CNN Wonders What Censure Will Do to Charlie Rangel's Health

Oh, this is the biggest one I ever had. You hear that Elizabeth? I'm coming to join you honey. - Fred Sanford

or

I've fallen, and I can't get up (but I will be re-elected). - Mrs. Flecther

A slap on the wrist?

Crowley - "So censure is huge".

It is to laugh.

Morons.

The lot of 'em.

MD

What do you call it when a reporter develops relationships with sources? Rangel was a frequent guest of the media, a frequent Sunday morning visitor, and no doubt a constant background source for every reporter in town who wanted to get some inside dirt. In other words, the media loved this guy because he gave them what they wanted.

Consider:

• A powerful man is accused of substantial corruption.
• His own colleagues agree with the charges.

... and the media is concerned with how it will hurt  ... the corrupt politician?

How will Al Capone feel about his conviction? How will O.J. feel about his conviction? How will Bruno Hauptmann feel about his conviction?

Look what the media has done. Because Rangel is a favorite of the media, and a key player in the game that the media wants to play, they see this whole trial from his perspective. Lost is the view of the public he defrauded in his public service. 

Charlie Rangel is exhibit A in why we need mandatory retirement at 65 for congressmen if we can't get term limits.  There is NO reason why anyone should in congress this long.  It breeds a sense of entitlement and arrogance.

Our congressmen often talk of the "privilege" of "service."    But they really think of it as an entitlement.  If it's such a privilege, then don't be selfish; get the hell out  and let someone else have the "privilege."

Censure isn't "huge"...it's a crock.  Words, just words.  Thre's no actual punishment or consequences.  Will he even lose his seat on Ways and Means?

As for concerns about his health, there's a simple solution: he could retire.

Oh boo hoo for Charlie...he is a crook.

is getting up there in age. I think we should all be concerned about his health. In fact, I think Charlie should consider his health and do what's best for it - retire. Come on Charlie! Let it go, man! Surely you can find some beach somewhere and relax...

Of course I was hoping Rangel would die on live TV, but that not having happened he should consider himself lucky.  Twenty years from now when muslims will have taken over America, sharia law would have him stoned.  See Candy,... there's always a bright side!

but he is still flaunting his complete arrogance and lack of morality.  A man of his distinction claiming to be "broke" while still winning elections and therefore robbing the people in his district of a good honest representative ???  He should be thrown out of the House.  So much for Pelosi's "swamp draining"  

Anyone remember James Traficant?  Remember how he got brought up on charges?  Were they comparable to what Charlie did?  He got the boot out of Congress.  The same should have been done to Rangel.

Censured is a nothing.  It goes something like this:  Bad Charlie!  BAD!  You are BAD, Charlie!  Now behave yourself!

And there you have it.

-Jon

Please go back and edit out your subject (vulgar) and first sentence on Rangel (horrific). Oh, and the second sentence too. And since the last sentence refers to Candy, you really have nothing to say.

being 80 years old simply means he's had more time than some to do the right thing....and he hasn't!  his age should count against him, not a factor to induce leniency.  this is a load of bs.  out in the real world, you get caught doing shenanigans on the job you're on the street scratching your @$$ in the unemployment line(if not doing time).  not in the federal government.  oh no, you screw up and you get a high five from your cohorts and teary eyed sympathy from the crap media. give me a break!

That censure will cause him harm - he shouldn't be there at all. 

...is going to do to Charlie's health.

-Dave

His military career and awards do absolutely nothing to negate the seriousness of what he's done.  In fact they make it even worse because you would expect someone with that kind of dedication and valor in the service of his country to have a higher standard of behavior than Rangel has shown with his dealings.  If he's so old that he can't stand up under censure, then he should resign from his post and spare everyone the spectacle that this is sure to become.  His illegal doings will become the centerpiece of any legacy he thinks he might leave behind.

I wonder ... what will Obama care do for the health of old farts who haven't gamed the system?

Who cares.

should have been out of there fifteen years ago.  

Well, if it were ME, my ass would be sitting in a cell....but since it's a Congressman....he's told he's been naughty and left to go do it some more.....Something just isn't right in America.....

If Rangel's age makes him too fragile to bear the light consequences of his corruption, then he is too fragile to be in a demanding political office, period. Of course, these are just weak attempts by liberals at CNN to defend and protect one of their own.

Firat, realize that Charlie is not the firat Congressman from Harlem to have these problems.  The guy he replaced, Adam Clayton Powell, was as crooked.

The difference is the Dems wouldn't seat Powell after his re-election even after trial.  Sounds like it should be done to Charlie this way. The cheater deserves to be in a slammer.

http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/highlights.html?action=view&intID=12

when the charges were read, as I watched the guy who read the charges it was of my opinion he clearly was on the side of rangel I could see it in his eye's, he when asked a question chose his words very very carfully to make dam sure he didn't put his own self in jepardy with regards to the answers he spouted. I'm sure Chaley threw a few bucks his way !! After Charlie this guy should be looked into on how he arrived at the suggestion of a mere Censure when you compare Charlie's charges against Mr. Trafficat's from just a decade ago Charlie by far were more serious and of course had DOJ Holder had any balls should have been in Prison for his Crimes, and since Holder didn't persue Charlie then we should of looked to the IRS to do there JOBS where by again Charlie should be in Prison awaiting his hearing by the Enthnics committee on top of charges form Holder & IRS and stripped him of every penny he has and every item he accumulated along the way e.g the Houses, cars (Parked for free) villas, gold watches, rings and the Millions he's got stashed away over there in on the Island of NaboomBoom !!

The one thing we have going for us is this, those who reside on this Committee had better head the voices of the American People as should those in the House cause come 2012 this will be remembered and if most if not all of them are up for re-election they had better do the right thing and strip him of every bit of power, and kick his ugly fat Ass out on his head cause it will come back to bite them all in the ass if they allow him to walk away with a slap on the wrist !!! 

Rangel screwed over his own constituents in Harlem.  No sympathy for this lying, cheating scumbag.  Boo f-ing hoo, Charlie.

I imagine that the trial and the verdicts will make sure Rangel will be dead in no less than 25 years.  Ohh yeah poor Rangle.

that all these bleeding hearts tend to focus on the perpetrator of crimes against the people, suddenly seeing them as vicitms when they are found guility of those crimes.  The fact that Charlie Rangle is 80 years old is irrelevant.  He is still a crook.  Throw 'da bum out.

Geeze that old fart is 80.  Two words.  Term limits.

I like what Beck suggested the other day and that is pollys should only get paid what the military gets paid,  not enough to piss in a pot.

The amount of contempt for us found in Rangel and other "representatives' is incalculable. They don't give a damn about us. In fact, if they could be representatives without dealing with constituents, they would.

The focus of  Crowley's story should have been: What has Rangel done to us?

"It-It's tough to watch, I'll tell you."

Yes, I it would be rather "tough" to "watch" one of your idols being exposed as a mere mortal, one who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, as they say.

I, for one, have little sympathy for Rangel.  He brought this upon himself, so he has no one but himself to blame. His "age" is immaterial.  If you're so worried about what this will do to him at his age, supposedly because the "stress" may cause him harm, then why didn't you show concern for him being in the House at his "age" when he was running for re-election.  Being the "head" of a committee, as well as being a member of the House in general, is always a stressful situation.  How will this "censure" make that stress any worse?

Stop making excuses, stop looking to evoke our sympathy, for a man who knowing, willfully, and DEFIANTLY brought this all upon himself.  Rangel isn't a victim here, he the perpetrator.  His constituents, and the American public in general, are the victims here. It's time we treat him, and all other who do this, as the true perpetrators they relly are.

If Rangle is not physically 'up to'  censure for what he has done, then he is certainly noy 'up to' being a Congressional representative... Throw him out for his own good...

How stressful would jail be?

"some of the people who do that they're so poor they've never touched anything in their lives. Let them touch those things for once."