Blago's To Name Us Senator

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 10:54 AM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...l?hpid=topnews

Looks as if Blago wants to create as much turmoil as possible as he goes down.
I have to put some of the blame on the Illinois state legislators; I thought they were going to strip Blago of his power to appoint,but sat on their butts and did nothing.
But the arrogance of the man is incredible.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 11:02 AM

This is all because the Illinois Dems realized that holding a special election, which they originally called for, might actually result in the unacceptable outcome of the voters electing a Republican to the Senate. So they reneged on that decision. You can't leave such an important decision like that in the hands of lowly voters, so they decided to let Blago's likely successor, Pat Quinn, pick a Dem for the Senate seat.

Of course, Blago could drag this out for months leaving Illinois with only 1 senator for the foreseeable future as the Senate will likely refuse to seat Burris.

MattusMaximus · 30th December 2008, 11:03 AM

It looks like Blago is going to name former IL Attorney General Roland Burris. Here's more news on it...

Report: Obama Senate Replacement To Be Named

Quote:

Embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich is expected to name former Illinois attorney general Roland Burris as his pick to fill Barack Obama's seat in the U.S. Senate, setting up a challenge with congressional leaders who have already said they plan to reject anyone the governor picks, the Associated Press is reporting.

State Senate President Emil Jones said Tuesday that Burris told him about the appointment, the news service reported.

The Democratic governor has scheduled a news conference for Tuesday afternoon. His aides won't say what it's about. ...

What I'm interested in seeing is how the U.S. Senate reacts to this appointment. I certainly hope they follow through on their threat to not accept anyone Blago appoints. Should be fun to watch

Alt+F4 · 30th December 2008, 11:06 AM

Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment?

MattusMaximus · 30th December 2008, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

This is all because the Illinois Dems realized that holding a special election, which they originally called for, might actually result in the unacceptable outcome of the voters electing a Republican to the Senate. So they reneged on that decision. You can't leave such an important decision like that in the hands of lowly voters, so they decided to let Blago's likely successor, Pat Quinn, pick a Dem for the Senate seat.

Is anyone here at all surprised by this? I'm certainly not - in fact, I predicted that this is precisely what would happen (better hit rate so far than Sylvia Browne

) If the table's were turned, the Illinois GOP would have done exactly the same thing. No party is going to put themselves into a position where they might lose a U.S. Senate seat when it is otherwise a sure thing.

Quote:

Of course, Blago could drag this out for months leaving Illinois with only 1 senator for the foreseeable future as the Senate will likely refuse to seat Burris.

Yes, one thing is for sure - the drama will continue for some time to come.

boloboffin · 30th December 2008, 11:13 AM

Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN.

Quote:

I think you're wrong about saying the Senate has full power not to seat the Gov's pick. In Powell vs McCormick, a 1969 case involving Adam Clayton Powell, the Supreme Court said, 7-2, that a house of Congress does NOT have such power-they can judge "qualifications" in the Constitutional sense (age, citizenship, etc). And they can judge elections, but say nothing about appointments. (Nate Silver did a great piece on this awhile back).

They can probably EXPEL a member as they see fit--though the Court's decision does not make that clear---but on what grounds? Just because they don't like the guy who picked him?

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN.

I think the difference is if there is evidence the person was selected for illegal reasons.

Much like the double jeapordy clause in the Constitution doesn't apply if it can be shown the judge who issued the acquittal did so because he was bribed.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 11:26 AM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN.

I like Greenfield, but I question his credentials in Constitutional law.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment?

Agreed, since when he gets to the US Senate he will be treated like something the cat dragged in before they refuse to seat him or seat him followed by immediate expulson.

MattusMaximus · 30th December 2008, 11:45 AM

The U.S. Senate reacts to Blago's pick...

Senate Dems say they won't seat Obama replacement

Quote:

Senate Democrats are refusing to seat the man picked by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill the seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.

Blagojevich plans to name former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris. Illinois State Senate President Emil Jones says that Burris has told him about the appointment.

In Washington, Senate Democrats say that no one appointed by the scandal-tarred governor would have the credibility to serve. ...

I wonder how far, if at all, this will play out in the courts? Very interesting.

kallsop · 30th December 2008, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Agreed, since when he gets to the US Senate he will be treated like something the cat dragged in before they refuse to seat him or seat him followed by immediate expulson.

There will be much public bluster, then the democrats will be glad to have one more vote and it's back to business.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by kallsop

There will be much public bluster, then the democrats will be glad to have one more vote and it's back to business.

I really doubt this.
And I have to remind you that the Dems don't have a monopoly on corruption. The previous Governor of Illnols,now residing in Joliet, was from the GOP......
You come off like a SNL parody of a die hard Republican, you know that?

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:02 PM

Blago announcing it right now.

Burris looks oblivious.

kallsop · 30th December 2008, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

And I have to remind you that the Dems don't have a monopoly on corruption.

You have the typical media template exactly backwards.

Where there's money and power and humans, there's corruption. Newsflash from Captain Obvious - the sun rises to the east tomorrow.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

The previous Governor of Illnols,now residing in Joliet, was from the GOP......

He's actually at the Federal pen in Terre Haute, IN.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:08 PM

Hahaha, a reporter asked if his $14,000 donation to Blago's campaign was the reason for his appointment.

Burris feigns ignorance! LOL

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

He's actually at the Federal pen in Terre Haute, IN.

That I did not know.
But the idea is still the same.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:10 PM

Blago refuses to answer questions "because I don't want to take the limelight away from Roland Burris".

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:15 PM

Bobby Rush saying Burris should be a Senator because he's black.

You can't make this stuff up...

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 12:29 PM

Wow. Just wow.
This gives us Californians a very rare chance to laugh at somebody else's state Government for a change.

kallsop · 30th December 2008, 12:38 PM

What's the over/under on this turkey making it out of Illinois and to the US Senate? Pretty slim I say.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by kallsop

What's the over/under on this turkey making it out of Illinois and to the US Senate? Pretty slim I say.

The strategy is now clear. Rep. Bobby Rush will lobby hard for Burris, and play the race card for all it's worth.

Who wouldn't vote to seat Burris unless they're a racist?

Policenaut · 30th December 2008, 12:47 PM

When is Blago going to start playing his fiddle?

The Mutha · 30th December 2008, 01:03 PM

MSNBC had a political reporter on, laughing, saying that the reason he covers Illinois politics is because it's always a zoo...

boloboffin · 30th December 2008, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I like Greenfield, but I question his credentials in Constitutional law.

Which is why Greenfield cites Nate Silver, who is writing based on his communication with a friend in law school (student or professor is not specified):

Quote:

FYI. If the Supreme Court took the case, It isn't clear that the Senate has the Constitutional authority to refuse to seat a senator who has been validly appointed under the Constitution.

Art I Section 5 says that "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..."

In Powell v McCormack, the Court held that the House of Reps couldn't refuse to seat Adam Clayton Powell as long as he met the Constitution's qualifications for membership (age, residency, citizenship.).

I guess, theoretically, the Senate could seat the appointee and then expel him with a 2/3rds vote. The Court wouldn't interfere on Political Question grounds: the Constitution doesn't specify the standard for expulsion so it is properly at the discretion of the Senate.

How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat.

Burris is 71. He may only be a respected caretaker for the seat until 2010.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 01:11 PM

Here's an mp3 of the press conference: http://audio.wbez.org/cityroom/2008/...34764_Unfi.mp3

It's over 22MB so give it a bit of time to d/l.

eta: question about the campaign donation at 6:30.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat.

Burris's law firm got quite a bit of state business after that donation.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

Which is why Greenfield cites Nate Silver, who is writing based on his communication with a friend in law school (student or professor is not specified):

How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat.

Burris is 71. He may only be a respected caretaker for the seat until 2010.

If this was a GOP appointment, I wonder if you would feel the same.

The Central Scrutinizer · 30th December 2008, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Alt+F4

Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment?

He's 71. At the end of his career. Why wouldn't he?

boloboffin · 30th December 2008, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

If this was a GOP appointment, I wonder if you would feel the same.

Actually, I don't think I've shared my feelings on this matter. I feel Blagojevich shouldn't be allowed to make this appointment. So take your wonderment and locate your fundament.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 01:47 PM

From the press conference I linked to above:

Originally Posted by Rep. Bobby Rush

"There are no African-Americans in the Senate and I don't think that anyone, any US Senator who's sitting in the Senate right now, want to go on record to deny one African-American from being seated in the US Senate. I don't think they want to go on record doing that. And so I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus. I intend to take that argument to the Senators. I intend to start with our own Senator, Senator Durbin who's a friend of mine, and I'm sure he will stand ready to be reasoned with".

The message to Durbin is clear: Seat Burris or you are a racist.

Oh boy, I can't wait to hear Durbin's response to this!

The Central Scrutinizer · 30th December 2008, 01:49 PM

Prediction: He'll be seated

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 02:04 PM

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats on Tuesday vowed not to seat embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pick to fill the vacancy left by President-elect Barack Obama, prompting a House Democrat to object to the nation's only prospective black senator being denied a seat.

Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois told reporters that Senate Democrats should not "hang and lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...6YEcAD95D9EFO0

Yes, not seating Burris is the equivalent of "hanging and lynching" him!

How many race cards are in the deck anyway?

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...6YEcAD95D9EFO0

Yes, not seating Burris is the equivalent of "hanging and lynching" him!

How many race cards are in the deck anyway?

If anything these threats will make the Senate's refusing to seat Burris more likely.
I am amazed how many people here seem to favor letting Blogo get away with it.

Alt+F4 · 30th December 2008, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

He's 71. At the end of his career. Why wouldn't he?

End? Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd would disagree. Politics is one of the few professions where you're not an old geezer at 71.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 03:30 PM

I am beginning to wonder if Blago is not trying to do as much damage to the Dems as possible as revenge for not backing him.
This appointment is already putting the Senate in a horrid situation: Either Seat Burris, making them look like idiots for their statements of never seating a Blago appointee and look as if they are caving in to having the race card played,in an time when I think most people are sick of it, or doing damage to the Senate's standing with the Left Wing of the party for denying a Afro American a senate seat.
And the whole race card is the last thing Obama wants at the moment.
The more I think about it, the more I despise Blago.

dudalb · 30th December 2008, 03:53 PM

Obama comments:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/...ate/index.html

Sounds to me as if he is trying to give the Senate political cover to refuse to seat Burris. I think he wants to get this over with as quickly as possible, and that the pain from a quick cut (taking the heat for refusing to sit a Afro American in the Senate) is better then the long pain from dissapointing a lot of people by caving into the race card and giving the GOP a field day.

boloboffin · 30th December 2008, 05:41 PM

Why haven't we gotten a reality show yet about Washington? Titles like Lobbyist or Take It To The Court or Sausage Making come to mind. Well, I mean aside from the 24/7 news channels. Even something like this Senate seat appointment could be the subject of a series if a production company could afford to wait on this and opportunities like it. If it were done well, and odds are against it, it would be interesting to watch.

Anyway, on another Senate seat front, Paterson interviewed an openly gay NYC assemblyman for Clinton's office. It's not an Yes, but it's not a No either. I like Paterson more and more these days.

BeAChooser · 30th December 2008, 06:09 PM

Should I point out that as a former Illinois Attorney General (1991 to 1995), Roland Burris, was supposed to clean up corruption in his state. Appears he didn't completely succeed at that job.

Other than that, he might not be such a bad choice since by many accounts he's clean as a whistle. He even ran against Daley for mayor of Chicago and that's got to indicate something good. Maybe the current governor is now just looking to stick it in the eye of democrats for turning on him by picking someone who is squeaky clean that they don't control. Just a thought.

WildCat · 30th December 2008, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by BeAChooser

Should I point out that as a former Illinois Attorney General (1991 to 1995), Roland Burris, was supposed to clean up corruption in his state. Appears he didn't completely succeed at that job.

You'll never see an Illinois AG do a damned thing to clean up the state.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil seems to be their motto.

30th December 2008, 10:54 AM	#1
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Blago's To Name Us Senator http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the...l?hpid=topnews Looks as if Blago wants to create as much turmoil as possible as he goes down. I have to put some of the blame on the Illinois state legislators; I thought they were going to strip Blago of his power to appoint,but sat on their butts and did nothing. But the arrogance of the man is incredible.

30th December 2008, 11:03 AM	#3
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,175	It looks like Blago is going to name former IL Attorney General Roland Burris. Here's more news on it... Report: Obama Senate Replacement To Be Named Quote: Embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich is expected to name former Illinois attorney general Roland Burris as his pick to fill Barack Obama's seat in the U.S. Senate, setting up a challenge with congressional leaders who have already said they plan to reject anyone the governor picks, the Associated Press is reporting. State Senate President Emil Jones said Tuesday that Burris told him about the appointment, the news service reported. The Democratic governor has scheduled a news conference for Tuesday afternoon. His aides won't say what it's about. ... What I'm interested in seeing is how the U.S. Senate reacts to this appointment. I certainly hope they follow through on their threat to not accept anyone Blago appoints. Should be fun to watch
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

30th December 2008, 11:06 AM	#4
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment?
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky

30th December 2008, 11:08 AM	#5
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,175	Originally Posted by WildCat This is all because the Illinois Dems realized that holding a special election, which they originally called for, might actually result in the unacceptable outcome of the voters electing a Republican to the Senate. So they reneged on that decision. You can't leave such an important decision like that in the hands of lowly voters, so they decided to let Blago's likely successor, Pat Quinn, pick a Dem for the Senate seat. Is anyone here at all surprised by this? I'm certainly not - in fact, I predicted that this is precisely what would happen (better hit rate so far than Sylvia Browne ) If the table's were turned, the Illinois GOP would have done exactly the same thing. No party is going to put themselves into a position where they might lose a U.S. Senate seat when it is otherwise a sure thing. Quote: Of course, Blago could drag this out for months leaving Illinois with only 1 senator for the foreseeable future as the Senate will likely refuse to seat Burris. Yes, one thing is for sure - the drama will continue for some time to come.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

30th December 2008, 11:45 AM	#10
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,175	The U.S. Senate reacts to Blago's pick... Senate Dems say they won't seat Obama replacement Quote: Senate Democrats are refusing to seat the man picked by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill the seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama. Blagojevich plans to name former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris. Illinois State Senate President Emil Jones says that Burris has told him about the appointment. In Washington, Senate Democrats say that no one appointed by the scandal-tarred governor would have the credibility to serve. ... I wonder how far, if at all, this will play out in the courts? Very interesting.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

30th December 2008, 11:02 AM	#2
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	This is all because the Illinois Dems realized that holding a special election, which they originally called for, might actually result in the unacceptable outcome of the voters electing a Republican to the Senate. So they reneged on that decision. You can't leave such an important decision like that in the hands of lowly voters, so they decided to let Blago's likely successor, Pat Quinn, pick a Dem for the Senate seat. Of course, Blago could drag this out for months leaving Illinois with only 1 senator for the foreseeable future as the Senate will likely refuse to seat Burris.

30th December 2008, 11:13 AM	#6
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 5,001	Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN. Quote: I think you're wrong about saying the Senate has full power not to seat the Gov's pick. In Powell vs McCormick, a 1969 case involving Adam Clayton Powell, the Supreme Court said, 7-2, that a house of Congress does NOT have such power-they can judge "qualifications" in the Constitutional sense (age, citizenship, etc). And they can judge elections, but say nothing about appointments. (Nate Silver did a great piece on this awhile back). They can probably EXPEL a member as they see fit--though the Court's decision does not make that clear---but on what grounds? Just because they don't like the guy who picked him?

30th December 2008, 11:18 AM	#7
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Originally Posted by boloboffin Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN. I think the difference is if there is evidence the person was selected for illegal reasons. Much like the double jeapordy clause in the Constitution doesn't apply if it can be shown the judge who issued the acquittal did so because he was bribed.

30th December 2008, 11:26 AM	#8
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by boloboffin Some people are wondering if the Senate has the power to refuse an appointment like this, one being Jeff Greenfield of CNN. I like Greenfield, but I question his credentials in Constitutional law.

30th December 2008, 11:30 AM	#9
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment? Agreed, since when he gets to the US Senate he will be treated like something the cat dragged in before they refuse to seat him or seat him followed by immediate expulson.

30th December 2008, 11:53 AM	#11
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755	Originally Posted by dudalb Agreed, since when he gets to the US Senate he will be treated like something the cat dragged in before they refuse to seat him or seat him followed by immediate expulson. There will be much public bluster, then the democrats will be glad to have one more vote and it's back to business.
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755

30th December 2008, 11:57 AM	#12
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by kallsop There will be much public bluster, then the democrats will be glad to have one more vote and it's back to business. I really doubt this. And I have to remind you that the Dems don't have a monopoly on corruption. The previous Governor of Illnols,now residing in Joliet, was from the GOP...... You come off like a SNL parody of a die hard Republican, you know that?

30th December 2008, 12:02 PM	#13
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Blago announcing it right now. Burris looks oblivious.

30th December 2008, 12:07 PM	#14
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755	Originally Posted by dudalb And I have to remind you that the Dems don't have a monopoly on corruption. You have the typical media template exactly backwards. Where there's money and power and humans, there's corruption. Newsflash from Captain Obvious - the sun rises to the east tomorrow.
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755

30th December 2008, 12:07 PM	#15
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Originally Posted by dudalb The previous Governor of Illnols,now residing in Joliet, was from the GOP...... He's actually at the Federal pen in Terre Haute, IN.

30th December 2008, 12:08 PM	#16
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Hahaha, a reporter asked if his $14,000 donation to Blago's campaign was the reason for his appointment. Burris feigns ignorance! LOL

30th December 2008, 12:08 PM	#17
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by WildCat He's actually at the Federal pen in Terre Haute, IN. That I did not know. But the idea is still the same.

30th December 2008, 12:10 PM	#18
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Blago refuses to answer questions "because I don't want to take the limelight away from Roland Burris".

30th December 2008, 12:15 PM	#19
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Bobby Rush saying Burris should be a Senator because he's black. You can't make this stuff up...
	Last edited by WildCat; 30th December 2008 at 12:19 PM.

30th December 2008, 12:29 PM	#20
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Wow. Just wow. This gives us Californians a very rare chance to laugh at somebody else's state Government for a change.

30th December 2008, 12:38 PM	#21
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755	What's the over/under on this turkey making it out of Illinois and to the US Senate? Pretty slim I say.
kallsop Guest Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 755

30th December 2008, 12:40 PM	#22
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Originally Posted by kallsop What's the over/under on this turkey making it out of Illinois and to the US Senate? Pretty slim I say. The strategy is now clear. Rep. Bobby Rush will lobby hard for Burris, and play the race card for all it's worth. Who wouldn't vote to seat Burris unless they're a racist?

30th December 2008, 12:47 PM	#23
Policenaut Infidel Defiler Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Shadow Moses Island Posts: 2,193	When is Blago going to start playing his fiddle?

30th December 2008, 01:03 PM	#24
The Mutha thoroughly confused, but valiantly trying... Join Date: May 2006 Location: Houston Posts: 1,504	MSNBC had a political reporter on, laughing, saying that the reason he covers Illinois politics is because it's always a zoo...

30th December 2008, 01:05 PM	#25
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 5,001	Originally Posted by dudalb I like Greenfield, but I question his credentials in Constitutional law. Which is why Greenfield cites Nate Silver, who is writing based on his communication with a friend in law school (student or professor is not specified): Quote: FYI. If the Supreme Court took the case, It isn't clear that the Senate has the Constitutional authority to refuse to seat a senator who has been validly appointed under the Constitution. Art I Section 5 says that "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..." In Powell v McCormack, the Court held that the House of Reps couldn't refuse to seat Adam Clayton Powell as long as he met the Constitution's qualifications for membership (age, residency, citizenship.). I guess, theoretically, the Senate could seat the appointee and then expel him with a 2/3rds vote. The Court wouldn't interfere on Political Question grounds: the Constitution doesn't specify the standard for expulsion so it is properly at the discretion of the Senate. How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat. Burris is 71. He may only be a respected caretaker for the seat until 2010.

30th December 2008, 01:11 PM	#26
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Here's an mp3 of the press conference: http://audio.wbez.org/cityroom/2008/...34764_Unfi.mp3 It's over 22MB so give it a bit of time to d/l. eta: question about the campaign donation at 6:30.
	Last edited by WildCat; 30th December 2008 at 01:15 PM.

30th December 2008, 01:29 PM	#27
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Originally Posted by boloboffin How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat. Burris's law firm got quite a bit of state business after that donation.

30th December 2008, 01:31 PM	#28
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by boloboffin Which is why Greenfield cites Nate Silver, who is writing based on his communication with a friend in law school (student or professor is not specified): How do you make Blagojevich's failings a question of Burris' qualifications? Maybe the $14,000 he contributed to Blagojevich's campaign? Seems awfully skimpy to me as a bribe for a Senate seat. Burris is 71. He may only be a respected caretaker for the seat until 2010. If this was a GOP appointment, I wonder if you would feel the same.

30th December 2008, 01:40 PM	#29
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,276	Originally Posted by Alt+F4 Why would Burris or anyone for that matter, accept this appointment? He's 71. At the end of his career. Why wouldn't he?
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

30th December 2008, 01:44 PM	#30
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 5,001	Originally Posted by dudalb If this was a GOP appointment, I wonder if you would feel the same. Actually, I don't think I've shared my feelings on this matter. I feel Blagojevich shouldn't be allowed to make this appointment. So take your wonderment and locate your fundament.

30th December 2008, 01:47 PM	#31
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	From the press conference I linked to above: Originally Posted by Rep. Bobby Rush "There are no African-Americans in the Senate and I don't think that anyone, any US Senator who's sitting in the Senate right now, want to go on record to deny one African-American from being seated in the US Senate. I don't think they want to go on record doing that. And so I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus. I intend to take that argument to the Senators. I intend to start with our own Senator, Senator Durbin who's a friend of mine, and I'm sure he will stand ready to be reasoned with". The message to Durbin is clear: Seat Burris or you are a racist. Oh boy, I can't wait to hear Durbin's response to this!

30th December 2008, 01:49 PM	#32
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,276	Prediction: He'll be seated
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

30th December 2008, 02:04 PM	#33
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,040	Quote: WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats on Tuesday vowed not to seat embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pick to fill the vacancy left by President-elect Barack Obama, prompting a House Democrat to object to the nation's only prospective black senator being denied a seat. Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois told reporters that Senate Democrats should not "hang and lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer." http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...6YEcAD95D9EFO0 Yes, not seating Burris is the equivalent of "hanging and lynching" him! How many race cards are in the deck anyway?

30th December 2008, 02:09 PM	#34
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 22,826	Originally Posted by WildCat http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...6YEcAD95D9EFO0 Yes, not seating Burris is the equivalent of "hanging and lynching" him! How many race cards are in the deck anyway? If anything these threats will make the Senate's refusing to seat Burris more likely. I am amazed how many people here seem to favor letting Blogo get away with it.

30th December 2008, 02:52 PM	#35
Alt+F4 diabolical globalist Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Department of Abandoned Places Posts: 9,780	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer He's 71. At the end of his career. Why wouldn't he? End? Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd would disagree. Politics is one of the few professions where you're not an old geezer at 71.
	__________________ "My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky