God Bless Texas. It would be a great state if they could just get rid of Mack Brown.

American by birth, Texan by the grace of God.

/always made me laugh
//proud okie

Never mind that this bill makes sense,is fair, or rightly points out the hypocrisy of those in Washington D.C. Subby posted a Fox news article. Wharrgarrbl-bots shall now gather and let us know how biased Fox news is. Because that is all that really matters.

How childish. Is he a member of the same party that was all butthurt about how dem mean ol Democwats huwt they feewings during the stimulus bill negotiations?

I know it's just the Republicans mocking the Democrats, but I hope this passes.

If the GOP has any brains at all they will run their '10 and '12 campaigns not against Obama, but against shiats like Rangel and the corruption they represent.

However, the "Stupid Party" wing of the GOP (circa 1991) is back in full effect, and will yammer on about crap like Obama the socialist even though the guy's got more layers of teflon happening than Reagan and Clinton combined.

Only priveledged politicians can Geithner their taxes and not go to jail.

From TFA: "Carter, a former judge, said he is trying to focus in a what he believes is a double standard and add some levity to the debate."

Yes, what the country needs now is "levity" and political cheap shots rather than serious solutions. Even if this is a good idea, naming it the "Rangel Rule" guarantees its failure, and this assclown knows it. Let's leave the heavy lifting to the adults.

/I can't stand Rangel
//not a Dem

All taxpayers currently receive equal treatment under the law," Rangel spokesman Emile Milne said.

Bullshiat.

Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

How about allowing all Americans the same health benefits you guys get, eh Representative Carter?

/rangel still a douche

Rangel and the new Treasury Secretary ought to get along just fine.

Me, well, I have to pay my taxes or lose my house.

7of7: Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

Don't trash Texans, defend Rangel. Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking. Tell us why you condone special treatment for certain lawbreakers. Do you excuse republican miscreants also, or is your garbage strictly partisan?

Gulper Eel: If the GOP has any brains at all they will run their '10 and '12 campaigns not against Obama, but against shiats like Rangel and the corruption they represent.

They'll probably have to sit tight on the presidential front. Unless Obama farks up majorly over the next >4 years, he's going to be tough to beat. They'd do better to focus their energies on shifting the balance of power in congress and regaining the trust of the voter, which shouldn't be too hard once Americans come to their senses and realize they replaced evil Republicans with similarly evil Democrats.

Il Douchey: Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking.

It's a waste of time when there are much more important things to do. There are already processes in place to punish any wrongdoing on the part of lawmakers. We don't need attention whore Texans grandstanding around the government being idiots.

Il Douchey: 7of7: Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

Don't trash Texans, defend Rangel. Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking. Tell us why you condone special treatment for certain lawbreakers. Do you excuse republican miscreants also, or is your garbage strictly partisan?

I believe I can safely say that gunking up the legislative process to grandstand and make a point is pretty stupid, without defending Diamond Joe Rangel.

Il Douchey: 7of7: Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

Don't trash Texans, defend Rangel. Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking. Tell us why you condone special treatment for certain lawbreakers. Do you excuse republican miscreants also, or is your garbage strictly partisan?

It's not that he pointed out the law breaking, it's how he did it.

At the risk of interjecting a moment of seriousness, it doesn't need to last forever. It could be a short amnesty period.

"Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress. You shouldn't be treated any differently under the law than your citizens back home," Carter said.

Preach it.

dj_bigbird: All taxpayers currently receive equal treatment under the law," Rangel spokesman Emile Milne said.

Bullshiat.

To be fair, he said taxpayers. Tax avoiders are treated differently.

Diogenes: Il Douchey: 7of7: Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

Don't trash Texans, defend Rangel. Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking. Tell us why you condone special treatment for certain lawbreakers. Do you excuse republican miscreants also, or is your garbage strictly partisan?

I believe I can safely say that gunking up the legislative process to grandstand and make a point is pretty stupid, without defending Diamond Joe Rangel.

Maybe, but you can't do so without appearing hopelessly tendentious.

OK, as an admirer of NY and its people, I hope you NY Farkers won't be offended if I ask how you got so many douchebags in your Congressional delegation.

KaponoFor3: Preach it.

You realize that Carter enjoys socialized medical insurance as a member of congress, right?

7of7: Stay classy dumbass Texans. Too bad we can't glass parking lot Texas because of all the resources there.

My what a broad brush you paint with.

Obdicut: KaponoFor3: Preach it.

You realize that Carter enjoys socialized medical insurance as a member of congress, right?

How is health insurance "socialized?" Does it hang out with other insurance and develop good manners?

Obdicut: You realize that Carter enjoys socialized medical insurance as a member of congress, right?

I am not aware on each and every benefit offered to Congressional members. But, using that analysis, I remember hearing debate last year about Social Security and how Congress members can put their contributions in private accounts? Does this vaguely ring a bell?

Either way, I'm all for Congresspeople being treated the same as regular citizens (or at least the public having the option of doing what the Congresspeople do, not necessarily being mandated to have to)

"Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress. You shouldn't be treated any differently under the law than your citizens back home,"

That's crazy talk now.

Il Douchey: Explain to us why it is wrong to point out Rangel's law breaking

7of7: It's a waste of time when there are much more important things to do. There are already processes in place to punish any wrongdoing on the part of lawmakers. We don't need attention whore Texans grandstanding around the government being idiots Because he's a Democrat.

/

kronicfeld: How childish. Is he a member of the same party that was all butthurt about how dem mean ol Democwats huwt they feewings during the stimulus bill negotiations?

You know, I came in here to post that exact word: "Childish", regarding the subject of the article, and "when did Rangel ever blame The Man?" regarding the headline.

But on refreshing my memory on Rangel's actions; and ignoring the fact that Republicans generally engage in, encourage, and celebrate any form of tax evasion that can be devised; and several other predispositions I could name, I can't get too worked up. Rangel in recent years seems to personify the stereotype of the deeply entrenched lifelong congressman who is unlikely ever to be voted from office, and has come to consider inconvenient campaign and tax rules to be optional when applied to himself.

Yes, this is unproductive partisan sniping. But Carter has a point. "I am raising this issue not so much to just push the issue but to open the discussion. I don't think it's wrong for us to start having a free discussion in congress and with a certain amount of humor in it about how should people be treated in congress," he said.

i hate texas republicans, but i appreciate the snark

Obdicut: KaponoFor3: Preach it.

You realize that Carter enjoys socialized medical insurance as a member of congress, right?

Which is completely different than the Equal Protection implication of Mr. Rangel's tax issue being treated differently than the rest of us.

KaponoFor3: I am not aware on each and every benefit offered to Congressional members. But, using that analysis, I remember hearing debate last year about Social Security and how Congress members can put their contributions in private accounts? Does this vaguely ring a bell?

Either way, I'm all for Congresspeople being treated the same as regular citizens (or at least the public having the option of doing what the Congresspeople do, not necessarily being mandated to have to)

So you agree he's an enormous hypocrite?

Nabb1: Which is completely different than the Equal Protection implication of Mr. Rangel's tax issue being treated differently than the rest of us.

How so? It's a right he enjoys as a congressman, shouldn't he be passing a law granting that to everyone? He said "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress."

filth: Does it hang out with other insurance and develop good manners?

Is that the best you've got? I think it's a fair question. If we're going to enjoy some of the privileges of the Congresscritters, why not all of them. Why should the average American pay around $10,000 per year for health care while we pay for theirs?

FWIW, I wish Rangel and a few others would go away forever.

Obdicut: So you agree he's an enormous hypocrite?

Um, no. Carter isn't breaking the law by using his "socialized healthcare" provided to Congressmembers. Rangel *is* breaking the law by failing to pay taxes.

It's a pretty clear distinction, you have to admit.

Obdicut: Nabb1: Which is completely different than the Equal Protection implication of Mr. Rangel's tax issue being treated differently than the rest of us.

How so? It's a right he enjoys as a congressman, shouldn't he be passing a law granting that to everyone? He said "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress."

It's a benefit, not a right. There is a difference. The Equal Protection Clause does not guarantee you the same benefits under the law that Senators and Congresspeople get. It does, however, guarantee that the law does not treat Mr. Rangel differently than the rest of us.

BuckTurgidson: But on refreshing my memory on Rangel's actions; and ignoring the fact that Republicans generally engage in, encourage, and celebrate any form of tax evasion that can be devised; and several other predispositions I could name, I can't get too worked up. Rangel in recent years seems to personify the stereotype of the deeply entrenched lifelong congressman who is unlikely ever to be voted from office, and has come to consider inconvenient campaign and tax rules to be optional when applied to himself

I'm going to have to jump in here. For the same reason it's always worst when a Republican gets caught in the wrong bed (or bathroom) it is worst when a Democrat dodges taxes. Republicans always say taxes are too high! So of course they would be easier on a tax dodger! You would think that a Democrat could not forgive anyone for taking money away from mother government.

KaponoFor3: Um, no. Carter isn't breaking the law by using his "socialized healthcare" provided to Congressmembers. Rangel *is* breaking the law by failing to pay taxes.

