The "story of a non-story" issue
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 01:31
VIEWED: 6454
PAGE 4 of 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Is David Vitter a member of the "current" Congress?
His transgresions did not occur or come to light during the current congressional session. Neither did Ensign's.
Rangel's transgressions, like Lee's and Weiner's, did come to light in the current session.
BTW. Mike, are you (1)an asshole or (2)a flaming asshole?
Answer 1 or 2 please.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I'll never forget the smirk and arrogance that Charles Rangel had, when asked about his ethics issues. Rangel basically laughed ..."
Folks, remember Raps' epic FAIL describing a picture WE ALL COULD LOOK AT ... This one?
Here is Rap's first FAIL ...
Quote:his second FAIL
Obama sitting in the corner, shoulders slouched, like a scolded child ? Seriously.. why isn't he in the big boy chair ?
Quote:and his doubling down on both FAILS.
he looks sullen and dejected... not attentive or engaged, even a little.
Quote:
Obama's shoulders are slouched, he's sullen, and in the corner
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=48454
So when he says Rangel smirked, was arrogant and 'basically' laughed (which I think means NOT REALLY but I want to claim he did) does anyone here trust he got it right?
I still find it astounding how Rap can literally not see what's in front of his face, and instead see what's not there. If I were him, I would be worried about my own sanity, at least a little.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Is David Vitter a member of the "current" Congress?
His transgresions did not occur or come to light during the current congressional session. Neither did Ensign's.
Rangel's transgressions, like Lee's and Weiner's, did come to light in the current session.
BTW. Mike, are you (1)an asshole or (2)a flaming asshole?
Answer 1 or 2 please.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
ETA: I see I neglected to answer Geezer's question. Generally, (1) an asshole. But I've told you this before, no doubt.
From the Wiki:
Quote:
Beginning in 2008, Rangel faced a series of allegations of ethics violations and failures to comply with tax laws. The House Ethics Committee focused on whether Rangel improperly rented multiple rent-stabilized New York apartments, improperly used his office in raising money for the Rangel Center at the City College of New York, and failed to disclose rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic. In March 2010, Rangel stepped aside as Ways and Means Chair. In November 2010, the Ethics Committee found Rangel guilty of 11 counts of violating House ethics rules, and on December 2, the full House approved a sanction of censure against Rangel.
Hardly the "current" session. That began January 3, 2011. So all of Rangel's transgressions "came to light" during the previous sessions, just like you excused Vitter and Ensign for.
So which kind of asshole are you, Geezer? Were you (1) a lying asshole when you made those ridiculous claims, or were you (2) just an asshole making a "campaign promise"?
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"I'll never forget the smirk and arrogance that Charles Rangel had, when asked about his ethics issues. Rangel basically laughed ..."
Folks, remember Raps' epic FAIL describing a picture WE ALL COULD LOOK AT ... This one?
Here is Rap's first FAIL ...Quote:his second FAIL
Obama sitting in the corner, shoulders slouched, like a scolded child ? Seriously.. why isn't he in the big boy chair ?Quote:and his doubling down on both FAILS.
he looks sullen and dejected... not attentive or engaged, even a little.Quote:
Obama's shoulders are slouched, he's sullen, and in the corner
http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=48454
So when he says Rangel smirked, was arrogant and 'basically' laughed (which I think means NOT REALLY but I want to claim he did) does anyone here trust he got it right?
I still find it astounding how Rap can literally not see what's in front of his face, and instead see what's not there. If I were him, I would be worried about my own sanity, at least a little.
Yup, and he COULDN'T see the ACTUAL smirk on Dubya's face when he said things like "Bring it on!" (which al-Qaeda immediately did, causing numerous deaths to U.S. personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq) and when he claimed that he just didn't think about Bin Laden that much, and didn't worry about him.
I imagine he was probably smirking when he disbanded the Bin Laden unit at the CIA in 2006, too. And of course Rappy "basically laughed" at the idea that Obama should get ANY of the credit for having Bin Laden tracked down...
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kwicko you are a credit to your party
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know, there's only so much amusement can be derived from one of these...
But of course, Mikey is who he is...
And I wouldn't have it any other way.
-Frem
I do not serve the Blind God.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
Kwicko you are a credit to your party
Couldn't tell if that was sarcasm.
Frem, which one is Mike in that pic?
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
Kwicko you are a credit to your party
As Geezer is a credit to yours.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So all of Rangel's transgressions "came to light" during the previous sessions, just like you excused Vitter and Ensign for.
Show me where I excused Vitter or Ensign's actions, or retract your lie.
ETA: Ooh. Censured one whole month before the current session. Nitpick mutch?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
So all of Rangel's transgressions "came to light" during the previous sessions, just like you excused Vitter and Ensign for.
Show me where I excused Vitter or Ensign's actions, or retract your lie.
You "excused" them from being considered improper by dint of their having taken place during the previous session(s) of Congress.
I pointed out that Rangel's transgressions meet your same criteria for exclusion EXACTLY. To leave Vitter and Ensign out of consideration for what you consider offensive mideeds, while including Rangel, *IS* "excusing" them.
Quote:
ETA: Ooh. Censured one whole month before the current session. Nitpick mutch?
Sorry you find facts to be "nitpicking". As I said earlier, your hypocrisy is showing, "mutch".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME