Skip to main content

As the Blagojevich/Burris/Rush psychodrama continues to unfold, it seems that a contest is developing over who can make the most absurd, the most delusional, and the most self-serving remarks in this political soap opera.

In the delusional category we have Blagojevich:

...weighing the option of appointing himself to the open Senate seat ... to obtain greater resources if he is indicted as a sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor; a desire to remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016; avoiding impeachment by the Illinois legislature.

...up against Roland Burris' belief that there will be "a major outcry" if the Senate defies Blagojevich by refusing to seat him:

In the self-serving category, we have the entire criminal complaint against Blagojevich versus Burris' flip flop from outrage to "no comment":

On December 13, Roland Burris said Blago should be forced from office, calling the governor's actions "appalling" and "reprehensible."

But now Burris has abandoned his call for Blago to be booted from office, and has completely dropped his condemnations of the governor.

But in the absurd category Rep. Bobby Rush is in a class by himself. It began yesterday, when he likened opposition to Burris being seated to a lynching, but he really outdid himself during an appearance today on The Early Show:

RODRIGUEZ: Yesterday we heard you say that they shouldn't hang and lynch the appointee to punish the appointer. But do you believe that this is the way the only African-American Senator should be seated? Tainted, rightly or not, by a scandal and against the objections of most of his own party?

Rep. RUSH: Well, let me just say this, you know, the recent history of our nation has shown us that sometimes there could be individuals and there could be situations where school children--where you have officials standing in the doorway of school children. You know, I'm talking about all of us back in 1957 in Little Rock, Arkansas. I'm talking about George Wallace, Bull Connors and I'm sure that the US Senate don't want to see themselves placed in the same position. I know my friend Harry Reid...

This has to be both the ultimate in "you can't make this shit up," and the most blatant, shameless playing of the race card. Ever. To equate objections to a scandal-plagued Governor, caught on tape planning to sell a U.S. Senate seat, appointing anyone to fill that seat, with the ugly and tragic events during the fight for civil rights, is not only appalling, it's an insult to every man, woman and child who put their lives on the line during that terrible time in our nation's history. Rush should be ashamed of himself.

Last week, another Illinois legislator was asked to fill President-elect Obama's vacant Senate seat by Blagojevich. Rep. Danny Davis, who had earlier sought the appointment, turned him down:

I indicated I came to the conclusion there was too much discomfort on my part and the part of my family ... it would be difficult to generate the trust level people would have to have in me. I just decided there was too much turmoil, too much disagreement. It was something I wanted to do, but I said I would not take an appointment from the governor.

That's how a person of integrity deals with an offer from an ethically challenged Governor facing federal corruption charges. Roland Burris and Bobby Rush should take note of that.

Update: A late addition, in the why-leave-it-to-history category, is Roland Burris' monument to ... Roland Burris. This explains why Burris is so anxious to get that Senate seat. He has space to fill.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:35 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  It's really quite embarrassing all the way around (29+ / 0-)

      as an African American I am thoroughly embarrassed by the shenanigans of Rush and Burris. This is why we need more younger African American leaders to step up because the old ones are still fighting the fights of the 60s in a 2000s environment. It's tiresome and embarrassing.

      You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

      by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:38:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i didn't know you were AA (5+ / 0-)

        so, am I!

      •  What's disgusting to me (8+ / 0-)

        is that these guys are using race to cloud this whole issue, when in fact, it was and has never been in the equation.

        No Democrat is saying don't seat Burris because he is black. This is not the issue, although I think Burris, Blago and Rush are hoping to sell it to the African American community to stir up something that is totally unwarranted.

        And that is the shame here.

        This old style politics of crying the race foul is old and tired. There will be times when such a call should be genuinely issued, but not for this.

        I agree with Muzikal, that it is high time younger African American leaders are brought into the fold.

        Race is still going to be a problem in this country, but to trivialize it for selfish means is uncalled for.

        •  I saw an interview Burris did today (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pine, 3goldens, dotster, Shhs

          where he said if he's not seated Race will be the second (if not first) thing on everyone's mind when it comes to why. SMH. Unlike Burris, the Senators and Obama have been very consistent on what they thought about ANYONE Blago appointed.

          You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

          by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:01:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  It's divide-and-conquer at its worst (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Shhs

          Race is really not the issue here. It's simply a mean-spirited attempt by Blag-o-boy to stick it to Obama by playing divide-and-conquer with the party base. And I'm glad to see that DC Democrats are holding their ground on this one.

        •  didn't Rush also say that the replacement (0+ / 0-)

          Senator has to be African American because Obama is?

        •  He's qualified in his own right (0+ / 0-)

          race is an issue, especially in the Senate.  Rush is dead on.

          Blago's a joke, we all know that.  Burris is qualified, Constitutionally and otherwise.  Which is why it was brilliant on Blago's part.

          Until Blago's convicted or impeached the appointment needs to stand.

          "It stinks." - Jay Sherman

          by angry liberaltarian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:33:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was reminded on Huff Post that Burris continued (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zinger99, Shhs

            to seek the death penalty for Rolando Cruz who was accused in the tragic case of Jeanine Nicarico, a case that spanned years-----while he was atty gen. even after another man had confessed to the crime.  His own prosecutor resigned in protest rather than continue this action which she saw as unjust.  The lead detective resigned in protest.  Cruz was eventually found innocent and released after spending 11 years on death row.
             Burris was accused at the time of refusing to back down on this case as he was planning to seek the governor's office and didn't want to appear soft on crime.  There were questions about his moral and legal judgment.
             

            •  The DuPage county prosecutor (0+ / 0-)

              wouldn't back down. Don't know about Burris. It's the DuPage Co. prosecutor who would be pushing the death penalty as far as I know...

              Rub raw the sores of discontent - Saul Alinsky

              by JayGR on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:48:34 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Burris is an affable... (0+ / 0-)

            He's a nice guy, but this is where ego and ambition blind him.  Danny Davis (my seat-warmer pick) did the sensible thing.  Burris is too in love with himself to do the people of Illinois any good.  Does he think a US Senator acts alone?  If he cares about Illinoisans, he'll reject the appointment and wait for a legit appointment from the next acting Gov.  Perhaps he can pull off a two-fer and pick that one up too.

            And Bobby?  What the heck happened to Bobby?  He's gone off the edge.  I used to love that guy back in the 1980s.  He was a stand up guy.  What does he owe Roland?  Who told him it was Roland or some white guy?  And why did he believe it? Why is he allowing himself to be used by a corrupt white guy to play the race card?

            Blago is evil.  He really wanted simply to F* with Obama and all his "enemies" and he doesn't care what he does to achieve his personal aim.  

            "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation.

            by Uncle Moji on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:04:39 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  I am African-American and I too am EMBARRASSED (5+ / 0-)

        by Burris and Rush totally enacting the 60's with the race card they are playing.  

        There are MANY situations in which African-Americans can be in a grievous position but this is NOT one of them.

        Blago could have picked a blue person but Reid would have still refused to seat him in the U.S. Senate.

        This is about Blago trying to get Illinois African-Americans on his side who may eventually be in the jury pool when he goes to trial.  This has all to do with Blago.  He doesn't give a shit about the people of Illinois.

        "Because we won...we have to win." Obama - 6/6/08. WELL WE DID IT!!! 11/4/08

        by Drdemocrat on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:04:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And this "crying wolf" will have the effect of (0+ / 0-)

          diverting attention to when the real race wolf is prowling. There it is, a real wolf and there will be numerous eyes rolled partly because of this kind of crap.

          Burris struck me as a rather pitiful person in the times I've seen him--and I'd never heard of him before yesterday. He didn't strike me as the sharpest nail in the bin, but many politicians are not. If elected, he'd be another of those. Not now. He wants it too badly and is willing to taint himself to do so. That is exactly what he has done. Go up and hug the filth spattered crook and it comes off on even the purest--self tainting even in innocence.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:52:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Please, Drdemocrat, don't be embarrassed. (0+ / 0-)

          By all means, donate to Rush's primary opponent, dish any dirt you have on Rush to Fitz, the Chicago media or the tabloids (as appropriate) and support Reid and Obama in their actions.  But do not feel embarrassed.

          Every American, no matter her color, has plenty of people that share that color of whom to be embarrassed.  That's one achievement of the Bush Administration's diverse Cabinet.  If everybody is stuck cringing in shame, nothing at all worth doing will get done.

          Dems in 2008: An embarassment of riches. Repubs in 2008: Embarassments.

          by Yamaneko2 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:46:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  You have absolutely (0+ / 0-)

        nothing about which to be embarrassed.  Many of the younger generation of politically active AAs have already taken the spirit of the old civil rights movement and integrated modern sensibilities.  I listened to an interview with an AA Republican woman (moderate) who, while disgusted with her race-baiting party, has decided to remain as one of the new voices of moderate Republicanism.  She was terrific even though I didn't agree with some of her positions.  She voted for Obama -- not because she agreed with him either -- but because he represented the hope for an end to bullshite in both parties.

