The Wall Street Journal ran another of my letters today, which was a broadside against Congressman Charlie Rangel's tirade in his July 31 letter, blasting the WSJ for doing its job too well and making a veiled threat to the WSJ. Letter below. Rangel, like Barney Frank, is the kind of man who would deliciously deliver a Hitler's commands, if given the opportunity. His letter is a peek into the man, just as Dead Eyes' rant against "stupid" policemen was in the Gates affair.
___________________
Well, the Journal certainly rankled Charlie Rangel—and provided him yet again with a petard with which to hoist himself. Mr. Rangel’s tantrum letter belongs in a college debate textbook on how to discern between rhetorical ad hominem and fact-based argument. Mr. Rangel chides and rants, and avoids all the salient facts that the Journal brought against him days before.
And what reader does not feel the bone-chilling threat in his last paragraph, when he pronounces despotically “The Wall Street Journal will have to answer for the harm it has done”? Mr. Rangel then disingenuously qualifies this threat by stating that he is not the one to whom the Journal will have to answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment