It got a reaction from me – an interesting mental picture I'd rather not experience again.

T_Steel wrote: “Next time I'm going to put “for the record” gosh darn it! It's all good.”

I'm not trying to give you a bad time T_Steel.

Had I put “If the accusations against Rangel are proven true not only should he lose his chairmanship, he should lose his job and be punished to the full extent of the law” in my first comment and you put “For the record, I equate Libby, Cheney, and Rangel.” in yours this thread may not have become so touchy (touche'?) in the middle. It is all good.

I just got a splendid idea: a for the record in comment profiles. A drop down list of where a person stands. But in today's political environment, those “for the records” may be do slimy and incendiary to show.

Your link to the article at The Hill explains why I don't think it's that big a deal… yet:

Aides cited various reasons for Pelosi holding her fire.

First, she does not want to be seen as interfering with the ethics committee probe by stepping in before it reaches a conclusion.

“You do not want to undermine the bipartisan ethics committee process,” said a senior Democratic aide. “Under Republican control, the ethics panel has been broken for many years. Individuals on that committee are now committed to doing their jobs and they’re investigating all aspects.

“We don’t know where they are in the process,” the aide added.

In addition, the Speaker does not want to set the precedent of penalizing a colleague because of transgressions alleged in media reports. Rangel’s failure to disclose hundreds of thousand of dollars in assets and income, including rental income from a Harlem townhouse, were covered in recent days by The New York Times, New York Post and other publications.

“There has to be more of a standard than that,” said a second Democratic aide in reference to those reports. “She is concerned about setting a bad precedent.”

Third, there is not an obvious successor on the powerful Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over all tax issues.

Note: The third reason appears to be editorial comment from The Hill as there is no attribution to Pelosi or her office.

If the accusations against Rangel are proven true not only should he lose his chairmanship, he should lose his job and be punished to the full extent of the law.

And really, if you don't think that anyone should comment on these current problems if they aren't on record commenting on past GOP scandals (which I'm not at all sure is the case for Jazz anyway- I certainly remember a slew of criticism over the Libby affair here at TMV and don't remember Jazz being a dissenter to that)…but in any case, if people here don't comment on ethical lapses of the Dems now, then won't they lack credibility by your logic in the future if the GOP retakes Congress? Won't it be just as valid for people to then say, “Why are you acting as though this never happened before, and where were you when Nancy Pelosi accepted corruption among her party leaders?”

No this isn't the first time this has happened. But it stinks EVERY DAMN TIME IT DOES. So now we have Rangel and Pelosi. Not Bush/Cheney/Libby. And it stinks. So I'm saying it stinks. 'Nuff said.

T_Steel wrote: “Speaker Pelosi needs to (like yesterday) ask/demand Rangel to step down from is Ways And Means post. No ifs, ands, or buts.”

George W. Bush and/or Dick Cheney needed to (like yesterday) ask/demand Scooter Libby to step down, too, and that was my point.

Jazz IMO (and now you) are acting as this is the first time a thing like this has ever happened. Where was he (were you) when much higher level shenanigans were going on? That was my point AND it was directed to “the substance of Jazz's article”.

Your jumping all over me and my comment says more about you and where you are coming from than it does about me.

Speaker Pelosi needs to (like yesterday) ask/demand Rangel to step down from is Ways And Means post. No ifs, ands, or buts. Then you can resume “blasting Republicans for hypocrisy” somewhat. Damn right it looks like a love story because she is showing too much “luv” in her handling of this situation. There's more than enough debris around Rangel to warrant a step down.

UPDATE: Maybe if a clever blogger had called the Libby affair the “George and Dick and Scooter Love Story” it would have been resolved sooner.