Tuesday, August 5, 2008

My Name is Rangel, Congressman of Congressmen...

My name is Rangel, Congressman of Congressmen:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

(I know the title is a needless display of a classical education, but I'll tie this up below, I promise.)

Most politicians would be satisfied with one scandal per week. But Dan Seal's sugar daddy (there's that phrase again, darnnit) is a special kind of politician. A mere four days after the New York Times bombshell regarding his apartments hit, the Washington Post lined up for their shot at Charlie Rangel. The Post reported that Rangel has been soliciting donations for a school from various corporations and business leaders…on congressional stationery…and most of the people solicited have business before the committee that he chairs. Oh, and the name of the school? The Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service. That's right... he named the school after... himself.

Now, there are several no-nos that Rangel committed here so we'll deal with each one in turn. First there is soliciting donations for a private entity on congressional stationery. That's a violation of House rules. Of course since he's violating the gift ban already this might not bother him.

The second problem here is the people Rangel is soliciting frequently have business before the Ways and Means committee, which Rangel chairs, or work for companies that do. Even if he just asking, there is the appearance of impropriety. As the Dean of George Washington University put it "[Rangel] has crossed the line… Charlie Rangel is a prominent public servant and may deserve a center at City College. . . . But I think one has to be careful about how one raises the money for that. The danger is that it begins to blur the lines between whether a quid pro quo is implied by this or not."

His final offense is not so much an offense against laws or ethics, but an offense against good taste. The man named a school after himself while he was still in office. And he had the gall to request of $2 million in earmarks to fund said school. That sort of monumental hubris, to decide that not only are you worthy of a monument, but that the taxpayers should pay for the privilege of erect it, is not becoming in a public servant. With that kind of attitude he should change his name to Ozymandias Rangel (there's that classical education creeping in... if you slept through the Romantics in English Lit., here's a link to 'splain it to ya.)

Perhaps now we have a clue as to why a Congressman from New York is helping a long shot, out of work wannabe like Dan Seals. Rangel sees a kindred spirit in the Pup. Maybe when he sees how Dan is running for Congress in a district he's never lived in, with virtually no legislative experience to his name, Rangel sees a younger version of himself. It's like he's Rangel's long lost, arrogant, presumptuous son.


Guess I'm not the only one out there who is working up the Rangel-Seals connection. Check out the latest video...


Anonymous said...

Expect more to come on Rangel - both the New York Times and Washington Post have teams working on his legal problems, the Ethics investigation and local leaders who are coming out of the woodwork to tell of other problems.

WilmetteLife said...

This is the gift that keeps on giving against Dan Seals.

Poor kid can't figure out how much of a crook Rangel is.

Anonymous said...

Everyone should check out this video about Seals and Rangel.



Anonymous said...

Doesn't Kirk have legislation that would deny pensions to members of congress who commit felonies? Is that why Rangel is supporting Seals -- to knock off the guy who might end his gravy train?

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:09, see my posting on the "other blog" which may answer your question. I'm also posting it here in case it gets deleted or Pelosi'ed (turn off the lights and turn off the microphones and cameras):


"Kirk is a "liar" or a "pathological liar?" Or is it really you cannot pathologically accept Kirk's accomplishments in office? You cannot pathologically accept these accomplishments to the point where the Senator Stevens' story really and truly bothers you.

I know why it bothers you. I remember now!

The Democrats hijacked Kirk's original bill, gave it to a couple of newbie elected Democrats so they can look good instead of looking lost and confused, and then watered it down to the point where Senator Bridge to Nowhere will get a mere slap on the wrist.

Or maybe he will avoid censure on a partisan vote like Rep. Rangel just did. You know Rangel, big Dan Seals supporter. Been collecting rent subsidized luxury apartments in NYC on the taxpayers dime. Sees nothing wrong with hosing down the taxpayers. Now he is raising money for Dan Seals and Debbie Halvorson, who must not care where their funds come from.

Way to go, ethically challenged Democrats!

And this upsets you? Well, it upsets me too! Like the Springfield ethics bill Democrats watered down then stalled in the State Senate for a year, the same bill that "Public Official A" refuses to sign? Who stalled that bill for a year in the Senate? Debbie Halvorson!

Way to go, ethically challenged Democrats!

That upsets me too!

But then, I remember when you Ellen Beth Gill were pathologically DEFENDING Senator Bridge to No Where for trying to get the bridge to nowhere passed into law. You of course were SUPPORTING Senator Stevens at that time because KIRK WAS OPPOSED TO THAT PATHETIC PORK PROJECT CALLED THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE!

You even wrote an article about how the bridge to nowhere really wasn't THAT expensive of a boondoggle that went nowhere, it was just an expensive boondoggle that went to an almost deserted island.

Way to go!

And you folks wonder why I call you 10th District Democrats incorrigible? Why I think you folks are hopeless? Beyond change?

You 10th Congressional Democrats have been pathologically pounding on Kirk for 8 years, pathologically blaming him for anything and everything and refusing to acknowledge a single one of his accomplishments. It is ingrained in your beings. You can't help it.

Way to go ethically challenged Democrats!

All that badmouthing will leave a sour taste in your mouth when Kirk gets reelected.

Louis G. Atsaves"

Anonymous said...


You are a model for us all!

Anonymous said...

Here's the reality from having done a few of these things.

Whether Mark goes back to Congress hinges on 2 questions that we begin to get answers to after labor day.

1. Is Mark vs Dan 2 about national politics or local leadership? If it's about local leadership, Dan loses. Dan's ads will focus on the need to change d.c, we will get a spot with him and Obama. The DCCC will help him with a generic ad tagging Mark with big oil and Bush.
I'm sure Mark will talk about some soccer mom issues he's helped for the district and try to paint Dan as what he is frankly, the latest chicago trash to sully up the north shore.

2. The bigger question is if Obama goes Reagan and the country decides they are done with the GOP. If Obama starts to run away with it, Mark may not stand much of a shot. Likewise Dan does not stand much of a chance if John McCain of 2000 shows up.

I think the likely outcome is McCain takes a big piece out of Obama, but Obama wins with less than 300 electoral votes and Mark squeaks by 51-48.

Either way, we have to realize what a great leader Mark is and how hard he works. So many areas throughout New England, the midwest and elsewhere, right now have moderate members who quit on them, got lazy and were beat or have become democrat tools.

Anonymous said...

Well Anon 9:15 I hope your dire prediction of 51/49 is way off target. Congressman Mark Kirk WILL WIN on November 4 regardless of Obama's sway in this district and in the State. Mark Kirk IS the true leader of the moderates. Once he stands up and speaks out and defends his record the voters in this district will see the difference. Who and what is Dan Seals. WE know the answers to that statement. In spite of the rantings and ravings of a few of Ellen Beth Gill's supporters, the growing number of people in this district who are calling and asking for yard signs, sending in checks to the campaign prove the point. Yes, it's going to be close. It might end up as close as 2006. Dan Seals offers nothing to anyone in this district and voters know it.

Anonymous said...

Look dude, I am a sunny optimist, otherwise I wouldn't waste my time blogging at 10 when I should be watching sportscenter and intend to do gotv.

But the fact that we are all in denial about is that the party locally and nationally has done a shit job of articulating a message and vision for the country. It's great to do local issues, but you want your congressman when he's as smart as mark in sync with the party, and playing offense.

Doesn't it bother you in the least that we have a state up shit creek without a paddle right now and NO serious Republican rebuttal other than to sit and stool?

Doesn't it bother you that with all the issues confronting the country and all of Mark's experience in d..c we are reduced to some tangential issue about allegations over a congressman 600 miles from here?

I could go on and on but the fact is, 8 years of national republican leadership and 8 years of Mark, we shouldn't be reduced to hoping a guy who should have never made it out of a senate race here (obama) and unemployed intern with a old europe view of Israel have a bad few months.

Anonymous said...

Boy Anon 10:52 you've said it plain and simple. We ARE up that proverbial creek and really without a hope of a paddle. Our party state-wide is hopeless. I once heard former Congressman Porter say very wisely that you can't beat something with nothing. How true. We can wring our hands, we can hoot and holler about what we have locally and nationally, but how about those of us with the brains and the guts to DO SOMETHING actually get out and try to get something positive accomplished in these waning days of this 08 cycle. I refuse to accept the fact that we have to sit here like lemmings and let these less than capable guys take hold of our district and our country. With the brains and ideas that have been floated on TA's blog these last few years there has to be some action we can take right now. Let's do it.