It's a pretty clear distinction, you have to admit.

So when he said "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress," he just didn't mean it? Or he meant it only when it's embarrassing to his opponents, or what?

Nabb1: It's a benefit, not a right. There is a difference. The Equal Protection Clause does not guarantee you the same benefits under the law that Senators and Congresspeople get. It does, however, guarantee that the law does not treat Mr. Rangel differently than the rest of us.

Is Mr. Rangel currently under investigation for his non-payment of tax?

Obdicut: Nabb1: It's a benefit, not a right. There is a difference. The Equal Protection Clause does not guarantee you the same benefits under the law that Senators and Congresspeople get. It does, however, guarantee that the law does not treat Mr. Rangel differently than the rest of us.

Is Mr. Rangel currently under investigation for his non-payment of tax?

It's not the investigation. It's the lack of his payment of a penalty. RTFA.

Nabb1: It's a benefit, not a right. There is a difference. The Equal Protection Clause does not guarantee you the same benefits under the law that Senators and Congresspeople get. It does, however, guarantee that the law does not treat Mr. Rangel differently than the rest of us

Damnit Nabb1, quit bringing logic and facts into this thread.

Obdicut: So when he said "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress," he just didn't mean it? Or he meant it only when it's embarrassing to his opponents, or what?

You are really wriggling on this one, and I think you know it. I'm sure he did mean it, and I bet he'd be willing to extend his benefits AS AN OPTION to his constituents.

Nabb1: Which is completely different than the Equal Protection implication of Mr. Rangel's tax issue being treated differently than the rest of us.

There are a hell of a lot of "regular" taxpayers - individuals and businesses alike - who don't get in any trouble for late or non-payment of taxes, who get stuck with a very trivial penalty, or who are able to negotiate their past due tax liabilities down to pennies on the dollar. I fail to see any "equal protection" implication whatsoever.

Dancin_In_Anson: Because he's a Democrat.

Yeah, my mistake. That's exactly what I meant.

/

Congress needs term limits. Get rid of all the "insiders" and wastes of space. The Ted Kennedys and the Strom Thurmonds.

I really wish there was a way for citizens to push a law on Congress so that they HAVE to follow it. No votes. This is what it is.

Yeah, in theory if people wanted them out, they'd vote them out, but the same could be said for Presidents. Term limits can be very good things.

kronicfeld: There are a hell of a lot of "regular" taxpayers - individuals and businesses alike - who don't get in any trouble for late or non-payment of taxes, who get stuck with a very trivial penalty, or who are able to negotiate their past due tax liabilities down to pennies on the dollar.

And there are also a hell of a lot who do get stuck with a penalty. Consistency is all I think people are asking for, especially when the person in question is a Congressman.

KaponoFor3: It's a pretty clear distinction, you have to admit.

You and your respect for the "laws." Psh...!

7of7: Yeah, my mistake. That's exactly what I meant.

I can think of no other reason that you have a problem with pointing out the hypocrisy of the treatment of Rangel and we little people.

KaponoFor3: kronicfeld: There are a hell of a lot of "regular" taxpayers - individuals and businesses alike - who don't get in any trouble for late or non-payment of taxes, who get stuck with a very trivial penalty, or who are able to negotiate their past due tax liabilities down to pennies on the dollar.

And there are also a hell of a lot who do get stuck with a penalty. Consistency is all I think people are asking for, especially when the person in question is a Congressman.

Exactly.

KaponoFor3: And there are also a hell of a lot who do get stuck with a penalty. Consistency is all I think people are asking for, especially when the person in question is a Congressman.

How can you be consistent with something that, as I said, is inconsistent? Are they supposed to slam him just because he's a public official, regardless of the severity and intent behind what he did? Is that "consistent" with the treatment of non-public officials who have done the same thing, or is that "inconsistent" with the extent to which prosecutorial discretion has been applied by the IRS?

Nabb1: It's not the investigation. It's the lack of his payment of a penalty. RTFA.

So the investigation does not include him not paying the late fees? I'm honestly asking, since y'all are law-knowing guys: he's gotten away with not paying late fees? He's completely in the clear?

KaponoFor3: Damnit Nabb1, quit bringing logic and facts into this thread.

To remind you both, he said, "Your citizens back home should have the same rights and benefits that come to you as a member of congress.""

So I'm not sure why you're talking about right vs. benefit.

KaponoFor3: And there are also a hell of a lot who do get stuck with a penalty

I think it's actually a shiatload of people. But don't ask me for a citation.

Ahahahahaha

This is what republicans do when a crisis faces the nation.

Waste everyone's farking time.