      •  Why are you embarrassed (0+ / 0-)

        You didn't do anything - did you?  My law says that the governor is innocent until proven guilty and still has every right  to appoint a new senator to fill this spot.  I say seat Burris and stop this idiocy and lets get on with it.  Too much time has been spent in speculation and worry.  This is a good man - seat him!

        Not only did we beat the British now we have to beat the Bushes.

        by libbie on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:13:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No reason to be embarrassed... (0+ / 0-)

        As an English/German/Irish/Cherokee/something in the past that the old folks whispered about but didn't talk about with the kids, I can tell you...

        If you ain't got some fools, big fools, and damned fools in the mix, you ain't human, and Frederick Douglass damned well settled that question years ago.

        Free speech? Yeah, I've heard of that. Have you?

        by dinotrac on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:46:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  are'nt you tired of this diversion away from (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pine, Northstar, Randall Sherman, Lava20

      what bush is doing on his way out the door? why do persist with this crap as if our whole goverment is not corrupt ? what is this compared to what bush has done ? is this the dumbest generation of america yet ?

      •  divide and conquer - look at the responses (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pine, sebastianguy99, Shhs, Lava20

        injecting race,party etc., we argue amongst ourselves all while we are being robbed blind . please keep your eye on the bigger picture and not diversions . what is george bush and dick cheney doing - where are they ?

        •  Speaking of bigger pictures. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pine

          Could this Rush play be rooted in deeper animosities towards Obama, perhaps stemming from when Obama challenged Rush for IL-1?  I wouldn't be surprised if there was lingering tension.  

          And good for Obama, if that's the case.  

          •  actually, I suspect that Rush's illness is (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Uncle Moji

            playing havoc with his thinking. He looked horrible, and sounded weak and disjointed. The Rush I know (and gave a service award to 15 yrs ago) was active, vibrant, well spoken and emotional. I don't know what sort of cancer he is fighting, but the cancer is winning. I do know that there were serious questions of whether he had the energy to even run this time. There was talk of "replacing" Rush with his wife. (a la Todd Stroger, Lisa Madigan, and other family affairs)

            He was not making sense, and he was definitely not himself. Even so, what he said was foolish, petty and counter-productive, which surprised me.

            What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

            by agnostic on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:58:01 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, thanks for the update on Bobby (0+ / 0-)

              What I saw today at the presser was not the Bobby Rush I had come to know and respect 20 years ago.  I did not recognize the man who defended this Burris pick in a rambling, slurred, incoherent, and inexplicable speech.

              "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation.

              by Uncle Moji on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:23:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  where in the hell is that $ 700 billion ? (6+ / 0-)

          this blago stuff probably does not even affect you ! a diversion which you are falling for ,fools !what has bush done today that will hurt you and your children that the media is'nt talking about and don't want you to know about ? could he along with israel be plotting an attack on iran ? where is pelosi and reid bush's co-defendants ? you believe that snake patrick fitzgerald who let dick cheney walk despite knowing his guilt in outing valerie plame ? what are they trying to accomplish with these charges against blagovich ?

          •  Thank You..No Guts When It Mattered Most (0+ / 0-)

            Didn't have the stones to go after the VP, but now is some kind of hero for going after Blago? I don't see it at all.

            Dems need to focus and show we can govern. I'm betting most Americans are willing to give the guy a chance, but the Dems insist on posturing for some reason.

            Where is that $700 billion? Hello?

            "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

            by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:46:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  on SOOOOOOOOoooo many levels. (7+ / 0-)

      You really couldn't make up something more ridiculous than this without scandalous photos involving stripper clowns.

      (and who knows, they may be out there)

      You are entitled to express your opinion. But you are NOT entitled to agreement.

      by DawnG on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:53:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If we put some pressure on this guy maybe (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pine, kerflooey

      Burris will say he needs to step down (for health reasons of course) that would fix the current problem.

      GOP = Godless opposition party We Hassle to make America a Vassal (state)

      by Shhs on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:55:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Burris is on the "I love Blago and he (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pine, 3goldens

        hasn't done anything wrong" boat now

        You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

        by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:00:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I can't imagine what he's thinking (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pelagicray

        I don't know what Burris smoking. Reid has said the Senate will not seat him. If a legal fight comes out in Burris's favor and he is seated, the Democratic caucus probably will not recognize him and he won't get any committee assignments. He won't win the Democratic nomination in 2010. All around, it's a losing proposition.

        I simply don't see what he has to gain from this, other than historical infamy for drinking Blago's kool-aid.

  •  So much for Burris not playing the race (14+ / 0-)

    card. Those guys are so pathetic.

    You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

    by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:36:57 PM PST

  •  Exactly: (5+ / 0-)

    Rush should be ashamed of himself

    •  Rush obviously thinks he can get away with it (4+ / 0-)

      and I've seen a couple of people from Chicago talking about how upset everyone is going to get if Burris isn't seated because Burris is black. I say bullshit, if Burris was white the Senate and Obama would be saying the same thing they are now.

      You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

      by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:39:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Burris must not be seated. And no one should be (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doc2, kerflooey

        Intimidated by Rush's bullshit of playing the race card. Burris is a disgrace. Rush is beyond a disgrace. And Blago is just a pure loon.

      •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Randall Sherman, Muzikal203

        My Mother grew up in Chicago.
        She says Rush is a disgrace now, with these latest antics.

        Through the forest, above the trees, within my stomach, scraped off my knees. I drink the honey inside your hive, you are the reason I stay alive. ~~NIN

        by Lava20 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:57:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Kudos to your mother (0+ / 0-)

          I haven't seen anyone around here from Chicago saying that.

          You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

          by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:59:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  This (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens, tcandew, kaolin

            is rather sad.

            I think what makes me more annoyed is the fact that Reid and other Democrats are so bothered by this, but where were they with Ted Stevens?  He was actually convicted!  

            All the crap going around and they can take a stand now?

            Through the forest, above the trees, within my stomach, scraped off my knees. I drink the honey inside your hive, you are the reason I stay alive. ~~NIN

            by Lava20 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:06:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I'm in Chicago and (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            agnostic

            all of this is utter bullshit.  Rush has been a festering wound for a while.  Blago is an absolute joke, and won't do a damn thing to work with our city.  Rush completely lives in the past a la Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.  

            Best part it, I grew up in Texas and had Bush as a governor.  I am shit-governor bait.

  •  I was very upset that so many (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CityLightsLover

    people were heartily agreeing with, and showering love upon, Kanye West when he made the stupid utterance that "George Bush doesn't care about black people" since it was a seat-of-the-pants blubber that sets a potent precedent for this Rushian bloviating.

    From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

    by satrap on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:38:33 PM PST

  •  Oh jeebus. (5+ / 0-)

    I feel like I'm watching a bad soap opera and I can't change the channel.

    "It may look dark tonight, but if I hold on to hope, tomorrow will be brighter."

    by apip0115 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:38:53 PM PST

  •  How about this.. (4+ / 0-)

    Most people do not have that many issues with Burris, beyond his hypocrisy in flip flopping on Blago. What if the senate refuses to seat him. Blago is indicted and removed. The new governor comes in, says he's vetted Burris, sees no wrongdoing occurred with Burris and he says he can advance the appointment of Burris as he is generally a good candidate.
    Thoughts?

    Until Obama does something tangible for the GLBT community, beyond pretty speeches, he is just "All-Talk Barack"

    by gladkov on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:38:57 PM PST

  •  I vote Reid and Jesse White. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    beltane, Lava20

    Reid, for implying that he will fight a fight he can't win, in order to keep a perfectly fine person from becoming senator.

    White, for violating the duties of his office in order to keep a perfectly fine person from becoming senator.

    Excuse me, your child is kicking my seat.

    by Inland on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:39:09 PM PST

    •  Reid CAN win this fight actually. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens

      "Because we won...we have to win." Obama - 6/6/08. WELL WE DID IT!!! 11/4/08

      by Drdemocrat on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:49:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You believe that? (0+ / 0-)
        The senate makes an SOS cert a legal requirement, and the SOS refuses, even as we all know that the appointment took place....Does that seem like something thatwould prevail?

        I sure hope not.  

        Excuse me, your child is kicking my seat.

        by Inland on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:48:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I respectfully disagree (0+ / 0-)

      I repsectfully disagree with your assessment. No one disputes that Roland Burris is qualified to serve as a United States senator. It's the fact that he accepted an appointment from Blagojevich that is intolerable.

      As far as I'm concerned, if Blagojevich raised FDR or Paul Wellsotne from the dead and appointed them, they still would not be considered legitimate in the eyes of the people of Illinois or the U.S. Senate. If Burris pervails in a legal fight to be seated, he has a bleak future. It seems unlikely that the Democratic caucus will give him a committee assignment and he has zero chance of winning renomination in 2010.

      Just my $.02.

    •  If he were "perfectly" fine, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pelagicray

      he wouldn't have accepted such a tainted appointment. He's a joke, and if his accepting anything from Blagovich isn't enough for you, and playing the race card isn't enough for your, the monument should be. Joke, joke, joke.

      •  Bootstrapping. (0+ / 0-)
        It always comes back to Blago's corruption, not any look at Burris.  A person who accepts an appointment is corrupt, so Burris is unaaceptable for not knowing that.

        It's easy if all you know is that one fact and have two seators.

        Excuse me, your child is kicking my seat.

        by Inland on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:56:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I just love (4+ / 0-)

    how IL politics confuses the rest of the nation.

    Like common sense or decency has anything to do with anything...

  •  You need to dig up (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CityLightsLover, apip0115

    Rush's quotes about Blago from a week or two ago.

  •  I'm Glad to See I Wasn't the Only One (11+ / 0-)

    extremely bothered by the words "lynch" & "hanging" being thrown around so easily yesterday - pretty much saying that anyone who would disagree with the Burris appointment is racist.

    On behalf of all "Hoosiers," I apologize for Evan Bayh!

    by CityLightsLover on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:39:20 PM PST

    •  Clarence Thomas ruined it for everybody else nt (4+ / 0-)

      The GOP has resorted to Cannibalism. Please send Condiments to GOP HQ

      by JML9999 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:52:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rush is the racist. (3+ / 0-)

      He said that because the voters elected Obama who is black, Obama's replacment msut also be black.

      Imagine if McCain had won and a white politician in Arizona insisted McCain be replaced by another white politician "since that is what the voters voted for." No one would have trouble seeing the racism.

      No one should have trouble seeing Rush's racism, either.

      Now we hold his feet to the fire.

      by foxfire burns on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:56:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He also said he was "praying" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        foxfire burns, CityLightsLover

        that an AA got appointed. In other words, he prayed that no white person would get appointed. What an asshole.

      •  I don't like Rush (3+ / 0-)

        but equating your McCain scenario with this one strikes me as either tone deaf or intellectually dishonest.  There are already 96 white senators, so of course nobody would say that McCain's replacement should be white.  But there was only one (and now zero, after Obama's resignation from the Senate) black senator.  I see totally understand preferring (but not requiring) that the replacement for the one outgoing black Senator be another black person, lest we end up with a Senate devoid of blacks.

        If all things were "equal", there'd be roughly 12 black senators at any one time.  Now you're bitching that some might prefer that there be at least one?

        •  I agree with this... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kaolin

          I don't have a problem with the suggestion that it would be preferable to have an African-American Senator in that seat.  Truthfully, I hope in the end that's what winds up happening.  The A-A community is terribly underrepresented in our government.

          That said, Rush went WAAAY over the line by suggesting that objections to Burris' appointment must be rooted in racism.  I know MANY progressive people who are troubled by this appointment, and race has absolutely nothing to do with it for any of them.

          If anything, I'm disgusted by the fact that race got injected into this, and it wasn't those who oppose this pick who brought up the issue of race, it was Bobby Rush.  Truthfully, I think it was Rod Blagojevich.  He knew damn well that all of this was gonna happen, and he's probably laughing his ass off about it all right now.  If Blago had appointed a white candidate, we would all be crying foul, and nobody would be defending the pick.  Since he picked a black candidate and then had a highly scripted press conference with Bobby Rush there to say "if you challenge this, you must be a racist!", you know this was a game from the start.  Is it traditional to trot along a U.S. Congressman who has zilch to do with the appointment process to these things as a matter of protocol?  No.  It was a very cynical play by Blago, and it was designed to create an internal civil war amongst Democrats, with race being the dividing issue.

          It sucks ass, and it does no good for any of us, black, white, or otherwise.

          Burris is a complete token pick.  He may be qualified for the job, and he may have been completely clean before all of this.  But he wasn't chosen for those reasons.  He was chosen because he was black, to stir this shit up.  Had he been the exact same person but white, he wouldn't have even gotten the time of day.  Blago doesn't care about his abilities or his ethics, he cares about his skin color.  And Burris doesn't care how smelly the road for him to the Senate must be, he'll take it any way he can get it, because he thinks that it is somehow owed to him.  He's being played, and he knows it.  He doesn't care, just as long as he gets to put "U.S. Senator" on that tombstone, even if only for 2 years.

          I want the next Senator from Illinois to be someone dedicated to serving the people, not his own self-aggrandizing "legacy".  We've got plenty of folks like that already in Washington.  We just kicked two of them out, Ted Stevens and Bill Jefferson.  Let's not add a new one.

  •  Diarist Wins BlogLine of the Day (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CityLightsLover, Lava20

    Follies describe the situation aptly.

  •  One less Democrat in the Senate by January 20 (0+ / 0-)

    The GOP didn't hurt us...we hurt ourselves.

    The Seminole Democrat
    A blue voice calling from the deep red

    by SemDem on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:40:29 PM PST

  •  Bobby Rush wins the "YUCK" award (7+ / 0-)

    Bringing up the race card particularly using the loaded term "lynch" turned this whole SIDE SHOW into a DISGUSTING one.

    Blocking whom ever Blago appoints for the Senate seat has absolutely NOTHING to do with race.

    I suspect that Obama got involved at this point when before he was staying as far away as possible because Bobby Rush played the race card.

    I also think that Blago, Burris, and Rush conspired together to bring up race in this.

    "Because we won...we have to win." Obama - 6/6/08. WELL WE DID IT!!! 11/4/08

    by Drdemocrat on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:40:41 PM PST

  •  Question: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Adam B

    What, really, is the downside for Rush?  His constituents probably eat this up and he's the kind of guy who thrives on racial politics.

    •  Actually many of us black folks are APPALLED (9+ / 0-)

      by Rush bringing his shit up.

      This is what many of us African-Americans feel about this:

      http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.c...

      I don't know if I've shifted politically or what. But after watching a black man named Barack Obama--who couldn't get into the Democratic convention eight years ago--win Virginia, North Carolina, New Mexico and Colorado, my tolerance for Negroes claiming that we need an appointment like this--in this kind of situation--is zilch.

      Look, I say this as a black dude obviously concerned about race in this country. If you want a black senator go out and do the work to get yourself one. Build the organizations, build the fund-raising, do a black version of Emily's List, if need be. At some point, you have to stop bitching about the track. You have to stop bitching about your hand-me-down spikes. At some point, you just have to go out and run. I have little tolerance for the racial grievances of upper-middle class blacks. Do for your damn self, and speak for your damn self. Keep my name out your mouth.

      UPDATE: It is amazing to hear Rush make this argument, given that if left to him, there would be no black Senators anyway. Rush backed the very-white Blair Hull against Obama in 2004. Are these people serious?

      "Because we won...we have to win." Obama - 6/6/08. WELL WE DID IT!!! 11/4/08

      by Drdemocrat on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:55:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wonkette wins the week (17+ / 0-)

    when she writes:

    [Blago] knows he’s politically outmaneuvered Harry Reid, which is perhaps the easiest achievement known to man

    This sig line is in foreclosure. For details on acquiring a credit default swap on this sig line, contact H. Paulson, Dept of the Treasury, c/o Goldman, Sachs

    by ActivistGuy on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:40:57 PM PST

  •  hopefully Quinn appoints Davis (6+ / 0-)

    and we get a competant and honest senator from Illinois.

    After Obama's eighth straight victory, Penn told reporters: "Winning Democratic primaries is not a qualification or a sign of who can win the general election.

    by nevadadem on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:41:39 PM PST

  •  The Race Card Jumps the Shark. Poorly (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    oceanview, BarbinMD, FrostyKotex, kaolin

    True bipartisanship is prosecuting criminals regardless of Party.

    by The Baculum King on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:41:45 PM PST

  •  Gobsmacked (6+ / 0-)

    There are circumstances under which Burris could have been an honorable, low-key placeholder to ride out the storm -- saying he was undertaking these duties so that Illinois could have an equal voice in the Senate, but without passing judgment on the Governor's woes and, instead, pledging to have as little to do with him as possible.

    He didn't do that, and Rush is playing the very politics that Barack Obama tried to end via his speech on race in Philadelphia, the same politics -- of course -- that helped Rush beat Obama in the 2000 primary, for what it's worth.

    •  Luckily, we're as far (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Muzikal203

      from 2000 as we're going to get.

      As I commented in an earlier thread

      Maybe he is
      also trying to stick it to Obama by putting him in a potentially embarassing situation. There is still the generational tension going on. I haven't forgotten Jesse Jackson's reference to castration. And there is another political rival (Rush) weighing in  on Burris's side as well.

      So to make a short story long--green-eyed monster envy.

      This proves it. Hopefully Rush's rhetoric won't work.

