Rangel Capitulates! Will Anyone Stand and say "Thank You, HUGO"?

[Sensitivity]

Yesterday, a brave foreign leader raised a warning to the American people about the urgent danger to their faith, freedoms and economic survival in a new global community. And the danger is not “out there”--- it is near. The devil is not in the details, the devil is “in the house.”

He warned about the effects of Bush’s arrogant disdain for the rights of other nations:

“Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world.”


He warned against the perversity of the NeoCon pursuit of a “New American Century:”

“They say they want to impose a democratic model. But that's their democratic model. It's the false democracy of elites, and, I would say, a very original democracy that's imposed by weapons and bombs and firing weapons.”


He warned against the right-wing’s paralyzing propaganda of terror and fear:

“The president of the United States, yesterday, said to us, right here, in this room, and I'm quoting, "Anywhere you look, you hear extremists telling you can escape from poverty and recover your dignity through violence, terror and martyrdom."”

There is obvious wisdom in these warnings.

Yet today, the good man Charlie Rangel felt he had to condemn Cavez for criticizing "My President."

The question is: Will any American leader stand to say “Thank You, Mr. President.”

[hlthe2b]

1. Huh?

Re: "Rangel Capitulatges!"

What in the world does that mean? :shrug:

[KoKo]

2. What does this have to do with Charlie Rangel...why do you say capitulate?

huh?

[Sensitivity]

7. Rangel is one of the few in congress who would watch Hugo' back

RANGEL, after U.S. engineered eviction of Aristide: "Venezuela, watch out. You know, we've already done it in Haiti, we may try to do it in Venezuela."

[MrCoffee]

3. No, they won't, because they're not suicidal morons.

Why do we want Dems to go on national television and shoot themselves in the head by congratulating Chavez?

[cali]

4. Codswallop

There was nothing particularly courageous about the remarks Chavez made. They were as crude and heavy handed as bushco's comments about 'axis of evil'. What's more, it's extremely doubtful that Rangel is capitulating to anything. Chavez got thunderous applause in Rangel's district. Chavez has the right to speak his mind. So does Rangel.

[Sensitivity]

5. I guess it will take Jimmy Carter to come out and say Truth-telling is OK

[longship]

6. I won't thank him.

I am not comfortable with Chavez's speech. I will not condemn it, but I absolutely will not support it.

The reason why Chavez's words worry me is that I am very concerned that he might have unwittingly handed the Repukes some leverage. If that's true, Rangel's words might be right on target.

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. precisely my feelings longship.....

To expect any rational, thoughtful Dem to come out in public support of what Chavez said on the floor of the UN is ludicrous. And I suspect that some of the people here who seem to want our Dem leaders to support Chavez's statements don't have the long term good of the party at heart. We may see some "rally round the flag" fallout from this. Unfortunately, his remarks have just handed the pubs a mid-term rallying cry, and anyone seen to be associated with Chavez will be villified, and that worries me.

It's like, I can call my brother a dirty rotten low-down toe-suckin' SOB if I want, but I certainly don't want to hear anyone else do it. I think Chavez's remarks were inappropriate for that particular forum, just as I thought Bush's "axis of evil" remarks were uncalled for. I mean is this the level to which the international debate has sunk?

[MrCoffee]

9. Both you and longship are dead on.

This is going to get spun 15 ways from Sunday, and Rangel cut that off at the pass. It was the politically smart move.

[Bake]

12. Damn right, Mr.C !!

Rangel and Pelosi were both smart to cut it off at the pass. When you already know who's pocket the MSM is, and you know who owns the radio waves, they were smart to cut off the spin - nip it in the bud!

Bake

[Sensitivity]

10. As long as the TRUTH is not acknowledge,d RW Propaganda works

In a 2 party system, the opposition's role is to
present the alternative world view. If they don't
they have to campaign in an environment which accepts
the premises of the ruling party.

--Doesn't work very well, as we have seen.

[Lisa]

11. I don't think Chavez really wants the Dems to support him anyway

It would not affect his own popularity, and actually it gives Bush's critics a chance to score some easy points with the US electorate by protesting Chavez's literal "demonizing" of Dubya. Unlike Bush, he's smart enough to be able to handle mixed messages quite well (like the US opposition winking at Chavez while they go on-camera and request an official apology).

An analogy might be the former Canadian PM Chretien's rather lame denunciation of the politician who referred to Bush as a "moron" -- "he is not a moron, he is my friend". Everyone came out ahead from that one. The politician (from the PM's own party) may have been disciplined for it, but she fired up her own supporters, and the PM was able to appear conciliatory at home and abroad. Best of all, even the pro-Bush people were obliged to utter the words "Bush" and "moron" in the same sentence, while supposedly defending him.