Skip to main content

View Diary: Rangel defends Rangel (176 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He did NOT. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GreenSooner, miss SPED, Mets102

    I live in New York and while the tax cheating and using his office to solicit money for his own foundation were legally more serious the fact that he used rent controlled apartments for his campaign office is the most offensive. Few working people can afford to live in New York yet Rangel used his connections to take a precious affordable housing space he not remotely entitled to either ethically or legally.

    •  So say ye (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CupofTea

      "It's impossible to wake a man who is pretending to be asleep." - unknown

      by looking and listening on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 02:35:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd believe that in NYC (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        miss SPED, Mets102

        Don't live there, but lived in NY/NJ for much of my life, and rent control is a high profile issue in the city.  It may be small potatoes as an ethical violation, but it is (or would be in most cases) a damaging issue to an NYC politician.

        Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt

        by Phoenix Rising on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 02:41:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well he's up for election as he (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kaliope, rainmanjr

          has been in the past for so many times.

          The New Yorkers should Vote him out!

          "It's impossible to wake a man who is pretending to be asleep." - unknown

          by looking and listening on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 02:45:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  probably would if the opposition were not split (0+ / 0-)

            In any event New Yorkers have a habit of re-electing some of the most corrupt politicians in the country. Just because someone lives where voters are dumb enough to re-elect them does not give them a pass on being investigated and sanctioned by Congress.

            •  I didn't say he should get a pass. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Eman, CupofTea, lightshine

              He isn't saying he should get a pass either.
              He is saying bring it on.

              I'm agreeing with him as it relates to the House Committee that has been investigating and negotiating all these years. Put or shut up.

              And if the the voters find him to be reprehensible then get rid of him. You state that there's not enough voters that find him to be so, so they keep voting him back in, yes?

              "It's impossible to wake a man who is pretending to be asleep." - unknown

              by looking and listening on Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 02:59:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site