Rangel: I don’t deal in average American citizens

posted at 9:30 am on December 3, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

One might have thought, given all of the handwringing from Capitol Hill last night over the horrors of censuring, that Charlie Rangel would have learned a little humility from the process.  For instance, on CNN moments after Nancy Pelosi read aloud a written scolding, Mary Matalin was aghast at the notion of a public shaming, demanding that Congress find some more civilized way to punish its members for ethical transgressions.  Others, notably callers to C-SPAN during the House votes on Republican, Democratic, and New York phone lines, said that the so-called punishment Rangel endured was nothing more than a slap on the wrist and that average citizens would be facing jail sentences for failing to report income and pay taxes, among the charges for which the House found Rangel guilty.  Democrats and Republicans alike scoffed at the idea that reading a strongly-worded memo aloud amounted to any kind of deterrent punishment.

Kerry Picket of the Washington Times asked Rangel how he felt about that criticism, and Rangel showed that he hadn’t changed at all:

PICKET:There’s been criticism from the floor tonight essentially comparing you to the average American citizen, who, if they went through similar circumstances such as yourself that they may be punished in a worse way. What’s your response to that?

REP. RANGEL: What paper are you from?

PICKET: Pardon?

REP. RANGEL: What paper are you from?

PICKET: Washington Times, sir.

REP. RANGEL: What’s the question? Can you kind of make the question a little more exact? This criticism came from the floor? The floor can’t speak. Who said what?

PICKET: Well basically….

REP. RANGEL: What is the question?

PICKET: I’m just asking what is your response to criticism that if the average American citizen. Someone who is not a congressman

REP. RANGEL:Please, I’m not a psychiatrist. I don’t deal in average American citizens. Citizens are diverse. They are broad. I don’t know what is average, and so I don’t really agree… I’ll come back to you when you think of a good question.

Well, how about this for a definition of “average”: not in Congress?  That question didn’t just come from the floor.  It came from every corner of the US that doesn’t include Capitol Hill.

Matalin is correct in one sense; the House needs another form of punishment, one that fits in the range between strongly-worded memos spoken aloud and expulsion.  Anyone who thinks that a public scolding is some sort of cruel and unusual punishment for corruption and ethics violations has marinated in Beltway stew a little too long.


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

Rangel is just an average deity, like most House dinosaurs.

RBMN on December 3, 2010 at 9:33 AM

Term. Limits.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Wow, what a prick!

milwife88 on December 3, 2010 at 9:35 AM

charlie rangel is a [deleted]

rightside on December 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM

Here’s a more civilized way to deal with Charlie….YOU GO TO PRISON! That’s where you belong.

search4truth on December 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM

I don’t deal in average American citizens.

http://reddogreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Charlie-Rangel-Beach.jpg

…we know a$$wipe…that’s the problem.

Baxter Greene on December 3, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Are there to be no, like, criminal charges forthcoming?

Akzed on December 3, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Bitchweasel.

SurferDoc on December 3, 2010 at 9:39 AM

charlie rangel is a [deleted]

rightside on December 3, 2010 at 9:36 AM

My thoughts exactly.

conservative pilgrim on December 3, 2010 at 9:40 AM

A Republican under such circumstances would be shamed into resigning at best, face criminal charges at worst.

“Censure” is a frakking joke.

IronDioPriest on December 3, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Plus no more gerrymandering of Cogressional districts!..:)

Dire Straits on December 3, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Are there to be no, like, criminal charges forthcoming?

Akzed on December 3, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Criminal charges are for regular folk. Laws don’t apply to congressmen.

rightside on December 3, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Sounds like citizens need to start suiting up for the August Townhalls right after Christmas … Get them reservations while they are hot.

tarpon on December 3, 2010 at 9:41 AM

Term. Limits.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 9:35 AM

Plus no more gerrymandering of Congressional districts!..:)

Dire Straits on December 3, 2010 at 9:41 AM

I think an indictment would be a good thing to read aloud on the House floor.

Fallen Sparrow on December 3, 2010 at 9:41 AM

What a condescending jerk. The guy has no remorse whatsoever. None. He should be in JAIL. His response represents the Washington elite, and this should be played in every 2012 ad.

conservative pilgrim on December 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM

Plus no more gerrymandering of Cogressional districts!..:)
Dire Straits on December 3, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Sorry for typo!..:)

Dire Straits on December 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM

Let’s just continue electing Constitutional conservatives into the majority so rats like Rangel are powerless to do real damage. The best way to make liberals suffer is to relieve them of power. They crave power. It is precious to them.

pugwriter on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Just shuddup, Charlie. I’m fed up.

kingsjester on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Just as a matter of interest, did he ever get back to her to see if she had thought of a “good” question?

jackmac on December 3, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Picket asks him a question and he just responds with gibberish.
What do you expect from someone who has never had to face the consequences of his deeds…?
He has committed multiple crimes that would send anyone else to jail and he scoffs at the notion of being verbally scolded.

Ask Wesley Snipes what happens to people who do not pay taxes.
Go ask a roofing contractor what will happen if he does not pay his taxes.

Charlie Rangel is a disgrace and has been for years but I guess we are supposed to overlook it because he is a senile old fool.
He has no business walking the halls of Congress.

NeoKong on December 3, 2010 at 9:44 AM

Ask Wesley Snipes what happens to people who do not pay taxes.

NeoKong on December 3, 2010 at 9:44 AM

Now there’s a compare and contrast example Pickett could use in her follow-up question.

conservative pilgrim on December 3, 2010 at 9:48 AM

I don’t see how the IRS doesn’t bring him to tax court. His investment income in the Caribbean is unrelated to his congressional duties, so he should not be exempt from penalties for not paying taxes.

Vashta.Nerada on December 3, 2010 at 9:49 AM

I wish I could see this speech again, only next time with Charlie wearing an ORANGE JUMPSUIT talking from behind a reinforced glass panel.

belad on December 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM

My guess is Cholly’s already sent out a new fundraising letter to his donors, using the censure vote to play up his own martyrdom as a reason to contribute to the Rangel 2012 campaign.

jon1979 on December 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM

He’s a freaking politician for crying out loud, he’s not above the laws we have to abide by. He should have been tossed out on his ear a long time ago and yet there he stood in the circus we call a censure hearing and spouted off the same lies he’s been telling for years. I hope the people that were supposed to testify against him before he pulled the cowardly card have the balls to speak publicly about just how corrupt this feckless rump is. Watch how long it takes him to pay his taxes…if in fact he ever does.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM

Plus no more gerrymanderingmind-boggling political rape of Congressional districts!..:)

Dire Straits on December 3, 2010 at 9:41 AM

FIFY

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 9:53 AM

Yep, he is indeed an arrogant prick.

On the other hand, the question was rather dumb, too.

rogersnowden on December 3, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Politburo bitter clinger.

tarpon on December 3, 2010 at 9:54 AM

When I was a Master Chief in the Navy – I always told my Chiefs in the Goat Locker that … if they violated a rule, or did something dishonest, or broke a core value – then they could not expect me to come to their rescue. Quite the contrary – I told them, “I will be your worst enemy”.

And the reason I told them that – is because the Chief Petty Officer community of the USN has to be ABOVE reproach. Any violation, any infraction – has to be met with strong condemnation. Depending upon the severity, it may require punishment.

I alway felt that Sailors could not respect a community of Chiefs who were duplicitous in the way they awarded punishment. Positions of critical leadership require that that leadership be held to a higher standard.

This apparenlty not the credo in the US House of Representatives under Democratic rule.

Thank God that rule is changing.

This man was censured – he should have be expelled and his case sent to the Justice Department for prosecution and imprisonment.

Did y’all catch how Charles Krauthammer … supported Rangle? LOL

This is a disgrace – THIS IS THE MAN WHO WRITES TAX LAW – VIOLATING HIS OWN LAW.

You want a recipe for destroying the credibility of a nation’s government? Here is the main ingredient – CHARLIE RANGLE.

HondaV65 on December 3, 2010 at 9:54 AM

Matalin is correct in one sense; the House needs another form of punishment, one that fits in the range between strongly-worded memos spoken aloud and expulsion.

Might I suggest prison? How about a jail cell right next to Duke Cunningham.

rbj on December 3, 2010 at 9:54 AM

A more appropriate punishment would be a Democratic circular firing squad…

PatriotRider on December 3, 2010 at 9:55 AM

Wesley Snipes is sitting in prison right now watching that and getting pretty PO’d!

jeffn21 on December 3, 2010 at 9:56 AM

Bitchweasel.

SurferDoc on December 3, 2010 at 9:39 AM

I personally think crapweasel is a better term.

I don’t see how the IRS doesn’t bring him to tax court. His investment income in the Caribbean is unrelated to his congressional duties, so he should not be exempt from penalties for not paying taxes.

Vashta.Nerada on December 3, 2010 at 9:49 AM

I don’t understand this, either.
Why is it that the feds come down on the little guy for EVERYTHING & the big guy always gets a pass?!?!?
You or I would be in JAIL.
WHY?!?!?

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 9:56 AM

Why isn’t he being prosecuted? Tax evasion, tax fraud, etc. These were clearly not oversights on his part; it was deliberate, illegal behavior that went on for years.

Is there some provision in the tax code that exempts crooked Congresmen from complying with the same tax laws the rest of us are subjected to? If not, the IRS needs to explain why they have not filed charges against this POS.

AZCoyote on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 AM

Why does Matalin think public shaming, based on a clear factual record, is uncivilized? Hypocritical, maybe. Does she dispute the validity of ethical (as opposed to purely legal) standards or tribunals? Would it be uncivilized to “shame” BP or its contractors after a civil finding of liability based on a mere preponderance of the evidence and/or non-criminal rules of procedure?

It must be pretty embarrassing to lose an election and that doesn’t seem to be an option where Rangel is concerned.

Seth Halpern on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 AM

as long as we’re categorizing “citizens” and how they fit on the bell curve, then Cholly Rangel’s constituents must be “below average” for reelecting him.

standards.

ted c on December 3, 2010 at 9:57 AM

Between little Timmy Geithner and Charlie Rangel, my outrage meter is bleeping on tilt… Charlie’s Congress buddies give him a slap on the wrist and a standing. And I could care less what a great job Charlie did in his military service. My father and father-in-law were just as heroic but paid their taxes without fail till the day they died.

If any of us poor schlubs do this we are penalized real money and slapped in the slammer. Why charges are not pressed is beyond me.

This is patent, unadulterated bullsh@t, pure and simple. “Average American citizens”…my patootie.

marybel on December 3, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Old weasel, shrinking out of his suit. The Reaper will claim him soon.

SurferDoc on December 3, 2010 at 10:00 AM

Congress writes itself out of enough laws without having a penalty system that lets them flout the rest of the laws.

Taxes are for the little people.
Laws are for the little people.
Punishments are for little people.

Those that write the laws feel they aren’t part of the little people but aristocrats who know better than the mere plebes they must grovel to for re-election.

Term Limits.
Smaller Districts.
A much bigger House.
And a lot less spending and power for all of government.

The aristocracy must go.

ajacksonian on December 3, 2010 at 10:02 AM

/awe, come one guys…you know he didnt mean it THAT way.

xRos on December 3, 2010 at 10:05 AM

Why isn’t he being prosecuted?

Because he’s not an average American, that’s why. Not only should he be held accountable for his actions, every politician who voted for letting him off the hook for these infractions should be censured as well. What a joke our government has become. I laughed about the wikileaks saying Russian or Afghanistan politicians were crooked…we probably have more crooked politicians than any other country does and even when confronted and exposed we don’t do anything to them.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM

All the descriptions that run through my head concerning Rangel after reading this would get my account yanked from Hot Air.

So I won’t write them here.

Suffice to say that he’s out of touch with the American people. And he’s out of touch with reality.

After pointing my hubris detection meter towards Rangel, it melted. Off the charts.

Carl on December 3, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Gutless piece o sh*t congress don’t have the balls to do the right thing and send this as*hole to jail.

