THE SPINE SEPTEMBER 4, 2009
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
The most up-to-date on-line bulletin Congressman Rangel produces for his constituents has a photograph of him being patted on the cheek by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Its latest dated item is August 28. But Rangel is now in such deep doodoo that not even Ms. Pelosi, who has a very high tolerance level for shmootz (see Jason Zengerle's article about Murthaville and John Murtha in the last hard-copy edition of TNR or in this space), will not be showing her affections for Harlem's representative to Congress any time soon. Still, she also can't bring herself to dump him. So she is delaying the whole Rangel scandal for a judgment by the House Ethics Committee, which, of course, is not always known to be direct and honest itself.
Democrats habitually tell themselves that Republicans are the ones who forfeit the public trust, perhaps by dint of character. And there are so many cases of members of Congress (and appointees in the executive branch) who want that Grand Old Party to be a grand old party only for themselves that this partisan skewing of the corrupt seems almost plausible.
But it is not. This endemic corruption is, in fact, perhaps the one part of public life that is truly and lastingly bipartisan.
Murtha probably thought that by taking on President Bush on Iraq that he had immunized himself from the righteous anger of the "good government" types (the goo-goos, as we used to call them). But not even being reflexively anti-war (and hysterically anti-war in the style of Cindy Sheehan, at that) has immunized him from the consequences of his own and his constituents' greed. Well, no longer.
The editorial in the current issue of The New Republic (arriving in the mail in the next days and appearing here soon, look for it) calls on the Democratic leadership, at least, to demote him.
And our lead also argues that Mr. Rangel should be likewise punished. He, in fact, is a case all unto himself.
Please Google him. There is so much of evidence of tax evasion, lying on official income and asset reports, and even more common malfeasance that one wonders how the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee—where all national pecuniary levies are initiated—can even face his colleagues. His behavior seems also to be contagious. Many on his staff seem to imitate his infractions. Moreover, his own defenses should alone disqualify from the chairmanship (and even membership) on the Committee. Rangel has claimed that he didn't understand or even know the rules. In any case, he was very adept at making the rules he could not or, rather, did not want to grasp.
Now, to be sure, he has raised the race card. In doing so he has attempted to drape his serious pecuniary violations of law in the grandeur of Barack Obama and the office of the presidency. Rangel has not quite said that the accusations of tax evasion against him are motivated by racism. So, instead, he has played the race card in accusing the opponents of the health care proposals put forward by the administration of not having "gotten over the fact that Obama is president of the United States." Shorthand, sure, but clear shorthand and quite vicious. Shame!
5 comments
MP: This endemic corruption is, in fact, perhaps the one part of public life that is truly and lastingly bipartisan. george: Amen, brother, amen!! The goo-goos? I like it. Do you mind if I borrow it to show Spinesters how you basically take the same approach to Israel? With a twist of course. In here, whenever anyone dares to suggest the Palestinians may a have a couple of legitimate teeny tiny complaints about the policies of the Israeli government, you pounce on them the way some pounced on Rangel in the Tawanna Brawley debacle. [By the way, is it true you were particularly incensed when Rangel refused to admit Brawley was an agent of Hezbollah?] As for the pecuniary improprieties, allow me please to paraphrase Captain Willard: "Charging a man with corruption in Congress is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500." So, is Rangel the cause or the effect? But isn't that's like asking if money is the cause or the effect in the transactions between Washington and Wall Steet? Look, I haven't given up on you. Sooner or later you'll break down and confess that you and you alone are both the cause and the effect of your own condition. Then, together, we will reach out and bring all parties together in the Middle East. And all that was war before will become the peace that lasts for all eternity. See, you got me all misty eyed again. gw
- iambiguous
September 4, 2009 at 4:41pm
It will be interesting to see how the Congressional Democratic Leadership handles the Honorable Mr. Rangel. Rangel got his seat when Adam Clayton Powell was thrown out of Congress for his corruption, so I guess maybe between New York and Washington and 40 years they just get a little over confident. Pretty sure this will keep coming back around over the next 2-4 years if they don't deal with it. Remember, the other 40 year member of the House, the Honorable Mr. Conyers has his wife getting sentenced for her felony corruption charges later this year. I don't understand how the wife of a House Representative can be guilty of accepting bribes and her husband is not considered guilty also. Corruption played a big part in the 2006 elections and the voters threw out all the bad guys associated with Jack Abramoff. Can't see the voters supporting big programs like Health Care or Carbon Taxes when there is so much rapant corruption.
- CRS9TNR
September 4, 2009 at 7:51pm
george, it was Al Sharpton who got embroiled in the Tawana Brawley mess, not Charlie Rangel. I know, it's easy to mix them up. They are both from the Big Apple, and both are black. Sometimes I mix them up myself.
- scrubby
September 4, 2009 at 8:01pm
Srubby, Thanks. I often get both of them confused with Reverend Bacon. That's the part where fact always gets stranger than fiction. Would that the bonfire of the vanities be the other way around... george
- iambiguous
September 5, 2009 at 7:43am
Charlie Rangel may indeed be a charlatan; power corrupts and Charlie has been in office a long time. He is an effective congressman and when it comes to pushing back on Republicans, there are few who can match Charlie's moxie. I do not agree that Charlie is off base by raising the possible racial animus that may rest in the black hearts of all those cranky, corn-fed white conservatives out there who are crashing those Town Halls. The thing that always amuses me is that someone like marty peretz, a man who seems to spend a good portion of his increasingly declining sentient hours bellowing about fellow Jews who disagree with him on politics, then summarily kicking those unlucky bastards outta the Spine Approved Tent, can get upset when anyone talks about race or ethnicity. Pot, meet Kettle.
- MrCookie1
September 5, 2009 at 1:30pm