-
Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV? by Kenneth R. Timmerman
The Case of CH2M HILL: $2 Billion in Crony Stimulation by Rusty Weiss
The Truth about George Soros by AIM Staff
Lifting the Veil on WikiLeaks by AIM Staff
The Truth about Al-Jazeera English by Cliff Kincaid
Reaganomics and Obamanomics in the Media and in Reality by Malcolm A. Kline, Don Irvine and Spencer Irvine
How State Budget Battles Could Mean More Criminals Back on the Streets by Michael Tremoglie
Radical Muslims, Environmentalists and the Green Jihad by Mark Musser
Russian-Backed Propaganda Networks Claim Obama is a CIA Agent by Cliff Kincaid
Media Conceal True Nature of Flash Mob Racial Violence by John T. Bennett
NBC’s Mitchell Should Resign Over Telling Gaddafi’s Lies (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) by Cliff Kincaid
CASA de Maryland: The Illegals’ ACORN by James Simpson
Special Report
The Newswire
Take AIM Podcast
Charles Rangel the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee called Sarah Palin “disabled” in an interview yesterday.
From the Politico.
Rangel’s off the rails.
Charlie Rangel wouldn’t talk to reporters staking out his various meetings on the Hill this week, rattling off his name, rank and serial number as he breezed by. But he sat down with CBS-TV reporter Marcia Kramer (who got Bill Clinton to say he never “inhaled”) tonight to clear the air.
This worked not so much. When the question turned to Sarah Palin, things got weird.
“You got to be kind to the disabled,” he said of Palin.
Asked what he meant, he added: “There’s no question about it politically. It’s a nightmare to think that a person’s foreign policy is based on their ability to look at Russia from where they live.”
Uh-huh.
Later, after Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) blasted him for insensitivity (Palin’s young son Trig has Down Syndrome), Rangel released the following statement:
“Governor Palin is an obviously healthy person who in no way fits the description of disabled. I meant to say then, and I am saying now, that she entered the campaign with a disadvantage in the area of foreign policy.”
Yeah, that clears it up. Rangel is definitely suffering from the heat he has been taking over his financial improprieties and a Democratic presidential campaign that hasn’t been able to figure out how to deal wiith Palin. Temper, temper.
Share This
About the author
Don Irvine is Chairman of Accuracy in Media. He is active on Facebook and Twitter. You can follow him @donirvine to read his latest thoughts.
9 Comments for Rangel Says Palin is ‘Disabled’
Well Charlie, If she can bake a cherry pie, she’s got you beat in Spades.
A “nightmare?” The real nightmare, Charlie, is your party nominating someone with as little experience and with such liberal views as Obama. Another nightmare is the fact that people are elected to Congress that are so “disabled” by the mental disorder of liberalism. This country can’t take much more of it!
It’s time to continually vote out all incumbents for at least a few election cylces to end the culture of corruption and special-interest influence in Washignton.
Well Charlie, If she can bake a cherry pie, she’s got you beat in Spades.
“in spades”? Is AIM gonna let you get away with that?
Obviously Charlie is an insensitive dork, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that Sarah really does have very little foreign policy experience. But then again, neither does Obama. But Sarah isn’t running for President, she’s running for VP. As VP she’ll have four years to get the experience she’ll need to take the top job in 2012… at least that will be the case if ‘hope’ and ‘change’ really are factors in a presidential election.
The liberal characters are really miffed over Sarah Palin, that don’t have any idea how to deal with her. When liberals have nothing to say or they are losing the argument to facts…..the name calling starts. Everytime this happens just allows everyone to see who they really are. You would think the media would back the idea that a female has a chance of being V.P., but she isn’t the type of woman their looking for. Its really too bad this is going on in America. We all knew the media leaned to the left but this media coverage has been over the top for Obama. I don’t believe anything these clowns say anymore.
“The liberal characters are really miffed over Sarah Palin, that don’t have any idea how to deal with her.”
Who needs to deal with her? We’ll just watch her implode, thanks.
“When liberals have nothing to say or they are losing the argument to facts…..the name calling starts.”
What arguments? What facts?
“Everytime this happens just allows everyone to see who they really are. You would think the media would back the idea that a female has a chance of being V.P., but she isn’t the type of woman their looking for.”
Really? Is that the role of the media? You are seriously confused.
“Its really too bad this is going on in America. We all knew the media leaned to the left but this media coverage has been over the top for Obama.”
If that’s what you want to see, that’s what you’ll see.
“I don’t believe anything these clowns say anymore.”
On this we agree.
“Who needs to deal with her? We’ll just watch her implode, thanks.”
Implode? Why? She has more experience than Obama and he hasn’t imploded… yet.
What arguments? What facts?
Speaking in general.
Really? Is that the role of the media? You are seriously confused.
“Dave is the confused one! When Hillary was the female contender, various media focused on her and it was quite positive. But when the female is conservative, she is lambasted. I guess Dave lives somewhere outside of the US.”
“If that’s what you want to see, that’s what you’ll see.”
It’s more than what you see, it’s what is written/said, how it’s said and how much time is spent on a particular candidate. Research has proven this, and Dave could check it out for himself if he wanted to, but it appears that he prefers to see what he wants to see.
Obama is a black supremacist. Read his books. Look at who he associates himself with. Listen to his speeches. Obama is a socialist. Read his books. Look at who he associates himself with. Listen to his speeches. A vote for Obama is a move toward communism and a step away from freedom. Next to him, our democratic-controlled congress looks conservative.
Steve Brown says, regarding my prediction that Sarah will implode:
“Implode? Why? She has more experience than Obama and he hasn’t imploded… yet.”
“yet”? Some vote of confidence!
I say “What arguments? What facts?”
Steve says:
“Speaking in general.”
Which means you’re saying nothing. Not good enough, I’m afraid. The original quote to which I was responding was “When liberals have nothing to say or they are losing the argument to facts…..the name calling starts.” I repeat: what arguments? What facts?
The preposterous “point” is suggested that the media should “…back the idea that a female has a chance of being V.P….” and I correctly point out that this is not the ROLE of the media. Steve says:
“Dave is the confused one! When Hillary was the female contender, various media focused on her and it was quite positive. But when the female is conservative, she is lambasted. I guess Dave lives somewhere outside of the US.”
Just plain ridiculous. The media can’t crawl far enough up Palin’s behind! And the original point, that the media should “back” anything is simply lunacy.
“Obama is a black supremacist.”
Yikes! I had no idea! Let’s lynch him!
“A vote for Obama is a move toward communism and a step away from freedom.”
Holy christ! You left out child molester!
Heckuva job, Brownie! NEXT!
What an embarrassment Rangel is to America!