Comments on: Blagojevich Appoints Roland Burris (Updated)

By: damnum absque injuria » Reid’s Kabuki Dance

damnum absque injuria » Reid’s Kabuki Dance — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:38:57 +0000

[...] long argued that Reid and Co. don’t really want to “win” the fight against Roland [...]

By: Pablo

Pablo — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:37:31 +0000

Like it or not, Rod Blagojevich was doing his duty in making the appointment.

Yup. And given that he supported legislation to hold a special election, he’s got a great argument that he’s taking the moral (*snicker*) high ground. The Dems really tied themselves in knots on this one.

By: The realistic Dana

The realistic Dana — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 15:12:51 +0000

You have to ask: would it not have been irresponsible for Governor Blagojevich not to have made an appointment to the Senate seat?

The incoming Senate takes office next Monday, and Barack Hussein Obama has already resigned from the Senate. Since the governor is the only person with the legal authority to fill that seat, had he not made such an appointment, Illinois would have only one senator.

The state legislature could have dealt with this in the time they have had since the scandal broke, and passed a special election law, but they didn’t; that left only the governor’s appointment power to fill the seat. Like it or not, Rod Blagojevich was doing his duty in making the appointment.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 23:48:58 +0000

DRJ, I don’t think there is anything “principled” about Democrats feigning outrage over the result they want, but can’t admit out loud to wanting. Threating not to seat Burris, while knowing all along that they’ll “lose” on that issue and be conveniently forced to seat him, anyway, costs nothing. The only thing the Democrats truly opposed was a special election, as that could have resulted in a Republican winning. Everything else is pure theater.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:03:22 +0000

Some bloggers are acting as if they are expert analysts of political discourse. They are reading into it way too deeply. Burris said that Blago’s actions are reprehensible (in the sense of ‘if found guilty’). He didn’t mean that he “did” anything wrong. It was uttered in the context of whether or not he is actually convicted of any nefarious activities, in a COURT OF LAW. This was not an implication on his part to any wrongdoing, as if he were thumbing his nose at everyone to suggest nana nana boe-boe, you can’t do anything to me, ha ha, nana nana boe-boe. Beware of simpleton analysts who would like nothing more than to perpetuate media hype. They are actively seeking the stupid to follow them.
As far as any associations of racism is concerned with this case… aren’t we beyond this yet? C’mon… it’s rediculous to bring it up anymore.. isn’t it? People are still acting as if black people do not have a chance at politics… simpletons, I tell ya.

By: aoibhneas

aoibhneas — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:00:12 +0000

So what then happens when someone white defeats a seat reserved for a black? Peter Fitzgerald defeated Carol Mosely-Braun in 1999. And Obama took over the next election. So if the first black woman senator was from Illinois, should not that seat be reserved for a BLACK WOMAN? And what about sexual orientation? Should not homosexuals be proportionately represented in Congress? Back to blacks- it is an outrage that their are not at least ten black senators and 44 black congressmen in house of rep.?
Is Barney Franks seat to reserved for a gay? What about the rights of transsexuals? Murderers? Ooops… Fatboy Teddy has that one accounted for, eh? Is Lurch’s seat reserved for clueless, married-serially- to heiresses/traitorous assclowns?
And WHAT does it say about Ill. crooks of both parties that a man of conscience who would not play the effing game like his party wanted and voted against pork for his own state, was threatened by a primary challenge and thus retired after one term? The ONLY senator to vote against the 15 bil airline bailout. And against the 13 billion Ohare airport expansion? Why wasn’t this man of principle supported??? Rhetorical question- perhaps the GOP would have done better if they were not part and parcel of the endemic Washington corruption? But instead an inexperienced lackey of soros and daley and the chicago machine gets to be potus? What a friggin’ load of camel dung!

By: Michael Holford, Yakima WA

Michael Holford, Yakima WA — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:37:34 +0000

Mr. Burris is not ignorant nor unaware of the circumstances and controversy surrounding his proposed Senate appointment. “Legal” or not…by accepting this nomination it appears as though he at the very least is opportunistic, desperate and possibly naive if he honestly believes that that the controversy surrounding Blagojevich would not or should not effect his nomination. It diminishes his reputation and good name through association by accepting this nomination.

By: Another Drew (wwbkaADitcy)

Another Drew (wwbkaADitcy) — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:22:55 +0000

If there is a “Black Seat” in the U.S.Senate, why is John Kerry sitting in it?

By: Blue Proctor

Blue Proctor — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 20:18:11 +0000

There is no such thing as a BLACK SEAT in the US Senate. It is just a seat formerly occupied by a 1/2 black and 1/2 white man. This guy doing the appointing needs to see some jail time. What a disgrace. He only did it to extract a price by rejecting a black man. What a disgrace!

By: Patricia

Patricia — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:41:39 +0000

this was fuller and more assertive than I expected

True, for Barack this was explosive.