes to transform Congress into a marketplace of explicit sale of influence only bounded by the definition of treason.  That may be what she had in mind when she campaigned on the “culture of corruption” platform, but it’s the polar opposite of what voters believed she meant.

Update: Even the New York Times’ editorial board gets this one right.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I’m seriously thinking about becoming a democrat. Those guys are bulletproof…..

Vashta.Nerada on March 1, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Rangel is black. Therefore he can’t possibly be corrupt, and only racists would make such a claim.

/toungeincheekmode off.

wildcat84 on March 1, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Worst. Congress. Ever.

Good Lt on March 1, 2010 at 12:59 PM

Yay! Nancy isn’t wacist!

fiatboomer on March 1, 2010 at 1:01 PM

It’s come to the point where race is more important than ethics in the highest levels of government. Sad really, this used to be such a great nation and now we have fallen to a cautionary tale about affirmative action and identity politics.

Not to mention a House Speaker so drunk with power she will do anything necessary to keep her gnarled stubby fingers around that gavel.

highhopes on March 1, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Wait a second – these Democrats who are calling for Rangel to lose his gavel – what are they really asking for? From what I’ve seen they’re only asking for Rangel himself to stand down.

Why aren’t they asking for NANCY PELOSI TO FIRE HIM?

or … are they and I just missed that part?

It’s one thing to ask a crook to stand down on his own – and a crook won’t – so it’s useless to ask.

Quite another thing to force the speaker to get rid of him.

HondaV65 on March 1, 2010 at 1:01 PM

Nanzi is “jeopardizing this country”…

d1carter on March 1, 2010 at 1:01 PM

I say leave him where he’s at.

Just that much more fuel for the fire in November.

pain train on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

I’m sure Empress Pelosi meant “most ethically-challenged Congress.”

Why don’t the Blue Dogs, who don’t want to fall on their swords, join with the Republicans and overthrow SanFranNan. Worst Speaker of the House ever.

rbj on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Is there a “White Congressional Caucus” or would that be racist?

Knucklehead on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Pelosi would eat the afterbirth of a dog if it would further her ambitions.

jaime on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Now that one of their leadership has been caught violating ethics rules about accepting travel from lobbyists

Rangel was caught long ago for doing things far worse than this trip.

As wildcat points out, Rangel has the “skin defense”, and nothing else. When this is the defense used to keep traitorous retards like Rangel in power … things will eventually explode.

neurosculptor on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

The arrogance of hypocrisy!

rjoco1 on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Shame on the CBC for not seeing that Rangel stepping down was the right thing to do for so many reasons.

Shame on the Speaker for having no guts or backbone.

journeyintothewhirlwind on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Rangle: Corruption for me, but not for thee.

The hypocrisy of this, is way out of bounds. Pelosi needs to lose her gavel as well over this.

capejasmine on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Vashta.Nerada on March 1, 2010 at 12:57 PM

wildcat84 on March 1, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Good Lt on March 1, 2010 at 12:59 PM

ditto
ditto
ditto

SKYFOX on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

If the outcome had been any different, it would have certainly been “unexpected”.

AubieJon on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

At least Rangel has paid his income taxes…right?

WashJeff on March 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Is there a “White Congressional Caucus” or would that be racist?

Knucklehead on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Only if Republicans were in it.

fiatboomer on March 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

I’m thinking of running for congress just so we can have a black congress(wo)man to challange the CBC’s existance without being called raaaaaaacist.

RachDubya on March 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

Good!
I saw everyone including Sam Donaldson and Paul Krugman sigh and roll their eyes and wish he’d just go away.

Now, let’s see if the Republicans can “maccaca” and “foley” with the best worst of them.

Marcus on March 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

That crooked old POS shouldn’t even keep his seat.

chunderroad on March 1, 2010 at 1:05 PM

And they allowed the crook to attend the Healthcare Summit. Their arrogance is overwhelming.

kingsjester on March 1, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Well if Nancy had to get rid of Rangel, then wouldn’t she also have to consider such sterling incompetent members like Maxine Waters?

GarandFan on March 1, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations!

Yeah, Nancy, I’m calling you a racist.

cool breeze on March 1, 2010 at 1:06 PM

Shame on the CBC for not seeing that Rangel stepping down was the right thing to do for so many reasons.

Shame on the Speaker for having no guts or backbone.

journeyintothewhirlwind on March 1, 2010 at 1:03 PM

Exactly. The CBC members need to be voted out, and the CBC itself needs to be abolished. Corruption is corruption, no matter what race you are, what party you belong to, or what gender you are.

capejasmine on March 1, 2010 at 1:06 PM

As was the case with Jefferson, Rangel is Black and a Democrat….that makes him bullet-proof to anything short of….well, nothing!

GoldenEagle4444 on March 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM

But has Rangle even drawn an opponent for the election?

Iblis on March 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Trent Lott, bad joke, white, Republican…resignation ensued.

Charlie Rangel, lying sack of excrement, multiple ethics violations, black/hispanic, democRat…circle the wagons.

Hypocrisy, thy name is democRat.

Jarhead68 on March 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Did anyone happen to hear that loud “CRACK!” a moment ago?

That was the sound of the final straw being placed on the back of the camel….whose back was just broken.

pilamaye on March 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM

So now we have a tax cheat in charge of the treasury and another in charge of the Ways and Means committee.

The country’s in the very best of hands.

Slublog on March 1, 2010 at 1:08 PM

Pelosi should also lose her job. Without Murtha as her goon, Hoyer will see to it she won’t be Minority Leader when the GOP takes the House.

chunderroad on March 1, 2010 at 1:09 PM

One cannot help but wonder, what dirt Rangel has on certain individuals…

Rebar on March 1, 2010 at 1:09 PM

Without power, Pelosi becomes less popular with her San Fran constituents. She could even be vulnerable in the near future.

chunderroad on March 1, 2010 at 1:10 PM

THEY DO NOT CARE.

You are proles and would suffer if our great leaders in Congress like the Distinguished Charles Rangel were not in charge of the appropriations.

Who better to be in charge of doling out your tax dollars?

Come on people!

Opposite Day on March 1, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Speaking of corruption….

The question we are left with is: Why? What motivated this illegal grab of AIG’s equity and voting rights? Was it desperation in the face of the largest potential collapse in the history of modern finance? Was it unbridled power combined with supreme hubris? Or was it just criminal? The answer to this query resides in the as-yet-hidden files of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, now subject to a subpoena issued by my office in the federal lawsuit Murray v. Geithner, pending in the Eastern District of Michigan.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/secretary_geithners_got_some.html

capejasmine on March 1, 2010 at 1:11 PM

One cannot help but wonder, what dirt Rangel has on certain individuals…

Rebar on March 1, 2010 at 1:09 PM

He’s in a safe district and is a reliable vote right now. That’s it. He is an example to other Dems that anything goes, if you play ball.

chunderroad on March 1, 2010 at 1:12 PM

More of an indictment of Republican weakness and corruption than anything else. The GOP knew what Rangel was doing during all the years they had the power to stop him. They were too busy stuffing their own freezers.

jay12 on March 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Rangel chairs Ways and Means, the House committee that sets tax policy — a particularly juicy target for lobbyists, on par with Appropriations. If lobbyists have wooed Rangel with illicit favors, then anyone taking a serious position on ending corruption would demand his resignation from the committee, or strip him of the position without it. The fact that the House Ethics Committee has concluded that Rangel acted unethically by taking favors from lobbyists, according to rules Democrats themselves set, means that he is no longer suited for a position of trust in Congress.

Exactly right! Bob Ney was stripped of his chairmanship for taking an Abramoff-sponsored trip to Scotland, and eventually went to jail. And he was only the chairman of the House Administration Committee! In fact, he did very little for Abramoff or his clients, and wasn’t in position to. This is orders of magnitude different from the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee effectively taking bribes from lobbyists.

Yes, it was a very big deal when Charles Rangel became the first black chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, and he shouldn’t be stripped of that title without good cause. But this is good cause.

rockmom on March 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM

At least Rangel has paid his income taxes…right?

WashJeff on March 1, 2010 at 1:04 PM

There was the income that rental property in the Dominican Republic, that Rangel forgot to report to the IRS.

MarkTheGreat on March 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Crooks and Liars. Next game: Chutes and Ladders.

mojo on March 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Even the New York Times’ editorial board gets this one right.

When even your water boy is against you, it’s time to concede the game…

karl9000 on March 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM

Captain Jack Sparrow has more ethics than Pelozilla has or will ever have for that matter!

pilamaye on March 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM

I wonder if it ever crosses her mind that her term as speaker of the house will go down in history as the absolute worst we’ve ever had, by far overshadowing her “breaking the glass ceiling”. She should be under investigation herself for her lavish travel expenditures over the years…ones that you and I paid for.

scalleywag on March 1, 2010 at 1:15 PM

More of an indictment of Republican weakness and corruption than anything else. The GOP knew what Rangel was doing during all the years they had the power to stop him. They were too busy stuffing their own freezers.

jay12 on March 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM

Huh? Were Republicans supposed to go on a witch hunt against one of the most popular black politicians in the country, who was in the minority and effectively powerless? That’s a surefire recipe for electoral success, eh?

rockmom on March 1, 2010 at 1:17 PM

This sort of arrogance in wielding power really is just the natural effect of having a press that does not hold both parties to account equally. Preventing such corruption by making it known was one of the reasons the founders considered a free press so important.

Slublog on March 1, 2010 at 1:20 PM

One cannot help but wonder, what dirt Rangel has on certain individuals…

Rebar on March 1, 2010 at 1:09 PM

+1000

Brian on March 1, 2010 at 1:21 PM

I smell tuna.

Rangel will be allowed to say on the plantation because Nancy needs him.

And this *** of a woman and the democrats had the temerity to demand Joe Wilson apologize for telling the truth? And the GOP forced him to do it? God, I wish I were in Congress. This woman would be bug-eyed every day from the Hell I’d put her through.

SouthernGent on March 1, 2010 at 1:22 PM

Flash back to January: No one punished under congressional ethic rules.

WASHINGTON — Nearly three years after Congress approved sweeping ethics rules to “drain the swamp,” as incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it, no member of Congress has been punished for wrongdoing.

In that time, allegations of sexual misconduct and financial impropriety have been lodged against lawmakers. The most serious rebuke in the past year: a “letter of qualified admonition” to Sen. Roland Burris, D-Ill., after the Senate ethics panel concluded he misled lawmakers and inappropriately offered to raise campaign funds for then-governor Rod Blagojevich as Burris sought the Senate appointment. “Three years later, it’s the same old, same old,” said Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Enoxo on March 1, 2010 at 1:25 PM

Nancy Pelosi – draining the swamp…and filling it with sewage. And toxic waste.

ChrisB on March 1, 2010 at 1:26 PM

Did anybody really expect a different response from Democrats?

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 1:27 PM

But has Rangle even drawn an opponent for the election?

Iblis on March 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Rangle represents the 15th Congressional District (which includes Harlem and Spanish Harlem) so one has to believe he’s pretty safe. Unfortunately, if Chuck were to go away, an Al Sharpton wanna-be (or the genuine article) will be waiting in the wings.

Interestingly enough though, the 15th District also includes Rikers Island.

Hmmmmm…

pain train on March 1, 2010 at 1:27 PM

One more Dem vote for Obamacare locked up. I’m sure that entered the discussion between Nancy and Charlie.

“If ya let dis float, den you git mah vote.”

fogw on March 1, 2010 at 1:28 PM

We need a complete house-cleaning of Congress starting in November. We need to get rid of Pelosi, Reid, Rangel, the CBC, and the rest of the corrupt Representatives and Senators regardless of party affiliation.

MeAlice on March 1, 2010 at 1:29 PM

Interestingly enough though, the 15th District also includes Rikers Island.

Hmmmmm…

pain train on March 1, 2010 at 1:27 PM

“Jail didn’t stop Jim Traficant from seeking re-election!”-Charlie Rangel

ChrisB on March 1, 2010 at 1:29 PM

Tax Cheat Rangel Fends Off Challenge by 12-foot Alligator to Retain Tax Committee Chairmanship and “King of the Swamp” Title http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/10/tax-cheat-rangel-fends-off-challenge-by.html

Mervis Winter on March 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM

Hide the decline in ethics!

Fill that swamp!

Abby Adams on March 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM

There was the income that rental property in the Dominican Republic, that Rangel forgot to report to the IRS.

MarkTheGreat on March 1, 2010 at 1:14 PM

I blame his staff for not doing his taxes correctly. That seems to be the Dem way out of a mess.

WashJeff on March 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM

Did anybody really expect a different response from Democrats?

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 1:27 PM

I have to confess I did. I’m still finding it hard to accept that the leadership will roll the dice like this and go for broke, and truly expect their members to fall on their swords. There’s a dynamic at play that I haven’t quite internalized yet. In the normal way of the world, these people who’ve over-reached will get smacked-down so hard they’ll never recover. Even in smaller ways, that’s happened to all of us. So why do these people have no fear, of the people, of God, of Karma, whatever? Half of literature is about this very theme.

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Huh? Were Republicans supposed to go on a witch hunt against one of the most popular black politicians in the country, who was in the minority and effectively powerless? That’s a surefire recipe for electoral success, eh?

rockmom on March 1, 2010 at 1:17 PM

I know you to be a smart and politically savvy lady. But I still think the answer is yes.

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 1:34 PM

That’s it? Nothing less than “jeopardizing the country” is reason for dismissal?

You hear that, Duke Cunningham?

drjohn on March 1, 2010 at 1:34 PM

It’s fitting. One can find one’s self incarcerated for less than it takes to be removed from a Democrat post.

Does murder jeopardize the country?

drjohn on March 1, 2010 at 1:35 PM

The CBC is a joke, nothing more than a club to protect “their” members. Seriously, what do Rangel and Jefferson types have to do to lose support from the CBC, pee on Martin Luther King’s grave?

Bishop on March 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Well, considering how many times these criminals in DC have made my head explode of late, what’s one more?

Midas on March 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM

….and in other breaking news….the sky is blue.

search4truth on March 1, 2010 at 1:37 PM

It only adds more tea to the Tea Party.
Keep it up, Dems! Enjoy it while you can. There’s a change a-brewing this November!

stevezilla on March 1, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Does murder jeopardize the country?

drjohn on March 1, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Heck, when it’s conservatives or Tea Partiers, even stuff that Kentucky census worker’s suicide jeoparardized the country.

ChrisB on March 1, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Sorry Charlie, only good tasting tuna get to be StarKist. Chairman of Ways and Means, eh….whatever.

Where is the 24 hour, seven days a week drumbeat from the media? Oh, that’s right. He’s not an evil Republican.

I think some of the tea-party sentiment needs to be pointed more directly at the media for the horrible job they’ve been doing at protecting our nation and our freedom from odious, overreaching, and corrupt government, as the founders intended. Pelosi and Charlie Tuna need to be run out of town on a hot rail.

Slu, you’re spot on.

hillbillyjim on March 1, 2010 at 1:39 PM

I smell tuna.

Rangel will be allowed to say on the plantation because Nancy needs him.

And this *** of a woman and the democrats had the temerity to demand Joe Wilson apologize for telling the truth? And the GOP forced him to do it? God, I wish I were in Congress. This woman would be bug-eyed every day from the Hell I’d put her through.

SouthernGent on March 1, 2010 at 1:22 PM

+ 1000

I wish you were in Congress, too, SouthernGent.

chunderroad on March 1, 2010 at 1:39 PM

If the standard for excising corrupt politicians is “jeopardiz[ing] the country

….

Well if that is the standard, then they all have to go.

Lily on March 1, 2010 at 1:47 PM

Is there a “White Congressional Caucus” or would that be racist?

Knucklehead on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Think of the loneliness of the “Muslim Congressional Caucus”. An oppressed people cry out for over representation.

BL@KBIRD on March 1, 2010 at 1:47 PM

I suppose that if the Dems don’t go for broke, they’re left with the question of what the point of winning was. I’d prob. do the same as them in their shoes. It’s a one-shot deal.

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 1:49 PM

I suppose that if the Dems don’t go for broke,

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 1:49 PM

I wouldn’t mind the Dems going for broke so much if they weren’t taking the US Treasury with them while they’re doing it.

ChrisB on March 1, 2010 at 1:54 PM

Is there a “White Congressional Caucus” or would that be racist?

Knucklehead on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

Inquiring minds want to know.

Count to 10 on March 1, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Why isn’t Rangel being forced to resign as a Congressman?
Why isn’t Rangel being held on criminal charges?

albill on March 1, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Nothing that Mrs. Pelosi says can be taken seriously Her every statement should be greeted by hoots of uncontrolled laughter.

Mason on March 1, 2010 at 2:10 PM

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Charlie Rangel’s influence epitomizes some of the most persistent racial stereotypes and double-standards, primarily the parasitic symbiosis betweeen Dems and some black-pols. I think Nancy Pelosi is the congressional cowardly-lion. She would not risk having to hold a presser explaining her actions against someone who is as treacherous and mired in kickbacks as she is.

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Pelosi is the worst Speaker ever, period.

She is a train wreck, absolutely incompetent.

FireBlogger on March 1, 2010 at 2:19 PM

The CBC is one of the most racist groups in the country and, most disturbing, they have places of power in the government. The flip side to the segregationalists of the past in government.

thebrokenrattle on March 1, 2010 at 2:21 PM

But has Rangle even drawn an opponent for the election?

Iblis on March 1, 2010 at 1:07

Why isn’t Rangel being forced to resign as a Congressman?
Why isn’t Rangel being held on criminal charges?

albill on March 1, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Rangle could hang a white boy at Times Square and get reelected.

docflash on March 1, 2010 at 2:28 PM

I would love to see one of our talented members of the blogsphere do some side-by-side video work contrasting madame speakers little shift in ethics, er, violations. She ran her mouth plenty during the last election, lets get those soundbites compared to today’s mealy mouthed nonsense.

JusDreamin on March 1, 2010 at 2:37 PM

Big surprise…

Dopenstrange on March 1, 2010 at 2:39 PM

I seem to remember that Rangel replaced Adam Clayton Powell, who had to resign for ethical reasons. Is this a coincidence?

RAULALESSANDRI on March 1, 2010 at 2:41 PM

I remember that Rangel replaced Adam Clayton Powell, who had to resign for ethical lapses. Some improvement!

RAULALESSANDRI on March 1, 2010 at 2:43 PM

Let him keep his gavel in prison.

James on March 1, 2010 at 2:51 PM

At least he didn’t commit rape rape.

Just a touch of slightly almost borderline nobody got hurt unethical unethical.

Yeah.

BobMbx on March 1, 2010 at 2:53 PM

Rangel replaced Adam Clayton Powell who had to resign because of some chicanery. Hope, Change!

RAULALESSANDRI on March 1, 2010 at 2:56 PM

Last week it was gay-bashing, this week it’s racism. The Divine Mrs M is gone less than two weeks, and the whole operation is going to hell in a handbasket.

I sure hope for some change. Real soon.

manwithblackhat on March 1, 2010 at 2:59 PM

Of course, Pelosi can’t tell the truth about why she won’t act, which is that she can’t afford to alienate the Congressional Black Caucus and expect to survive in her own leadership position, which is already precarious enough.

Yep.

Did anybody really expect a different response from Democrats?

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 1:27 PM

Nope.

The Congressional Black Caucus also played a huge role in preventing reform of the subprime market, by claiming that those wanting to reform Fannie Mae were really just racially insensitive to the needs of poor minorities. They used their “bulletproof” status to stiffarm attempts at reform.

“Bulletproof” in this case meaning, “immune to checks and balances.” No surprise here, that when a group of Congressmen are beyond checks and balances, they are going to indulge themselves in a little corruption

tom on March 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

I wouldn’t mind the Dems going for broke so much if they weren’t taking the US Treasury with them while they’re doing it.

ChrisB on March 1, 2010 at 1:54 PM

“going” is no longer appropriate, unless you know how to pay off a $14 trillion debt.

If the Treasury paid off the debt at $1 million/day ($365 million/yr), it would take 38,356 years.

If the Treasury paid off the debt at $5 million/day ($1.825 billion/yr), it would take 7,671 years.

If the Treasury paid off the debt at $500 billion/year, it would take 28 years.

These numbers assume no new debt is added, and does not include interest the government pays on that debt.

So without a single dollar in new debt and no interest payments, it takes 28 years to pay off the debt. Sounds a lot like a home mortgage from the Bank of China.

I wonder what the default terms are.

BobMbx on March 1, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Is there a “White Congressional Caucus” or would that be racist?

Knucklehead on March 1, 2010 at 1:02 PM

[obvious joke deleted]

“Bulletproof” in this case meaning, “immune to checks and balances.” No surprise here, that when a group of Congressmen are beyond checks and balances, they are going to indulge themselves in a little corruption

tom on March 1, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Everything is bulletproof once you stop firing. CBC should be dismantled. It should have been long ago and certainly after they denied Steve(?) Cohen a seat.

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 3:31 PM

The Race Card on March 1, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Well if the entirety of human history is any guide, the fall these people will incur (and those connected to them)will be of such a scale as to be an object lesson for generations to come. I think we’ll all feel the fall-out.

JiangxiDad on March 1, 2010 at 3:34 PM

Huh? Were Republicans supposed to go on a witch hunt against one of the most popular black politicians in the country, who was in the minority and effectively powerless? That’s a surefire recipe for electoral success, eh?

rockmom on March 1, 2010 at 1:17 PM

Oh, yes, 2004 and 2008 were such banner years for the GOP, all right!

Your statement is a very strong indictment of Republican corruption.

jay12 on March 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Until I found the picture here,
http://boxer.senate.gov/en/press/photos/images/t_15.jpg
I thought Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi were the same person.

Ira on March 1, 2010 at 4:00 PM

When rape isn’t a rape. Now when an ethic’s violation isn’t an Ethic’s violation. Assuming that ethics and democrats can be used in the same sentence is an obvious oxymoron.

chemman on March 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM

Does murder jeopardize the country?

drjohn on March 1, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Wade on March 1, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Comment pages: 1 2