Mr. Rangel, NY Rep (D) was quoted: "You don't come into my country; you don't come into my congressional district and criticize my president." He was talking about Chavez.
If more democrats behaved in this manner, would it improve the US morale? World opinion? Thoughts?
2006-10-07 08:31:14 · 14 answers · asked by ? 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
if all politicians acted in this manner we would have a much more unified country and the media would have nothing to lie about.
2006-10-07 08:32:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Talk-show nannies are slick at saying things as if they were self-evident when such mantras are nonsense. What difference does it make if Chavez is a foreigner and a devil himself? It doesn't, does it? Quit thinking what you're told to think. And the chickenhawk babblers who tell you that you must think that this is the patriotic attitude to take would not have objected if Margaret Thatcher had come here during the Clinton administration and criticized him. You know they wouldn't have, so why don't you admit that this is a non-issue created by the GOPinionators?
2006-10-07 09:07:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That is why the Dem's lose elections. Most citizens do not like people who tear this country down for their own gains.The Dem's can not find anything good about their own government which they are a part of.I did not see them doing much when they were in office but cook the books on the backs of the military & small business while giving my money to people who did nothing to earn it.
2006-10-07 08:41:38 · answer #3 · answered by BUTCH 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You just got to be kidding... He makes one halfassed condemnation of a 2 bit banana republic jerk and you think that makes him some one to be emulated? Have you heard *anything* else that he says? Geeze... anyone but Charley Rangel...
If Democrats would back the president in his efforts to fight terrorism instead of trashing and opposing him at every turn... now that would go a long way to improving US moral... and as far as World opinion goes... those losers suck anyway, so who cares?
2006-10-07 09:23:56 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Charles Rangel's image would improve if he stuck to that kind of outlook. I think he made an honest statement for which he should be praised, but his record overall is rather spotty.
Bully for him on this accord however.
We are in a sad state of affairs when the only motivation our congress has is to re-elected and to take whatever steps necessary to assist other party-mates in becoming elected. The negativity and hate that has become the modus operandi in accomplishing this task has allowed a festering of what is wrong and bad to be the norm in the United States. Much of this has been created and promulgated with the appointment of Howard Dean as the Chairman of the DNC, but the Republicans live in a glass house as well.
Who's managing the country? Who is guiding the direction of our government? Where are our decency standards? What about checks and balances for the right reasons? Unfortunately, we will be all done with this when the most negative, most hateful and most anti-God politicians are elected to office. Then we can begin the true destruction of this Republic from the inside out.
As it is said, and I paraphrase, "if you always do right, it may not be easy. . . but it will always be right". Please note that in that quote there is no reference to doing what is popular, doing what will get one elected again (and again), doing what is expedient, or doing what is innocuous.
We are headed into a maelstrom of misery and a society of hateful paranoia, and we let it happen. We have asked that God be removed from schools and the lesson plans of most of our children. We have seen a society of permissive idiots operate under the guise of personal freedoms. Now we have children that are not shocked by murder, not infuriated at indecency, not embarrassed by immorality and not in awe of a supreme being.
Once these permissive types with this attitude of superiority and smug sincerity (i.e. Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton(s) and even Hastert, Shimkus, et al.) have their way we will realize that we have done little more than rip the fabric of morality, lose the guidance common sense and burn the pride of being decent human beings. And for what?
The failure of our republic will come and be in our faces for a long time. We need to gather back the pride of being a God-fearing, decent, giving, prudent, protective, free and solidly founded decent people. The bill of right does not and should not cover the likes of foreign leaders coming to our soil to speak ill of our leaders for their own self-serving and anarchist agendas. Nor should we have to find blame for the ills and aberrations of our society. The rash of school shootings is not a result of no gun control. Hell, any criminal who wants a gun can find a gun, regardless of what Rosie O'Donnell or Sean Penn say or think. Take the press out of the war and press the war!
Realize our strengths and identify our weaknesses -- they are often one and the same. The Bill of Rights contains some strong examples, especially with convenient interpretations. The ACLU is now a threat to the very basis of our republic. When we allow this crowd to interpret the constitution and selectively lobby for it's own liberal and permissive reasons we confuse and bastardize the tenets that set our country apart from others. . .
"Locks only keep honest people honest, and do not even break the stride of a real thief", is a quote I heard years ago, and it is perfectly apropos regarding over governing, gun control; and other knee-jerk reactions to creating big government to stop the ills of society.
2006-10-07 08:36:50 · answer #5 · answered by missourim43 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
they could be re-elected despite if convicted. those districts in easy terms care approximately what Politicians say. no longer what they do. Maxine Waters replace into on the middle of the Fannie Mae reform hearings. She blocked all reform that could desire to have helped stay remote from the Housing disaster. Thank god for ABC, CBS and NBC for no longer even airing any of it. Rhetoric over substance. the recent American way.
2016-12-13 03:56:19 · answer #6 · answered by endicott 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it would and here is why: Right now, even though I'm sure most democrats don't mean to come off this way, but the fact is that their rhetoric sounds too much like they hate America, and inteligent patriots cringe because we know that this rhetoric is being used by our enemies to bolster their hatred of America. So more of Rangel's attitude would be helpful to all of America.
2006-10-07 08:36:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Is this question saying we should be harder on those who point out wrongs when they are there or is this saying people should be more patriotic. The latter I agree with wholeheartedly, it's the former I don't understand. We crticize George Galloway for what he said about Bush's decision concerning Iraq. How many of the people who attacked him do you think would have applauded him if he roasted Clinton the exact same way during his presidency?
2006-10-07 08:35:19 · answer #8 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Uuummmmm - NO.
Mr. Rangel was probably paid off by the Republicans to say something nice about Bush. More Democrats - more Americans -need to stand up to the Bush administration!! The only thing that would improve my morale towards our current government is if Bush, Condi, Chaney and Rumsfield stepped down.
They are destroying our country lie by lie... by million dollars by billion dollars.
2006-10-07 08:38:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yep! Charles Rangel is a great American.
2006-10-07 08:32:55 · answer #10 · answered by Pop D 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, what Chavez did was an insult, lets see him do that in Korea or China. I think that would be the last we hear of Mr Chavez, good riddance
2006-10-07 08:35:08 · answer #11 · answered by lobo 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