Both parties should be punched in the face and you clowns should be far far far more pis*ed off than you are.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM

Both parties should be punched in the face and you clowns should be far far far more pis*ed off than you are.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM

Congratulations on reaching Troll Rank Number 1, in recognition of your awe-inspiring gall in telling people they should be more outraged about something, when you spend the rest of your time telling people they’re stupid to be outraged about everything else. We proudly present you with the Golden Troll Award.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:12 AM

How about complete loss of seniority and committee assignments? Doable and appropriate, but won’t happen; not in that swamp.

michaelo on December 3, 2010 at 10:13 AM

If Wesley Snipes is going to serve a 3 year prison sentence for three years of failing to pay taxes, shouldn’t Mr. Rangel get the honor of serving a 17 year prison sentence?

oldleprechaun on December 3, 2010 at 10:14 AM

Mary Matalin was aghast at the notion of a public shaming, demanding that Congress find some more civilized way to punish its members for ethical transgressions.

I was aghast at how unsubstantial it was. I was like “What? That’s it?”

BierManVA on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Gutless piece o sh*t congress don’t have the balls to do the right thing and send this as*hole to jail.

Both parties should be punched in the face and you clowns should be far far far more pis*ed off than you are.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM

Your first sentence is absolutely correct.
You 2nd is partly correct.
The last part of your comment in not correct.
We are PO’d.
And you are the a$$clown.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Congratulations on reaching Troll Rank Number 1, in recognition of your awe-inspiring gall in telling people they should be more outraged about something, when you spend the rest of your time telling people they’re stupid to be outraged about everything else. We proudly present you with the Golden Troll Award.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:12 AM

yawn

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM

when you spend the rest of your time telling people they’re stupid to be outraged about everything else. We proudly present you with the Golden Troll Award.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:12 AM

YES.
Hypocrisy at its finest.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:16 AM

yawn

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Says the guy who won’t go play in his own country’s back yard.
No fellow Canadian friends to rage at?
Or do you find your own country that irrelevant on the world stage?

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM

First-class jerk….

cmsinaz on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Good work Kerry.

I thought he was about to start shouting “Who are you?! Who are you?!” or maybe “Why don’t you mind your G-D business?”.

forest on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Both parties should be punched in the face and you clowns should be far far far more pis*ed off than you are.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM

I’m spitting mad, mad as hell, outrageously outraged. All of Congress should have been, but they’re all cowards. Afraid to do the right thing, which would have been to turn this over to the IRS and have the scumbag face the same kind of charges we would face. Why hasn’t the IRS prosecuted him? Because they’re a bunch of cowards as well.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Because they’re a bunch of cowards as well.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM

I thought the Congress was outrageously cowardly when they didn’t flush Clinton out of his office after he was impeached.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:22 AM

Both parties should be punched in the face and you clowns should be far far far more pis*ed off than you are.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:09 AM

I’m spitting mad, mad as hell, outrageously outraged. All of Congress should have been, but they’re all cowards. Afraid to do the right thing, which would have been to turn this over to the IRS and have the scumbag face the same kind of charges we would face. Why hasn’t the IRS prosecuted him? Because they’re a bunch of cowards as well.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 10:18 AM
———–
Because nobody wants to set a precedent that could f themselves in the future. They would prefer if everybody got away with it.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:23 AM

It is not like congress action crats double jeopardy, he can be indicted fr this in any time in the future?

anikol on December 3, 2010 at 10:23 AM

Ha ha ha. Stop pretending that you care about this issue.

You know that you think that Rangel didn’t deserve censor because of all the “good” he’s done in “serving” the public all these years (translation: because he’s advanced liberal causes.)

blink on December 3, 2010 at 10:19 AM
——
You know what I’m thinking? Really?
Take a wild guess what I’m thinking right now.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:24 AM

yawn

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Says the guy who won’t go play in his own country’s back yard.
No fellow Canadian friends to rage at?
Or do you find your own country that irrelevant on the world stage?

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM
——-
Ahhh, smug American c*ntiness comes out on an anonymous web board.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 AM

I don’t deal in average American citizens.

Doesn’t he need average American citizens to vote for him? Or only citizens of below-average IQ’s?

Steve Z on December 3, 2010 at 10:26 AM

I’m just asking what is your response to criticism that if the average American citizen. Someone who is not a congressman

WHY DON’T YOU MIND YOUR OWN G-D D-MN BUSINESS??

~Charles “Exceptional Citizen” Rangel

Shepherd Lover on December 3, 2010 at 10:27 AM

The reporter was too respectful. We have to stop respecting these people. Why are we helping to perpetuate their own mythology of specialness?

rrpjr on December 3, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Ahhh, smug American c*ntiness comes out on an anonymous web board.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 AM

If you hate Americans so much, then why do you come to HA?
Americans don’t give a rat’s a$$ what you think.
You are not one of us.
Blow.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:32 AM

Not at all. It’s because Republicans knew that they didn’t have the votes for a more harsh punishment.

A majority of Democrats voted to REDUCE his punishment.

blink on December 3, 2010 at 10:29 AM
——
And those guys are a*holes .

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:33 AM

comes out on an anonymous web board.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 AM

And your real name is this?
Trust me on this one Canadian, I’m not afraid of letting the world know who I am.
But in truth, it is none of your business.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:35 AM

If you hate Americans so much, then why do you come to HA?
Americans don’t give a rat’s a$$ what you think.
You are not one of us.
Blow.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:32 AM
——
I don’t hate Americans – I hate your incompetent political system.
Well, you’re kind of a jackas*, so I probably hate you.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:35 AM

And your real name is this?
Trust me on this one Canadian, I’m not afraid of letting the world know who I am.
But in truth, it is none of your business.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:35 AM
————
Yeah, you are afraid, since you don’t do it. Oh well.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:36 AM

We have to stop respecting these people. Why are we helping to perpetuate their own mythology of specialness?

rrpjr on December 3, 2010 at 10:31 AM

I agree.
I have a boss who is like these members of Congress.
The only respect he gets is basic bcs of his position.
Far as that goes, I’m not saying hi to him or even acknowledging his presence.
And my replies are curt & short. He knows I hate him.
We need to get down & nasty with these a-holes.
Anger is very influential.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:37 AM

Yeah, you are afraid, since you don’t do it. Oh well.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Come to Bentley. Try & find me.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:38 AM

Well, you’re kind of a jackas*, so I probably hate you.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:35 AM

LOL!
Again, what you think about American politics doesn’t matter.
Coming here for validation is extremely sad.

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Eg…I think it’s a stretch to use this as signs of his elitism.

He wasn’t saying, “Average citizens are beneath me.” You can tell be his following line, “Citizens are diverse. They are broad.”

Just as the average family with 2.5 kids does not exist, the average citizen that’s X% white, Y% hipanic Z%black, etc does not exist.

From my read, he seems to be avoiding the question by asking for a specific. All she needed to do was pick someone from his district in Harlem and ask if that poor, black man without political connections would get away with what he did.

JadeNYU on December 3, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Wesley Snipes vs Charlie Rangel.

My outrage meter is on tilt too. There has to be a tipping point and if this isn’t it or close we are in serious trouble.

ORconservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:43 AM

Yeah, Charlie, funny thing is we don’t deal in average corrupt Congressmen, either, which is why you’re in the spotlight.

You should have–how shall I put it?–minded your GD business and, specifically, your corrupt practices.

Christien on December 3, 2010 at 10:44 AM

wow. gettin’ all mean up in heah this mornin’…

ted c on December 3, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Term. Limits.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 9:35 AM

B.S. JAIL!

Mr. Grump on December 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM

I don’t deal in average American citizens.

Then what the hell are you doing in Congress, you son of a bitch?!!!!

pilamaye on December 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM

Wesley Snipes seems to have grounds for an appeal. Just saying, I am sure he didn’t enrich himself/SARC.

Dr Evil on December 3, 2010 at 10:47 AM

I don’t deal in average American citizens

Then what the hell are you doing serving in Congress, you egregious egotisical SOB?!!!

pilamaye on December 3, 2010 at 10:47 AM

This is why Maxine Waters ethics investigation needs to wait until the new Congress is convened.

Let the majority Republicans choose the penalties.

Dr Evil on December 3, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Well, Clinton is still often referred to as being “impeached,” so I don’t think these public actions are without their own real sting.

AnninCA on December 3, 2010 at 10:50 AM

Public floggings work for me.

mojo on December 3, 2010 at 10:50 AM

I will be, frankly, more interested in watching what they do with Waters, since there are several members who got special treatment, not just Maxine.

Talk about a big hmmmmmmm*

AnninCA on December 3, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Matalin is correct in one sense; the House needs another form of punishment, one that fits in the range between strongly-worded memos spoken aloud and expulsion.

Why?

Why doesn’t it need “hair-trigger expulsion” as a base punishment — with lifetime bans on federal association (including lobbying), long prison terms, and forfeiture of pensions for more advanced cases?

Why shouldn’t elected representatives be held to a more stringent standard of behavior than the average citizen? Is it not a rare privilege to serve?

cthulhu on December 3, 2010 at 10:53 AM

Because nobody wants to set a precedent that could f themselves in the future. They would prefer if everybody got away with it.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:23 AM

You’re probably right, they may all have cheated in some way or another. They all probably have dirty hands.

scalleywag on December 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM

B.S. JAIL!

Mr. Grump on December 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM

I’d rather we avoid these situations proactively by enacting term limits NOW.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Because nobody wants to set a precedent that could f themselves in the future. They would prefer if everybody got away with it.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:23 AM

I don’t disagree with you that some of them see it this way.

He wasn’t saying, “Average citizens are beneath me.” You can tell be his following line, “Citizens are diverse. They are broad.”

He knew exactly what she was asking him. The answer is just the same old double speak, avoid the question with BS political game playing too many of our “leaders” use.

Jvette on December 3, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Ahhh, smug American c*ntiness comes out on an anonymous web board.

Dave Rywall on December 3, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Way to stereotype there, douche.

MadisonConservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Wesley Snipes vs Charlie Rangel.
ORconservative on December 3, 2010 at 10:43 AM

I want to see that fight.
My bet’s on Snipes.

Why doesn’t it need “hair-trigger expulsion” as a base punishment — with lifetime bans on federal association (including lobbying), long prison terms, and forfeiture of pensions for more advanced cases?

cthulhu on December 3, 2010 at 10:53 AM

I like it.
This is what needs to happen.
Bcs most of them go for public service to get rich.
Take away their ability to do so after they’re expelled & see how fast this type of behavior goes away.
Or maybe I’m just dreaming.
It’s sorta like letting the fox stay in charge of the henhouse.
Can we just not say that if someone is found to be guilty of a CRIME that they are PUNISHED according to the LAW?

Badger40 on December 3, 2010 at 11:01 AM

“Mary Matalin was aghast at the notion of a public shaming”

Hmm, A narcissist would be, because public shaming is the antithesis to narcissistic revenue. For a narcissist, public shaming is the worst punishment of all, because it undermines their fragile self-image.

LarryD on December 3, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Well, he is correct. Harlem voters, who overwhelmingly elect trash like Rangel, are in no way, “average American citizens.”

For that, I’m glad.

MNHawk on December 3, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Well, Clinton is still often referred to as being “impeached,” so I don’t think these public actions are without their own real sting.

AnninCA on December 3, 2010 at 10:50 AM

Oh yeah, that impeachment thing has really haunted BJ Clinton. I mean, one hardly ever hears about him and he has no influence or following anymore. Why, after he left office he has remained a hermit in NY, still too ashamed to show his face. /s

Jvette on December 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Oh, but…but…but…he “served” in Congress for 40 years…and he marched in Selma with MLK and he…blah, blah, blah.
What a certfied, card-carrying d*uchebag. I am incapable of understanding the depth of the arrogance of this POS. HE SHOULD BE IN JAIL – where any of us would be if we pulled the kind of sh!t that he pulled. This whole thing makes my f!#$ing eyes bleed.

Dopenstrange on December 3, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Censure. Hah!

itsspideyman on December 3, 2010 at 11:27 AM

Charlie is far more a criminal than Tom Delay, yet look at the different treatment in the two cases. Outrageous.

We need a President that will instruct the IRS to treat all in the legislative and executive branch as they would any average American, regardless of their political party.

slickwillie2001 on December 3, 2010 at 11:27 AM

Comment pages: 1 2