Thursday, January 01, 2009

Blago scores a point

You gotta give Rod Blagojevich credit here. The guy really knows how to give the Democratic establishment fits.

A couple days ago Blago defied basically EVERYONE and appointed Roland Burris as Barack Obama's replacement in the Senate. Burris is a longtime Illinois politician and former Attorney General who has a penchant for losing elections. All early indications is that Burris is the sort of career political hack who makes my skin crawl; he even built himself a ridiculous mausoleum that has his "accomplishments" chiseled into the granite.

But unless his vetting turns up something that will obviously disqualify him, I'm beginning to think that he should be seated.

Here's the facts: Blago is still governor. Burris so far hasn't been implicated in the scandal. We were once a nation of laws, although we've gotten pretty far from that for the last eight years; we need to set an example and start following the letter of the law if we want our nation to survive. And if Burris isn't connected in any way to the "pay for play" scandal, I don't see why he isn't legally entitled to the seat.

Of course, Harry Reid (or, as I like to refer to him, "The Nutless Wonder") has said he would work to block Burris's confirmation. That's vintage Harry Reid for ya, all talk and no action. Just wait and see; when the Illinois Supreme Court certifies the appointment, as Burris asked them to do, Reid will decide that it'll be simply too divisive to pursue any attempt to keep him out.

Again, this is a perfect example of how the Democrats have let themselves fall behind by not being proactive. The Illinois legislature should have removed Blago from office immediately. Or pass a law to reform the succession process BEFORE Blago appointed someone. But they couldn't get their act together.

Roland Burris looks like a very weak choice for Obama's replacement. But if he survives the extremely thorough vetting that I HOPE he gets, he should and will be seated.

And the Democrats will look bad regardless.


Bob Symmes said...

Bob -

You miss the point: it's not Burris, it's Blagojevich.

ANYONE selected by this governor - accused of trying to gain personal profit from this appointment - is in turn tainted and thus weakened by these allegations.

I don't know enough to pass judgment on Mr. Burris' qualifications for US Senator, but I know enough to question the qualifications of his judgment in accepting this appointment.

It would have been better had the legislature stripped the governor of this power; it would be best if Pat Quinn, once governor, simply make his choice - whether Burris, Davis, or whomever.

Frankly, I'm offended by the over-the-top racist comments by Rep. Bush, Waters, et al. Whatever happened to "judge a man not by the color of his skin, but on the content of his character"?

CT Bob said...

My point wasn't whether Burris is adequate or not, or whether the Democrats hate him because of Blago, but that if the appointment is proven to be legal, we should abide by the law.

We've had eight long years of Bush/Cheney literally shitting on the law. Can we maybe start the new era with applying our laws to the absolute letter, regardless of how it looks to people? Can we simply make a decision based on the law, rather than popular opinion? That's all I'm asking.

If Burris turns out to be dirty, then fine; fuck him. But if Fitzgerald doesn't have anything on him or on Blago's choice of him, then we're legally stuck with him.

Unless we want to continue the hypocrisy of the last 8 years.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

All early indications is that Burris is the sort of career political hack who makes my skin crawl; he even built himself a ridiculous mausoleum that has his "accomplishments" chiseled into the granite.

Given the history of Blacks in America; let him have his ego; he probably earned it the hard way.

He is in a fairly exclusive region; after all how many Blacks have risen to his level politically in the entire nation's history?

Yes; it would have made more sense to spend the dough on something else that would last through the ages (his obvious goal) such as seeding an scholarship annuity, but this is how he chose to do it.

Apparently there's no dirt on the man, he seems to have accomplished quite a bit but doesn't campaign well or considering it is Illinois were talking about, maybe he's too clean for the party machinery's taste.

Let him slide on the ego trip final resting place. (For all we know his wife and family talked him into it anyway.)

I agree with you; there's no valid reason to put him in the middle of the Governors self-created crossfire problem.

Seat him.

Bob Symmes said...

It is likely that -- if he is seated by the Supreme Court (against the stated wishes of the Senate Democratic caucus and like the 43rd President) -- he might receive NO committee memberships.

The Supreme Court can force the Senate to seat the appointee, despite the particular accusations against the appointer on t5he process used. However, there is NO law or Constitutional basis to compel the Senate to permit such an appointee to do anything other than voting on the floor of the Senate.

Perhaps that's what this fool wants; I have a low opinion of the Senate (and an even lower opinion of the Senate Democrats) that I could accept even this.

Anonymous said...

For him to accept it, and he lobbied fro it AFTER Blago's indictment, is more than enough to taint the selection. After all how do we not know Mr. Burris is engaging in a little bit of blackmail of his own. As to the legality of it, blacks used to be bought and sold legally. Sometimes something legal needs to be fought. Why continue to add to the sense of incompetence and scandal that already plagues all levels of goverment. The only way to start restoring trust is to let the people decide who THEY want both in Illinois and in new York. Just the race baiting alone gives the impression of blackmail based on race.

Authentic Connecticut Republican said...

>>Perhaps that's what this fool wants

But he's nobody's fool.
Therein lies the real problem.

I googled him and you should too, the man's impressive and has more than a resume to back that up.

His record of civic involvement spans decades - he's a real Eagle Scout sort of guy, the likes of which seem in constant shortage most especially in Washington.

It's seems apparent that the party machinery isn't all that warm to such a fellow. Their own history would illustrate that well.

The odds of getting someone of half the caliber in that seat are slim unless the Senate seats him.