Blue-on-Blue Watch: NYT versus Charlie Rangel.
Although there's a subtext, here. There usually is, with these things.
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 | Charlie Rangel | Culture of Corruption | Obamafiles — Comments (10) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Let's say that you're a news/media organization, and you have yourself a problem. There's this guy running for President. You loved that the guy was running for President. You got totally into fact that the guy was running, to the point where you pretty much gushed and cooed and did all sorts of really, really embarrassing things on your front page in support of the guy. You did everything that you could to get the guy the Democratic nomination, and lo! - he did.
And then the guy abandoned public financing for the election.
You loved public financing. It was like a starving puppy that you found in a storm drain during a blizzard, all whimpering and scared and alone. You took public financing home and kept it alive, cleaning its sores and giving it its worm medicine, making sure that it had all its shots and got housebroken. And the guy? When he came over, he made you think that he loved public financing just as much as you did... up until the moment where he took a rock and did his level best to bash its brains in. And when you came home to discover what he had done, he shrugged at you. He actually shrugged.
So what do you do?
Well, if you're the Washington Post, you tell your editors to take off the filter that gives the guy his halo. If you're the LA Times, you let your house blogger know that it's no longer Be Kind To The Guy Millenium. If you're ABC News, hey, Jake Tapper suddenly sees himself on TV more often. But if you're the New York Times, maybe you don't have those options. Direct action is going to get squashed before it starts. The people who control your paper don't care about public financing, really. They're still entranced by the guy. So, you can't go after him directly.
But that's actually OK: he has friends.
Read on.
I'm talking, of course, about the Old Grey Lady's surprisingly scathing denunciation of Charlie Rangel:
Rangel Rents Apartments at Bargain Rates
While aggressive evictions are reducing the number of rent-stabilized apartments in New York, Representative Charles B. Rangel is enjoying four of them, including three adjacent units on the 16th floor overlooking Upper Manhattan in a building owned by one of New York’s premier real estate developers.
Mr. Rangel, the powerful Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, uses his fourth apartment, six floors below, as a campaign office, despite state and city regulations that require rent-stabilized apartments to be used as a primary residence.
Mr. Rangel, who has a net worth of $566,000 to $1.2 million, according to Congressional disclosure records, paid a total rent of $3,894 monthly in 2007 for the four apartments at Lenox Terrace, a 1,700-unit luxury development of six towers, with doormen, that is described in real estate publications as Harlem’s most prestigious address.
(See also JammieWearingFool and Instapundit)
I say "surprisingly scathing" because it's the NYT, of course: they could have done this story any time in the last decade. They haven't, for reasons which I will piously decline to speculate upon, but if I were it would probably be largely centered around Rep. Rangel's partisan political affiliation. Unfortunately for the Representative, such considerations were apparently not quite enough to immunize him from the reprocussions of being an Obama super-delegate: he may have wanted to think about the implications of changing his affiliation more before he did it, back in June.
How will this affect Rangel? Officially, probably not at all: the article (slightly bitterly) admits that he gets 80% of the vote every election, and anybody who expects either Speaker Pelosi or the Democratic Party to do anything about one of their own's, ah, surprisingly varied real estate holdings probably has a whole other bunch of charmingly naive delusions affecting his or her behavior. But it will put Rangel in the spotlight, and he knows it - the actual response was "Why should I help you embarrass me?" - and by extension his new patron. It also perhaps tenders the hint that perhaps, just perhaps, other supporters of the junior Senator from Illinois may want to not really rely on The Paper of Record... not recording. We'll see.
Still: maybe you should have left that puppy alone, Senator Obama.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Obama/... DODD? — Comments (12) »
Blue-on-Blue Watch: NYT versus Charlie Rangel. 10 Comments (0 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
The only brush i had with a legislator was also at an airport. It was Ben Nighthorse Campbell. He talked to me for a long time and was very nice, and also a very quick guy who picked up on a lot of things about me just from our casual conversation.
I would not speak to Rangel though for any reason, he is a piece of garbage.
(yes I know about his war service, check out my profile of him
here:http://impudent.blognation.us/blog/_archives/2006/9/13/2322187.html
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
I wonder if Rangel has used any of his *** FOUR *** rent-controlled luxury apartments to support the Church of Scientology? I ask because I've noted many times before before that Rangel was one of the guest speakers when the Church of Scientology opened its new chapter in New York. Their website used to have a drippingly vainglorious photo of Congressman Rangle adorning the glittering podium, and he spoke at the opening celebration along with (then) United Nations Under-Secretary General Maurice Strong (the current UG is Mr. Sha Zukang of China.)
Congressman Charles Rangel praised the Church for its effective drug abuse and literacy programs, while United Nations Under-Secretary General Maurice Strong validated the Church’s human rights public education campaign.
There is a Scientology chapter in Harlem, at 2250 3rd Avenue, less than a mile and a half from Rangel's *** FOUR *** rent-controlled apartments. In any other city than NYC, that's walking distance.
Imagine, for example, how cool it would be if Cash Cab picked up a Scientology acolyte fare outside the Harlem chapter and asked:
"How many rent controlled apartments does Congressman Charles Rangle have at Lenox Terrace? 1,2,4,8 or 16?"
It would make a great question and also great cable for the Discovery Channel!
He got what he wanted out of them and then tossed them aside when something better came along.
I beleive the old addage "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" applies here. And, boyo, the American Left sure got milked.
------------------------------------------
This signature left intentionally blank
after all, they played the whore to Stalin, Mao, and any number of insane American Left wingers. I doubt if there is any introspection of any sort at the NYTimes.
/The Great Red Lady
//The Fishwrap of Record
///All the dialectic that's fit to print
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
Just like a woman who keeps on dating men who use her isn't it? Ya can't ever talk any sense into them...
"No, I really think he's the one. He just needs a couple grand to enroll in these marketing classes and then we'll settle down and he'll take care of me."
Milk it, Barry, milk it...
------------------------------------------
This signature left intentionally blank
The New York Times building sits directly across from my office window, I often wonder how long till I see the building itself completely fall appart (not including them having to take down their "Solar" rods)
Charlie has gone too long getting away with so much. The previously mentioned Draft Bill that became a talking point for all Dems in 2004 as they claimed it was really Bush trying to do the draft and that Bush was the one who put the bill up (And sadly many Dems I knew took their word for it and believed Bush was trying for the draft) Then there is the earmarks for the "Charlie Rangel Library for Charlie Rangel's complete uber Awsomeness" that he wants here in NYC. And now this, which even if talked about time and time again will go nowhere since the AG here is a Dem hack.
One nice little bop at Doh'Bama but the NYT attacked his friends because they know it will just slide off.
Voting for the Sexy(Pres) - Sexy(VP) Dream Ticket
Jindal/Palin 2012
You've got to love the following in NYT piece:
When a Times reporter, David Kocieniewski, pressed Mr. Rangel on the issue of fairness, the congressman declined to answer, saying, “I have decided unilaterally that you have asked more than your share.” He added, when Mr. Kocieniewski tried to press him, “Hell no, I’m not going to respond to you.”
and the following:
Asked by a reporter whether his living arrangements were fair — given that other residents of rent-stabilized apartments who have more than one unit are typically asked to occupy just one — Mr. Rangel replied, “The question of fairness is so subjective.”
Actually a nice guy; but they also said Idi Amin was charming fellow.
Charlie was actually standing alone and you would never know he was the scion of NY Democratic politics. I remember just watching for a minute as nobody seemed to care or actually relish an engagement.
He was quite the epitome of extravagance; well dressed, well heeled and manicured. I approached by introducing myself and then asked why he would actually sponsor legislation to bring back the draft. What followed was a long winded condemnation of Bush and Iraq which I personally found unflattering to our troops. After some time, I advised he need not fillibuster, politely yet briefly expressed my displeasure with him and McDermott and walked away.
I should have stayed an observer.
"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report