Fall from grace; a personal appeal from Charles Rangel!

                    
      AP Photo - FILE - In this Nov. 2, 2010 file photo, Harlem resident Jackie Rowe Adams, left, sings "God Bless America" as U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., center, celebrates with supporters on election night at the Martin Luther King Jr. Democratic Club, in the Harlem neighborhood of New York. The prospect of a public scolding in Washington for Rangel over ethics violations has drawn both sadness and scorn in his Harlem neighborhood, where he was just re-elected with 81 percent of the vote and remains an icon to residents who say they'll be the ones to decide his political fate. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/11/03/rangel-easily-wins-re-election/

Rangel's NY supporters urge 'no' vote on censure

     A group of local leaders says Rangel has worked hard in his decades-long career to support his community. They're urging other members of the House of Representatives to vote no on a recommendation to censure him. The Democratic congressman was convicted in an ethics trial by a panel of lawmakers on 11 counts of ethical wrongdoing, including his use of House letterheads and staff to solicit money for a college center named after him. A number of the donors had business before the House Ways and Means Committee while Rangel served as chairman. Rangel also filed a decade's worth of misleading financial statements understating his assets, and converted a subsidized New York apartment - designated for residential use - into a campaign office. Other tenants who violated their lease got evicted. The tax issue was a sore point for several members of the ethics committee, who said it was especially egregious that a former chairman of the House's tax-writing committee failed for 17 years to pay taxes on the income from his island villa. The Rangel case won't end the ethics committee's business. On Nov. 29, the panel of five Democrats and five Republicans will hold an ethics trial for Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif. Waters is vigorously fighting charges that she improperly attempted to get federal financial aid for a bank where her husband is an investor.  

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/11/21/1534672/rangels-ny-supporters-urge-no.html

    
     No surprise here!  These types of misuse are repetative, and there are many more politicians who have done worst.  So, will there be an overhaul of censures? I think not! Every presidency there has to be some kind of ousted to appease the population.

     I  recall, when it was time for election Charles Rangel as a representative was well loved and highly respected by the people of NY and his peers ; they’ve always spoke very highly of him, and how well he represented his district. It’s sad to see that the ethics council voted 9-1 to censure him not based on an actual crime, but for inappropriately misuse of funds.  Rangel claims it wasn’t for enrichment, or corruption or personal gain, and was justified accordingly. So is the Ethics council censure right? From my understanding the censure punishment given is for felons who are found guilty (of bribes, and cover ups).  Is it fair to have compassion for him to get leniency? It’s sad to see him so broken since he is a self-confident, 80-year-old man who has supported NY for decades, and through this his constituents re-elected him. He has 40 years of House service behind him, and I don’t recall him been tied up in any prior scandals. Rep. Charles Rangel would become the 23rd House member in the nation's history to be censured if the House goes along with a recommendation of its ethics committee.

     In my opinion, politicians have been getting away with these types of behavior for years, and the majority of Americans have been complaining for years, and have lost faith in (some or all politicians) because of all the scandals, and lies that seems to overshadow any accomplishments. The government implements and creates laws that are suppose to protect, benefit, and in some case (control the citizens) but those laws become one sided because politicians seems to think they're exempt. What punishment should Rangel get? And is it fair to have leniency on him? What makes him different?  How can we distinguish the level of punishment to give him? It’s always questions and no real answers when these things happen; if the government has to clean house it’s unfortunate that some form of punishment have to be paid to affirm a fair government system.

    
     In my opinion, when it comes to politics some Americans either don’t know, understand or don’t care; therefore, will politician change? I would say no! After all, firstly they are citizens, and secondly, they are elected citizens chosen by the people. So what does that say about us? My concept is, America is a product of its own traditions.  Therefore, Mr. Rangel it’s sad to see someone who has such a long career servicing his community fall from grace!

By UnsungVoice: