Fox’s Varney Exposes Charlie Rangel’s Hypocrisy on Raising Debt Limit

newsbusters.org ^ | October 17, 2013 | Paul Bremmer

[Tailgunner Joe]

Fox News host Stuart Varney embarrassed Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday’s Your World with Neil Cavuto, using archived video to expose the congressman’s hypocrisy on the debt limit. Rangel supported raising the debt limit before today’s deadline, of course, but back in 2004, with Republican George W. Bush in the White House, he sang a different tune.

Varney, filling in for Cavuto, set Rangel up by asking him why he wanted to borrow so much money now. Rangel ignored the question, instead expressing his glee at the deal the Senate had reached. He exclaimed, “[W]e have kicked the can down the road and I'm happy.” Varney then made his play:

"I hope you have not forgotten, but back in 2004, you were talking about raising the debt limit and at that point you were not in favor of it."

The host played a tape of Rangel on the House floor in 2004, speaking out against increasing the debt limit. The congressman was forceful back then, railing:

"The request sounds like a drunk going to an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting saying, ‘just give me one more drink and I won't do it again.’ You can't help yourself with spending. You think you have a credit card with no limit on it... And who are you borrowing the money from? The Japanese and the Chinese. What kind of patriotism is that?"

Rangel could only smile nervously when the tape ended. Varney then posed the million-dollar question:

"[W]hy were you against raising a lot more money back then when the debt, by the way, was way under $10 trillion, but you are all for raising the debt ceiling when the debt is now $17 trillion? What changed?"

The liberal congressman lamely replied that he and his fellow Democrats who opposed a debt ceiling hike during the Bush years never said they would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the United States. But if Rangel thinks today’s Republicans would have put the country in jeopardy by not raising the debt limit, then surely he would have jeopardized the country if he had his way in 2004.

Besides, today’s Republicans didn’t actually want to jeopardize the full faith and credit of the U.S. Their goal in resisting a debt ceiling increase was to stop the government from spending and borrowing like an alcoholic – the very same reason that Rangel opposed such an increase nine years ago.

Below is a transcript of the exchange:

STUART VARNEY: After the Senate, the House is set to vote on a deal to raise the debt ceiling, therefore increasing the nation’s borrowing limit. To Democrat Congressman Charlie Rangel, who supports it. Congressman, welcome back. Good to see you again, sir.

REP. CHARLIE RANGEL: Good to be back.

VARNEY: You’re all in favor of this. You want to go out there and borrow another trillion dollars or whatever the number is. Make your case. Why are you so much in favor of borrowing all that money?

RANGEL: I feel like the country has been on death row and the Tea Party has given us a reprieve from the governor's office. So we're not out of danger yet. And we have kicked the can down the road and I'm happy. I love this country. I love all the Americans that really appreciate good government. And, more importantly, for those people who loaned us money, I don't think it's a profile in courage that now our president can say we will pay you back. That's what it’s all about.

VARNEY: I hope you have not forgotten, but back in 2004, you were talking about raising the debt limit and at that point you were not in favor of it. Let me -- I am going to play the tape. This is you back in 2004, sir.

RANGEL [on tape]: The request sounds like a drunk going to an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting saying, ‘just give me one more drink and I won't do it again.’ You can't help yourself with spending. You think you have a credit card with no limit on it. And then when you ask, well, where are you going to get the money? ‘Don't worry about it. We’ll increase the debt ceiling. We’ll just borrow some more money.’ And who are you borrowing the money from? The Japanese and the Chinese. What kind of patriotism is that?

VARNEY: I see you smiling, Congressman, ‘cause you know –

RANGEL: That sounds like one smart legislator to me. But I can tell you –

VARNEY: Why was it okay to raise the debt -- why were you against raising a lot more money back then when the debt, by the way, was way under $10 trillion, but you are all for raising the debt ceiling when the debt is now $17 trillion? What changed?

RANGEL: That's a very, very good question. You might even ask Senator Obama why he opposed the debt ceiling. Let me make it perfectly clear. When you are negotiating, as I was then and as President Obama was when he was in the Senate, you’re not saying that you’re going to jeopardize the full faith and credit of the United States of America. There is nobody that talked the way the language that you hear on the Republican side of the House.

[Lurkina.n.Learnin]

“Fox News host Stuart Varney embarrassed Rep. Charlie Rangel “

You can’t embarrass Rangel. It’s just like water off a ducks back.

[vette6387]

While I am personally tickled that Varney mousetrapped this old SOB, the truth of the matter is that both parties are equally guilty of pissing away money we don’t have. With very few exceptions, they all should be thrown out of office!

[Cold Heart]

Varney is one of my favorites. I’m out of the market now but I still watch just because I like his show. A real gentleman, great contribution from the UK.

I like Charles Payne too. Intersting that he voted for Obama and then admitted it was a big mistake. All the research available to him and he missed that one. Charles obviously not a Freeper.

[Darteaus94025]

“Well, because as Democrats, we will say anything we need to in order to seize and hold power. Are you new around here Stuart?”

[VerySadAmerican]

It was the democrats who kept using the term “full faith and credit of the US”. I don’t ever remember a conservative saying it. Too bad Varney didn’t point that out.

[RC one]

AD1125 In this year sent the King Henry, before Christmas, from Normandy to England, and bade that all the mint-men that were in England should be mutilated in their limbs; that was, that they should lose each of them the right hand, and their testicles beneath. This was because the man that had a pound could not lay out a penny at a market. And the Bishop Roger of Salisbury sent over all England, and bade them all that they should come to Winchester at Christmas. When they came thither, then were they taken one by one, and deprived each of the right hand and the testicles beneath. All this was done within the twelfth-night. And that was all in perfect justice, because that they had undone all the land with the great quantity of base coin that they all bought."

[ExTexasRedhead]

http://therightscoop.com/mark-levin-to-the-ruling-elite-were-going-to-crush-you/

I suggest that everyone send this Mark Levin link containing his promise to the Elitists in DC to everyone on your email list(s) and ask them to forward the link to their email lists so that Mark is heard coast to coast. The new Battle Cry so to speak.

The Tea Party aka We The People know the crucial battles ahead starting with the eunuchs Boner and McConnell. Cleaning the DC vermin out of our government starts by organizing now for the 2014 cleaning and then the 2016 cleaning. Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it!!

[sheik yerbouty]

This is just the beginning of the Restoration of the American Republic!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Tailgunner Joe.

The liberal congressman lamely replied that he and his fellow Democrats who opposed a debt ceiling hike during the Bush years never said they would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the United States. But if Rangel thinks today’s Republicans would have put the country in jeopardy by not raising the debt limit, then surely he would have jeopardized the country if he had his way in 2004.

The brainless dildos who always vote straight-ticket Demagogic, don't watch anything on Fox (other than the NFL and whatever other sports are broadcast on Fox), actual news conflicts with their beliefs.