      And it's sad Burris is letting himself be a pawn in Blago's wacky chess game. The people of Illinois and the rest of the US deserve better

    •  I guess that crap works in Chicago (0+ / 0-)

      because those are the only people I see around here saying "it's gonna work!"

      You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

      by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:52:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Work on who, for what? (0+ / 0-)

        There are two audiences:
        (1) Blagojevich's potential jurors -- both the public at large, and Illinois' legislators (via impeachment), and
        (2) Harry Reid et al.

        •  They say that if Burris isn't seated (0+ / 0-)

          the Black folk are gonna get mad. SMH

          You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

          by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:58:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And, do what? nt (0+ / 0-)
            •  Hell if I know (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kerflooey

              I guess vote Republican. LOL

              You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

              by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:05:55 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Stay At Home Is What (0+ / 0-)

                They don't have to vote Republican to hurt Democrats. And if you think we're going to win any southern state without their solid and heavy support, then you don't understand what just happened in November. Want to win Indiana again, then you're going to need that small fraction of the vote to turnout for you.

                African-Americans did not turnout as expected in Missouri and look what happened. You want to win there in 2012 or not?

                If we want to win states such as Texas and Georgia in 2012, then you folks need to respect that you cannot take African-American votes for granted. They can inflict pain by staying home.

                And for African-Americans to get on here and join in the chastisement of the man's burial package, well that's disgusting.

                The quickest way to turn off African-American support is to attack something they hold dear, something they see as a religious and family matter.

                "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

                by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:19:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  It won't work anymore. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            defluxion10

            Something has changed. Ten years ago, OJ was aquitted of a murder he definately committed and blacks celebrated; this year he was convicted of a sorta crime where no one was hurt and there wasn't a peep from anyone. Obama changes everything, and guys like Rush and Sharpton had better understand that or they'll lose their supporters.

            •  Actually with OJ (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kaolin

              he's an idiot, and there's only so much support you can give someone. As soon as I heard what OJ did I thought "lock his dumb ass up"

              :o)

              You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

              by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:33:40 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  But didn't you think (0+ / 0-)

                he was a dumb ass when he practically cut two people's heads off?

                •  I was in middle school, I didn't even watch (0+ / 0-)

                  the trial, but I remember my parents watching it. I just didn't want him to be convicted, I didn't have an opinion on whether he was guilty one way or the other.

                  But if I had paid attention to everything, I probably would have thought he was a dumbass.

                  You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

                  by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:41:13 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  It's Chicago's cess pit (0+ / 0-)

      and well, it's also your own cess pit in a small way too.

      "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

      by Salo on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:08:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ahh...the Myth of Post Racial America (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99, sambeau

      Do you believe that Barack Obama can make one speech
      and end racial politics?
      There's ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with at least some black people(Rush) demanding a black man as replacement to serve out Obama's term and Burris is far more experienced and clean than JJ Jr or Danny Davis.
      Blacks(13% of US pop.) need MORE representation(1 out of 50!), not less.
      Get real!
      Maybe this controversy will knock some holes in  some phoney expectations about what Obama can do--the sooner the better.

      •  yes and no (0+ / 0-)

        Do there need to be more blacks in the Senate? Of course.  But Rush assumes there are no legitimate non-racial reasons to deny Burris the appointment, and that's bullshit.

        •  Not more, just ONE! (0+ / 0-)

          I should have said 1/100.
          You're letting your hatred of one man based on rumor and innuendo overturn your judgement.
          Blago is not a WMD pointed at Obama.
          One day you'll wake up and realize how ridiculous you've been and we can all have a big laugh!
          At least you'll have lots of company!

      •  So I take it from your use of population (0+ / 0-)

        percentage that you would be in favor of an amendment mandating 13 percent of the senate (and House for good measure) be African.

        Does that mean that Jewish-American seats in the senate would also have to be capped by their representation in the population? What about Brazilian-Americans? How many seats should they get?  

        •  Oh pah-lease (0+ / 0-)

          And do I think Jews, Mormons and old white guys are way over represented?
          You bet!
          I also think that two Senators from Utah should not equal two Senators from California.
          In the 21st century, we deserve proportional representation.
          But being from the vacant libertarian West,
          you disagree. Because it serves your interest?
          Or are you folks just more deserving?

          The US Senate is inherently unfair. A highly qualified black replacement for Obama, like Roland Burris is NOTHING in comparison.

      •  To be angry... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kaolin

        About being underrepresented in Congress, and especially the Senate, is a completely fair and legitimate complaint by the A-A community.  I truthfully hope to live to see the day where the complaint will no longer be necessary.

        To press strongly for and to advocate strongly for a good African-American replacement for Barack Obama's Senate seat is a good and just thing.

        To suggest that ANY objections to an appointment made by one of the most corrupt governors in modern American history must be rooted in racism is a flipping travesty.

        Had Pat Quinn appointed Burris, nobody here would be complaining.  Had Burris run and won in a special election, nobody here would be complaining.

        The complains here aren't really about Burris or his skin color, they're about Blago, and this is about standing on principle.  To people who believe that we should let this pass since Burris is a qualified black candidate, would you not be arguing that we should not accept a white appointment made by Blago, had that wound up being the case?

        Keep your standards even.  Bobby Rush and Roland Burris BOTH said that Blago was in no position to make this appointment in recent weeks.  Now that he has, the tune has changed.  If you opposed the notion of Blago making the appointment before December 30th, you have no ground to stand on in supporting the appointment today.  And if you opposed it before and you still oppose it now, maybe, just maybe, you oppose it on principle, and race doesn't have a damn thing to do with it.

        Thank God my black president doesn't play games like this.

  •  OMG. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pine, ElizabethAM

    Blago thinks he's running for PRESIDENT in 2016? seriously?

    You are entitled to express your opinion. But you are NOT entitled to agreement.

    by DawnG on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:43:01 PM PST

  •  Unlike Colbert I See Color (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cederico, Pd, cartwrightdale, tcandew

    And I will see a Senate full of pretty repulsive and ineffectual people getting holier than though about HOW a Senator was appinted, even though he was lawfully appointed.  Sure Rush used the race card.  Tell me how many African Americans there are in the Senate.  It is too bad that Illinois has had to produce two of the three African Americans that have sat in the US Senate since reconstruction.  Now we will come up with the third from Illinois and the fourth in the nation.  

    You can whine all you want but Blagojevich and Burris and Rush have played the race card masterfully.  The best thing to do would be for the Senate Democrats to back down (hey they did over Liberman and FISA and torture and the war) and move on to serious business.  Like resurrecting our economy, putting people to work, and getting us out of war.

    •  great (0+ / 0-)

      So we're just supposed to stand by and say, "OK, corrupt fools, you win this time???"

      I don't see that Senate Democrats have anything to lose by fighting this one.

      •  Because it is a waste of time and potentially (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pine

        damaging to the implemention of policies that will help our people and our nation.

        •  more reasoning, please? (0+ / 0-)

          I'm still not buying into your argument, but I'll remain open to persuasion here. How exactly does it damage the implementation of Democratic policies? I'm not quite grasping that point.

          Blago has like a 5% approval rating right now and I can't imagine that Burris's is much higher. I don't exactly see that we're pissing off any major constituencies except for maybe loyalists in Rush's district. If anything, I think that fighting the Burris appointment sends the message that Senate Democrats aren't going to tolerate corruption within their own ranks. And I don't see that this is going to become and all-consuming debate. We may see 1-2 days of debate about it on the Senate floor, but I don't see it turning into a Watergate-level drama.

          If you have some reason to believe that it will cost Obama major political capital or that we gain some long-term tactical advantage from seating Burris, I'm open to considering that point. But I'm simply not seeing it right now.

          In the end, we may still disagree here. That's fine, and I don't wish you any ill will. Daily Kos is great for hashing out these things.

          •  We have opponents who don't love the country (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sebastianguy99

            the bad faith among Senate Republicans is a steady ooze.  What is Specter doing holding up Eric Holder but to bring back the horrible 1990s (Ok I know that is ludicrous nad hopefulle self defeating but it is distracting)?  And McConnell now cares about federal spending?

            The Senate is a bad tempered fraternity in the first place.  So it is important to start out the next term with a full senate and a straight up or down procedure accepting the new members.  You know there will be a fight about Franken so the focus of the Democratic leadership is to emphasize the need for the Senate to get working immediately.  Bring everybody in.  Let litigation happen but ignore it.

            Now let's look at this beautiful scenario.  A bunch of Democrats are going to not seat a Democrat because a corrupt Democratic Governor from the state where the new president comes from appointed him.  And the guy is African American to boot (in the past Republicans have had to scrounge around for African Americans like Clarence Thomas).

            If I was a Republican and my chief objective in life was to damage Demcorats and the Demcoratic President (my objective certainly is not the welfare of the USA), I am looking at a gift horse here.  I don't even have to try hard because I know the Senate Democrats will screw it up even further (Durbin for one has become the flip flopper par excellence of moral opprobrium when it comes to war crimes, Lieberman, etc.)

            On the progressive, isn't it great to have real elections front, the Burris nomination is perfect because he is dead in 2010.  That gives anyone a fair shot at the seat.  A special election before then would be a typical slimy Illinois affair with the insiders and machines tyring to put their thumbs on the scale (please read up on hos John Stroger became President of Cook County and how Dan Lipinksi became a congressman).  

            •  By full Senate (0+ / 0-)

              do you have some inside info on what's going on with Franken/Coleman? Or what about the successor to Clinton's or Udall's seat? Would waiting an extra week for a senator from Illinois completely derail Obama's agenda? If so, it must be concluded that he has much bigger problems than one senator.

    •  There should be more AA's in the senate. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eman

      They should run for the office and get elected. Playing the race card to gain a tainted appointment sets the whole movement back.

      •  I'm sure you feel the same about Caroline Kennedy (0+ / 0-)

        right?

      •  They Should Also Be Allowed To Accept Appoitments (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tcandew, kaolin

        when they've done nothing wrong.Obama called him a "good man" and he otherwise meets the constitutional requirements.

        With so few African-American representation in the Senate, there should be no shock that there is some strong pushback from those who don't want to see one get away because of the alleged sins of someone else.And just because it's white liberals doing the throwing under the bus doesn't stop people like Bobby Rush from doing what they do. He should have never had reason or a platform to say the things he did.

        This mess is entirely the fault of Democrats.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:10:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  They didn't play the race card "masterfully" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eman

      Playing it "masterfully" would've had Blago appointing Burris without playing mentioning race at all.  The issue of this appointment preventing the possibility of there being zero black Senators would've been on everyone's mind without any need to play the race card explicitly.  By going explicit with it, they played the race card clumsily, not "masterfully", particularly Rush.

    •  Just for consistency (0+ / 0-)

      if, god forbid, John Paul Stevens dropped dead tonight and W appointed another winder to the SCOTUS, you would totally support the appointment because it was 'legal'? Would you argue the Senate HAD to confirm the appointment because it was legally done?

      If you wouldn't, please distinguish these for me.

  •  I don't think a guy who worked for civil (4+ / 0-)

    rights for so long should be accused of "the most blatant, shameless playing of the race card. Ever." Especially since it's not even close. Willie Horton makes this look raceless.

  •  Blago is probably the most honest man (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Support Civil Liberty

    in politics right now.

    You know damn well he will not do anything unethical with all this heat on.

    •  The most honest man? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      timbuck, c liam

      Umm, he said he wasn't going to seat anyone. Then less than a month later. . . he seats someone. That's your idea of honest?

      You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

      by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:45:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think he means it in the (0+ / 0-)

        "hardest working employee is the one with the supervisor looking over his shoulder" since.

      •  Actually, he never said that, his lawyer did... (0+ / 0-)

        is that what you meant?

        Need Support Barack? Give Joe Lieberman and Rick Warren a call. Maybe they can help you.

        by justmy2 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:29:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't like Blago, but he made that statement (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99

        when everyone was pushing for a special election.  Since that didn't happen, he had to fulfill is obligation to make an appointment (I would've preferred he do that by letting Quinn pick someone that Blago would rubberstamp, but whatever).

        Even without that explanation, your post doesn't indicate "dishonesty", merely changing one's mind.  Or do only women have that prerogative? ;)

    •  disagree; it is impossible to truly know what (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rimjob, RoCali

      people are up to until they shock the shit out of you.

      "may your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view." Edward Abbey

      by timbuck on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:46:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Heat Has Been On..... (5+ / 0-)

      ....Blago for years, and it hasn't slowed him down. Arrogance & stupidity have a way of impeding rational thinking.

      Since 2005, Blagojevich has been the subject of at least a dozen separate federal investigations, involving accusations against at least 14 other people.

    •  If you think this appointment... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GeoGrl, timbuck

      ...was not forumlated in a way to help Blago (if only to offer him cover and attempt to legitimize his position by demonstrating he is CAPABLE of making a decent pick) then I have a bridge to sell you.

      Because that ain't honesty.

      You are entitled to express your opinion. But you are NOT entitled to agreement.

      by DawnG on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:50:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't know about honest... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pine

      But he's definitely smart. Such a waste.

    •  hahahahahahah, that's a good one!!! (0+ / 0-)

      If I'm supposed to believe that Blag-o-boy is being honest right now, then what else am I supposed to believe?

      1. That Sarah Palin's kids are now using birth control?
      1. That Bill Clinton really didn't inhale when he smoked pot?
      1. That George W. Bush really is a compassionate conservative?
    •  my first response to you . . . (0+ / 0-)

      My first response to you may have been a bit harsh. Sorry if that was the case. I still disagree with you, but I remain open to persuasion.

      I'm open to being persuaded that seating Burris is in the Democratic Party's long-term interest, but I'm nowhere near convinced at the moment. Someone will have to make that case more persuasively than what has been articulated in its present form.

  •  A great test for the Constitution (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sebastianguy99, Lava20

    Well folks, this is what our legal system and the Constitution was made for....process.  This will be fascinating to watch the process play out: Can the IL Sec of State withold certification? Can the Senate not seat him? Will Senate seat him but expel him? Or will the Senate "delay seating" and wait for a new Gov to appoint so that there are possibly two appointees fighting it out? Can the a new Gov revoke the appointment of the initial Gov if the Senate hasn't seated him?  Can he enter the Senate floor?  Personally, I think Burris should be seated and let him stand for re-election in 2010 -- it may take that long to sort it out! But meanwhile, what a show and what a circus!

    There is a silver lining to this. Some of these Constitutional provisions will be tested and their meaning explored.  After all, that's how we got Marbury v. Madison.

    •  I want to see the Constitution tested! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99

      It is always interesting when these things happen to see how we evolve as individual states and as a nation.

      This will be an intersting test...as a political junkie I want to see it play out - but as a citizen where our economy is tanking and Obama needs every vote for that stimulus plan in Jan - I would want to see it end quickly.

  •  Remember Jim Trafficant? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cartwrightdale, timbuck

    That's who Blag reminds me of.

    The weak in courage is strong in cunning-William Blake

    by beltane on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:44:59 PM PST

  •  How the Senate Dems will be able to BLOCK Burris: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WIds, Lava20

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/...

    First Read's Thoughts since Illinois Secretary of State refused to Sign Blago's papers for his appointment:

    The U.S. Senate can block Burriss since he doesn't have the necessary papers REQUIRED since there is no signature.

    While reports maintain that the signature may not be required under the rules and regulations of Illinois, the U.S. Senate rules do appear to require such a mark. So if the secretary of state follows through on his threat and refuses to sign and certify the appointment, this rule may come into play.

    See section No. 2 below, from the Rules of the Senate, available at Senate.gov:

    1. The Secretary shall keep a record of the certificates of election and certificates of appointment of Senators by entering in a wellbound book kept for that purpose the date of the election or appointment, the name of the person elected or appointed, the date of the certificate, the name of the governor and the secretary of state signing and countersigning the same, and the State from which such Senator is elected or appointed.

    "Because we won...we have to win." Obama - 6/6/08. WELL WE DID IT!!! 11/4/08

    by Drdemocrat on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:45:14 PM PST

    •  Does the Secretary of State (0+ / 0-)

      have that discretion?  Wouldn't he be breaking the law by not signing?

    •  mandamus (5+ / 0-)

      Under IL law, White likely has no choice but to sign.  A lawsuit could force him.

    •  I don't think the SoS has veto power (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99

      The purpose of the SoS's signature is to allow him to serve as the official witness saying, "Yes, this indeed is the appointment that the governor made".  Seems he would be not fulfilling his office if he refuses to sign.  Is he supposed to pretend that he doesn't know who the governor picked, or that can't verify that it was Burris that the governor picked, and therefore refuse to sign?

      In my state, WA, the SoS is one of the very few statewide Repub office holders.  Are you really saying that he could decide to block all appointments made by the Democratic governor by simply refusing to certify those appointments just because he feels like it for whatever reason (e.g. maybe he wants only Repubs appointed, so he'd block all Dem appointments)?  I watched the WA electoral college vote, over which he presided (and the Dem Gov attended).  Could he have refused to certify the electoral college vote for any reason he wished (such as the fact that he preferred McCain)?

      Seems that you guys are making up laws as you go.  If that's what you're doing, how are you any better than Blago?

    •  He Can Refuse To Sign, But So What? (0+ / 0-)

      His refusal carries no weight of law and would just be a political stunt.

      "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

      by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:00:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  folks with ties to roger clemens cut them because (0+ / 0-)

    of the taint of scandal:

    HOUSTON - Roger Clemens' name is being removed from a sports medicine institute at a Houston hospital in another apparent blow to the legacy of the major league baseball pitcher since he was linked to steroid use.

    i would have thought burris would do the same as danny davis.

    "may your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view." Edward Abbey

    by timbuck on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:45:38 PM PST

  •  Heh (0+ / 0-)

    I was called racist on this website for using the term "race card". I wonder where that person is now, now that there is a blatant example of playing the race card?

  •  The Senate has refused to seat electees (0+ / 0-)

    Before now: see the cases of Frank Smith and William Vare.

    There's no reason they should seat a person dubiously appointed to the Senate.

    •  Fine (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Phil S 33, Potus2020

      What's dubious about the appointment?  Is the standard really that the governor is under a cloud?

    •  That sets a precedent (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99, Escamillo

      That the Senate can refuse to seat anyone by majority they don't like without any evidence of wrongdoing, and you know the Republicans will use that against us down the road.

      •  Tombstones Are Now In Play People (0+ / 0-)

        Don't think the Republicans aren't watching this with great relief and glee.

        We've managed to attract attention away from their civil war in order to claim that a otherwise good man has a tombstone too large to be a Senator.

        Burial plots will now become part of oppo research, you watch. When it comes back to bite us in the behind, those who do not stand up today will have no ground to stand on then.

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:57:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Those two were involved in illegal activities (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Escamillo

      Burris is not.  He was legally appointed by the current Gov of Illinois.  Unfortunately, that man happens to be Blago.

      So tell me, how did ya'll feel about all of Clinton's dubious appointments after he had been impeached by the U.S. House?  What a scandalous rascal, eh?  Everything Clinton did after impeachment should have been invalidated because of the cloud over his head. It doesn't matter that Clinton wasn't convicted by the Senate. He should have been thrown out anyway, right?. After all, he never could have accomplished anything after impeachment, no one would work with him, etc, etc, etc.

      Me thinks there's a double standard here.

      btw, I can't wait for Blago to be gone.  As it stands, he's still (unfortunately) the Gov.  My Gov, in fact.  But it annoys the living hell out of my when outsiders come in here and try to tell me who should and should not represent me.  Dkos has a bad habit of doing that.

  •  The monument update... that is hilarious (5+ / 0-)

    He truly is audacious.

    "The struggle of humanity against power, is the struggle of memory against forgetting." -- Milan Kundera

    by LV Pol Girl on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:51:09 PM PST

  •  Bobby Rush is an utter disgrace. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Randall Sherman, PalGirl2008

    This fool doesn't belong in the democratic party. His shameless play of the race card is beyond disgraceful. This guy needs to be given his retirement papers. And Burris is another bone head moron for accepting Blago's offer. This three idiots are ruining the great state of Illinios.

  •  Interesting to see Bobby Rush and the Barack (0+ / 0-)

    the Magic Negro crowd united about something.

    "Forever is composed of nows." Emily Dickinson

    by Leftovers on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:54:20 PM PST

  •  And Let's Do Total War With the Mausoleum (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tcandew

    I don't think Burris is shameable on this count and it really doesn't matter what the rolling the eyes and feeling superior crowd feels right now. Burris has got the Governor's nod so the politics of personal destruction (as seen on TPM and everywhere else in the liberal blogosphere and on Drudge - 'cause everyone likes to put down a black man) don't really matter.  

    The rule of law matters and you can't even call it a travesty yet 'cause Fitz let the perp out after posting $4500 bail to resume his job.  And the boys and girls in Springfield spent two plus weeks plotting away, letting Blagojevich line up Burris and go ahead with his strategy.  But when it comes to appointing an African American, as a means of buying off a potential jury, everyone is all upset.  But not when the previous governor closed down death row for the exact same purpose.

    I'll take Burris warts and all.  It's a two year gig.

    •  Oh sheesh. (0+ / 0-)

      This is such an oversimplification.  Of course, if the law requires that Burris be seated, I will accept that and it might even be fine.  I'm not sure on that, but the outcry over a process that the people simply cannot have faith in is hardly simply "politics of personal destruction".  And to call it racism really is pretty unhelpful, to say the least.

    •  Hey Clown... (0+ / 0-)

      But when it comes to appointing an African American, as a means of buying off a potential jury, everyone is all upset.

      You're an ass for assuming that the reason everyone is upset is because Blago appointed a black man.  Everyone is upset because Blago made the appointment, period.

      What's more upsetting is when those who actually suffered the horrors of having family members lynched are insulted by having Rush make the assanine comparison and suggesting that those who might obstruct Burris' appointment are akin to Bull Connor.

      Is Illinois Secretary of State Jessie White a modern day Bull Connor because he won't certify the appointment?

      Before you answer that question, I suggest you make sure you know what color White's skin is, before you make a bigger ass out of yourself...

  •  Burris's Monument to Himself (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Randall Sherman

    His pre- and self-written epitaph reminds me of Gene Hackman in The Royal Tenenbaums...

    "Died Tragically Rescuing His Family From The Remains Of A Destroyed Sinking Battleship"

  •  Could Somebody Tell Me Why All the Kos (9+ / 0-)

    front pagers are writing the same stuff about Blago and Burris.  No one is really laying out the down side of fighting the Burris nomination (like serioulsy hobbling to Obama agenda). Instead we have a steady preen of self-righteousness.  Maybe Kos front pagers didn't know the line from Casablanca was snark.

  •  This is one of those rare times (0+ / 0-)

    when Redstate and dKos agree.  I'd link, but, well, you know where to find them...

    "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

    by mspicata on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:00:14 PM PST

    •  What counts as agreement? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99

      There is a significant number of comments over the past 24 hours supporting Burris being seated. It is probably a minority of comments supporting Burris, but it is not small.  I think he should be seated and I have heard no legal reasons why he shouldn't be.  Under the 17th Amendment, I think he is the Senator now -- whether or not the IL Secretary of State signs the document.

  •  "Monumental" ego (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc2, Little, statsone

    Oh, the humanity humility!

    A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore. -Yogi Berra

    by Joon on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:01:25 PM PST

  •  Bobby Rush is a racial hate-monger (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Randall Sherman

    and should be primaried for this embarassment.

    On November 5, 2008, history was made.

    by Prince Georges for Obama on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:03:39 PM PST

  •  Back off of this guy!!!!! (5+ / 0-)

    You are doing harm.  Blago is using him and destroying him.  Along with a lot of other IL Politician who may not be the savvy-est.  But, have really done a lot for the communities they represent.  I am disgusted you are so willing to poke fun of this man.  Have you watched any of his press?  He is not a slick guy.

    Where are the diaries discussing why Fitzgerald asks for a 3 month extention on the indictment of Governor Blago?

    •  That would appear to be more important (0+ / 0-)

      ...

      "It's a race to decide who the British goverment will follow blindly for the next 4 years" Kennedy/Kerry '08

      by Salo on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:12:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would think so. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Northstar, mrchumchum

        This whole thing is appearing to be a strategical political move.  
        You guys are going to belittle and destroy Burris.  Then you are going to find out that the man probably had something to do with PE Obama's rise in IL politics.  PE Obama supported Burris against Blago in 2002.  You people are falling for this.

        You know why Vitter and Craig are still present.  Because, if the Republicans stood on principle we would have our super majority.

        Here we are hugging these so called principles (whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty; isn't that a principle).  We are going to be left once again holding our penises and our principles.
        The Repugs (Fitzgerald included) are playing politics.  What the hell are we playing?  'I am more principled than you!'?  'I can be outraged more than you can'!?

    •  Oh please, this is Bobby Rush's M-O (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      doc2, statsone, freedapeople

      and Burris knew it when he called him up there and gave him the mic. In fact, Burris backed up Rush this morning in the interview he gave to NBC. They know exactly what they are doing, and it's something that may have worked a few years ago, but it's a new day around here.

      You know, some people are like slinkies, they're good for nothin'! But they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.

      by Muzikal203 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:16:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  why back off? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pine, PalGirl2008, kerflooey

      all Burris had to do was to refuse the nomination.

      And he would not be "destroyed"

      "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

      by statsone on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:22:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why can't you let this play out (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99

        without coming down on a gentle old man who sees a chance to fulfill an aspiration he had let go?  What is the sense?  He has not done anything to you.

        •  gentle old man? (0+ / 0-)

          If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.

          He has been nominated to the US Senate.  Only 100 spots that (supposed to ) serve a very important function.

          He has not done anything to me or anyone else.  Just shown poor judgement.

          "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

          by statsone on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:28:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  ANYBODY HEARING this (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99, Escamillo

        Fitzgerald needs another three months to build a comprehensive case against the Governor.
        This is bull shit.  So, remind me again what the rush was?  Oh yeah, to prevent Blago from appointing a Senator.  Well, can't really do that if you can't indict the guy.  So, no one is preventing anyone from doing anything.  Legally the man can appoint the seat.
        But, meanwhile the Repugs have shined a bright light on IL politics and are waiting for fall out.  They were probably hoping for more of a nefarious connection to PE Obama.

    •  There have been diaries on Fitz aking for (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99, truesteam

      3 months to go on a fishing expedition, but those diaries have been largely ignored.

      Many Kossacks think that Fitz walks on water and blithely accepts everything he says as truth and everything he does as right.  I don't trust Fitz as far as I can throw him.  This guy has a flimsy case after YEARS of investigation; brings forth a criminal complaint accompanied with public grandstanding ("Lincoln rolling in his grave", anyone?), contaminating the jury pool, all but ensuring that his target can't get a fair trial; then asks to extend the indictment deadline by three months, citing "complications" and "thousands of phone conversations to examine"?  Does this buffoon have a case or not?  He should've already had his case ready before his grandstanding.

      •  Bingo! Exactly! Let us not forget either that (0+ / 0-)

        this guy could not (or would not) build a case against Cheney in the Plame outing.  It was admitted that it was clear that Cheney had an involvement that was illegal.  But, the guy dropped it.  It got hard so he gave up.  He did not pursue justice for the American people.  It was too politically hard.  He sucks and did not hold up his obligation to the people of the US.  We let him off the hook.  We damn near gave him one of those Awards that are a dime a dozen that Bush gives out for utter incompetence.  The Bazaro World Presidential Medal of Valor blah, blah  look way; look away; nothing to see here; just us heroes.

  •  The 17th Amendment -- Seat him! (4+ / 0-)

    Here is the relevant part of the 17th Amendment:

    "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct."

    There is nothing that allows a State to add extra conditions onto the Governor's appointment process. The IL Sec of State's signature has no bearing on the appointment under the 17th Amendment.  Burris is the Senator NOW whether the IL Sec of State signs the document or not.  Also, since there is no election, all the Senate can do is judge qualifications of the appointee and there seems no impediment.  

    Seat him and move on!

  •  This is sooooo tawdry. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sebastianguy99

    "Handle every stressful situation like a dog. If you can't eat it or hump it, piss on it and walk away."

    by winter outhouse on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:11:57 PM PST

  •  your mocking of his (future) grave is telling, (5+ / 0-)

    cultural incompetence at its worst, every black person I know over age 65 (who's earned a decent living) has a family plot and head stones ALREADY bought and set aside for them and their spouse.

  •  grave shows his ego (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc2, kerflooey

    the link goes to an page with an image of the monument he built to himself.  In one of the comments, there is a link to a very large image.  Inscriptions and all.  Very tacky to say the least.

    Very sad.

    The honourable thing to do was to refuse the nomination and to call for blago's resignation - as he did before.

    Now accepting the nomination and no longer calling for the resignation only means he is looking out for himself.

    A shame.

    "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

    by statsone on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:20:47 PM PST

  •  Your "Update" is disgusting (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Potus2020, tcandew, truesteam

    The man is a pioneer in his own right.  Allowing your disgust of Blago to disparage Burris is uncalled for.  That't two misses for Barb today.

    First, repeating the defamation at the center of the NYTimes suit and now this...

    take a day off Barb.

    "It stinks." - Jay Sherman

    by angry liberaltarian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:31:15 PM PST

    •  okay. . . let's play "what if?" (0+ / 0-)

      Okay, for the sake of your argument, let's play "what if" with your situation.

      Let's suppose for a moment that the U.S. Senate decides not to fight the appointment and to seat Burris. Then what happens? He'll probably be the most ineffective person in the Senate because everything he does will be viewed under a cloud of suspicion. No other member will want to cooperate with him on legislation (especially now that we have more than 1-seat majority), he'll have difficulty securing any committee assignments whatsoever, and I see absolutely no way for him to win re-election in either the 2010 primary or general election.

      So tell me what exactly we have to gain by not fighting this? My question here is serious and not intended to be snarky. I'm open to persuasion here if you can make the case that there's some long-term advantage to seating Burris. I'm just not seeing it now.

      •  The only way Burris wins the 2010 primary (0+ / 0-)

        Is if there's a huge fight over seating him.

        Furthermore, the Illinois State Legislature can call a special election at any time to replace the temporary appointment of Burris.

      •  He's going to be the most junior anyway... (0+ / 0-)

        what does it matter...he's already agreed to be a placeholder and not run.

        If he did run in 2010 he'd lose by WIDE margins.

        But slandering a pioneer with bad jokes about his future burial location is low and borderline racist.

        "It stinks." - Jay Sherman

        by angry liberaltarian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 08:12:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  oh, give me a break (0+ / 0-)

          I respect that there's a different view of this controversy, one that says that Burris should be seated because of the rule of law.

          But I'm not buyng of these "racist"/"boderline racist" assertions. Please show me a single shred of evidence that Barbinmd or other Kossacks who take a position different from yours are either (a) objecting to Burris based on his skin color, or (b) holding Burris to a different standard than they would a white appointee.  The fact of the matter is that Blago could have appointed the ghost of Abraham Lincoln or Adlai Stevenson to the seat, and people would still be treating them the same way.

          •  i understand the taint (0+ / 0-)

            but the mausoleum crack is the borderline racist crap...burris is a pioneer.  there's no minorities in the senate with the departure of obama and salazar.  the political calculus on the part of blago is admirable in it's own right, slimeball or no.

            blago is gov.
            gov has power of appointment.
            has not been convicted or impeached.
            appointment stands.

            cracks about burris's ego...too much.  yay for danny davis for doing the right thing.  

            yay for burris for giving the people of IL a senator for two years.  he'll be so scrutinized there's no way he'll do anything corrupt.

            "It stinks." - Jay Sherman

            by angry liberaltarian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:31:05 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Burris is the one who chose (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anthony Segredo, pine, kerflooey

      to join up with Team Blago, accept his appointment, stand by his side, play the race card. He's a pioneer of idiocy.

  •  Racism works both ways (4+ / 0-)

    If we on the left can condemn racist statements from wingnuts, then it becomes critical to acknowledge it from those on the left and minorities, too.  Bobby Rush's comments are racist and his bringing up lynching reprehensible.  Any CBC members who support this pick, need to ask themselves what their reaction would have been had Blago nominated a white man.

    Yes, it is a sad commentary that there are currently no black senators.  I hope that gets fixed now and perhaps in 2010, too.  However supporting the nomination of Mr. Burris is wrong, a violation of principle, and, at times, racist, under present circumstances.

  •  All his kids are either Roland or Rolanda... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paul Hogarth, kerflooey

    Kinda like George Foreman, except as a multiple world champ, Foreman has reason to be conceited.

    "Truth, justice and the American way."

    by Sourmash on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:39:02 PM PST

    •  Are you kidding me??? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tcandew

      Are you going to condemn how some cultures name their children?  SERIOUSLY?  This is not that uncommon.  I went to school with a family and all of the boys (4 of them) were Juan.  The one girl Juanita.  In the heart of white suburbia in the mid 80's.  What is your problem?

  •  Burris and Blago (0+ / 0-)

    I guess the phrase "race card" has come to have a one-way meaning. Does the fact that the Senate has no African American members suggest that somewhere, somehow a "race card" is being played--though not in the same fashion as Rush employs. I guess the election of a talented candidate like Obama absolves the nation, and the Left of any attention to the lingering stench of inequality. Do the folks piling on Burris suggest that he is any less able than most of the other 99 white men and women in the Senate. The Blago's have been operating for centuries.

    •  Oh bullshit. They are playing the race card (0+ / 0-)

      in the most obvious of ways. If there were 50 AA's in the senate, it'd be just as bad. This issue has nothing to do with race or the fact that there aren't AA's in the senate.

  •  The Use Of Burial Plots Is Wrong, Wrong, Wrong (7+ / 0-)

    The man bought a nice final resting place for him and his wife. Walk through any big cemetery and you'll see some larger designs. That doesn't mean those people were bad.

    The use of a burial plot,not a building, but a multiperson plot, is appalling and not worthy of being on the front page.

    Those who value a right to privacy should also be appalled by the invasion of politics into a matter where it has no place.

    The fringe Right does these kind of things, not progressives. This entire matter is just another example of the loss of focus by Democrats before we take over to govern.

    Focus people, this is not an issue.

    "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

    by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:53:14 PM PST

    •  Disagree. (0+ / 0-)

      I think it offers a glimpse into what kind of man he is. His ostentatious monument does not seem to be a cry for privacy, in fact it's a cry for attention, even after death.

      •  Being a politician = "a cry for attention"... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99, kaolin

        ...let's not be so selective in attacking this one apparently decent and honest politician. Nothing wrong with him before yesterday. Suddenly, he's as evil as a bigoted RW GOP'er. Jeez.

        39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

        by Larry Bailey on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:01:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "apparently decent and honest"? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Anthony Segredo

          What honorable man would accept this appointment from this governor? And then argue that his race should shut the critics of the move up? This is one bad guy, who only looks good when compared with Blagojevich.

          •  Bad in what respects? That he took a Senate... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sebastianguy99, kaolin

            ...appointment from someone that virtually everyone operating in the grime of Chicago Democratic politics (including PE Obama) has had a relationship with for years?

            Or do you have something else specific to lay on Burris?  BTW, I was saying "apparently" because my reading so far shows nothing the guy has ever done wrong and yet, not wanting to over-estimate Illinois politicians, I'll hedge until proven otherwise.

            39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

            by Larry Bailey on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:14:55 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Everyone HAD a relationship w/Blago. (0+ / 0-)

              HAD. Before he blew up. Burris stands alone in aligning himself with Blago AFTER his crimes.

              •  You can bet some if not all STILL have... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kaolin

                ...a relationship with him -- but NOT via telephone or email (right now). The buried bones must remain buried. Please don't tell me you believe all of the corruption in Illinois politics is manifested in a single politician, just because he is the one Fitz has decided to focus the public eye on.

                39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

                by Larry Bailey on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:47:59 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  So He Should Turn Down A Tremendous Opp... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Larry Bailey

            ...so as not to offend some people's self-righteousness?

            "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

            by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:25:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  And, it may be some of the Burn The Witch... (0+ / 0-)

              ...mentality that overwhelms us here at DKos occasionally -- when someone somewhere does something that we collectively feel goes against something or someone we've "currently" staked a lot of hope in.

              39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

              by Larry Bailey on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 04:03:51 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Then Your Standard Is An Affront To Descent Peopl (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tcandew, kaolin

        The matter of selecting plots is a deeply personal one. But this use of a burial site tombstone as a political hammer does not pass the smell test.

        And trying to sell this judgment by tombstone as a character issue is going to piss many people off, including independents.

        It's like the looney Right wants to make life and death medical decisions for you, meanwhile the looney Left wants to say what your tombstone looks like after you do die is a sign of how you lived your life.

        I can just imagine the howling that would go on here if some Obama appointment came up for confirmation hearings and a Republican tried to condemn her/him for what a burial plot purchase legally.

        This stinks!

        "Most people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so."

        by sebastianguy99 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 04:40:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  About time someone said that... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sebastianguy99, kaolin

      ...all this rush to demonize a good Democrat (Burris) is unseemly overall, but particularly given the use of a personal matter. Not something to be proud of.

      39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

      by Larry Bailey on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:58:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Blogo: Find me a black Rep! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc2, Anthony Segredo

    Roland Burris destroyed his own political career by letting Blogo use him as a tool. Sure, eventually Obama's seat may be filled by a black politician, but it won't be anybody appointed by wiseguy Blogo.

    There sure is such a thing as wanting it too much.

    Nothing's more common than wasted potential.

    by jimbo92107 on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:13:31 PM PST

  •  You know Spitzer could have appointed the next (0+ / 0-)

    Senator from the great state of New York.  Instead we have Patterson.  And how is that process going now that the bloom is off the ingenue?

  •  That's a grave crypt, not a monument (5+ / 0-)

    Let's not be ridiculous here. Also- by the looks of the crypt, it could very well be a family crypt. There is nothing unusual about this. Certainly a FAR CRY from 'erecting a monument to honor himself'

  •  There really is a constitutional issue here . . . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eloise

    No matter how icky some of the folks involved.
     First, Blago IS still the governor, and he will be until he is constitutionally removed by the legislature.
     Second, the people of Illinois are entitled to representation during what will be an important legislative session.
     My prediction, and I am taking bets,  is

    The Senate will refuse to seat Burris;

    Burris will sue ;

    Lower courts will seat Burris and tell the Senate they must accept him WHICH

     is exactly what the Washington Dems want -- they then have a Dem vote that they may need without dirty hands.

     And the US Supremes will either let the lower court ruling stand or take up the issue and make that decision for themselves.

     There was an interesting discussion of this on NPR (ATC) yesterday which I will try to link to in a minute.

    •  Agreed. (0+ / 0-)

      The best thing is for the Dems to fight this appointment and lose.  My only problem with that is that it drags the process out and keeps the story alive (at least on cable news).  

      Hopefully more serious issues will drown out this story after Jan 20 when the new government starts tackling real problems.

  •  Here's what NPR has posted . . (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eloise

      This is not exactly what I heard yesterday when they had a former governor of Illinois (an unindicted one) commenting but it is similar

    here is one issue on which Maltz and most other experts appear to agree: A 1969 Supreme Court decision renders it almost impossible for the Senate to outright deny Burris entrée to its august chamber.

    The case involved the House's refusal to seat New York's Adam Clayton Powell Jr. on issues of ethics, The high court held that the House could not deny a seat to a duly-elected congressman who met constitutional age, citizenship and residency requirements for the office. The House could have seated Powell, the court found, and then expelled him with a two-thirds majority vote. But it couldn't mess with the votes of the people.

    "Under Powell v. McCormack, the Senate must seat Burris," says Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California-Irvine's law school. "It can only refuse to seat him if they were to determine that he is not 30 years old or has not been a citizen for nine years or is not a resident of Illinois."

    Says Maltz: "Burris was duly appointed — maybe by someone many consider a real scum. But there's no 'real scum' exception."

    The story is here.

    •  But couldn't an argument be (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kaolin

      made for Powell not being the controlling case here since Burris is not an elected official, but appointed, and the Senate has the right to judge the qualifications, election, and returns of its members, maybe they don't want someone appointed by a potential felon to be part of their club. Not wholly unreasonable, they're not blocking Burris, just Blago's attempts to appoint someone at all.

  •  Illinois people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Anthony Segredo

    my heart goes out to the people in Illinois as they watch their political system collapse.  

    It's even more awe-inspiring to know where Obama came from politically.  How he could flourish with such egomaniacs is amazing.  

    Unsustainable is unsustainable, which means it will eventually end.

    by Must Have Been The Roses on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:52:36 PM PST

  •  I may not be major but I will certainly be (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    agnostic

    outcrying.

    I think people are delusional if they think that
    black people in general (or in Illinois specifically)
    are just going to write this off just-because-Barack-Obama-told-them-to.
    There is ONLY ONE prior case of the Senate considering that an appointment process might have been flawed, and it came out of the untimely confluence of two "passings" -- the former, in April, of the 17th amendment, and the latter, in August, of Alabama Sen. Joseph Johnston.
    The Alabama legislature had not managed, over the
    summer, to update the statute enabling the governor to appoint a replacement Senator.  As a result, the existing language said the replacement would serve until the legislature convened to elect the next Senator.   Many Alabamans (and many US Senators) argued that Alabama's enabling statute had been obsoleted by the ratification of the amendment and that the Governor therefore had NO power to appoint ANYone to the Senate UNTIL AFTER a new law, worded to fit under the direct-election framework, had been enacted in Alabama.  And the Senate did in fact rule 34-30, to that effect, later.
    I have no idea why only 64 instead of 96 Senators
    voted (Arizona and New Mexico were admitted in 1912).  I think part of their objection may also have been that Alabama itself had not ratified the 17th amendment, and they viewed the Governor's trying to use the old law as an attack on the change.

    But there is 1 sense in which Burris might be more harmed by precedent than helped by it:
    THE ONLY Senator EVER actually REFUSED A SEAT by the Senate, BECAUSE the campaign via which he got it was too corrupt?
    Frank L. Smith, of Illinois , in 1926.

    The road to hell has not YET been paved with Republicans, but it SHOULD be -- Corrected BumperSticker

    by ge0rge on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:57:00 PM PST

  •  as funny (haha) as this mess is, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kaolin, PalGirl2008

    (compared to the funny smell of a teenage boys' locker room) there are side effects, and they ain't purty.

    http://features.csmonitor.com/...

    Government has come to a complete stop. or at least the political end of it.

    But Bloggo the Ass has already cost Illinois no less than a Billion in cold federal cash, that would have been paid to Illinois in the form of matching funds. Because of his mental illness, quirks, quarks, or whatever makes him quack up, Bloggo managed to lose that money for our state.

    Bloggo, for those who have not followed his career pulled some real doozies this year. Just as the negotiations for the latest budget ground to a halt, Bloggo called two emergency sessions in a row, and as the last one started up (on a long weekend) he left Springpatch to go see a ball game.

    If you ever wanted to see a comic strip-styled image of steam coming out of the house or the state senate's collective ears, that would be the time for it.

    Then, during the same negotiations, just as a deal was close, (with even the minimal GOP remnants coming on board) Bloggo screwed everything up by coming up with a free senior citizen ride plan for all CTA and RTA users. Unfunded, by the way, even though it was a good idea. Well, it trashed all the numbers and hard work already done, and basically, they had to start from scratch.

    Bloggo very well might be insane. Certainly his ego is larger than the diameter of Jupiter's orbit.

    From that perspective, Bloggo's choice of Burris is par for the course, a not bad idea coming out of left field at the weirdest time, and under the strangest circumstances. He has managed to ruin Illinois, Burris' future (such as it was) and provides endless fodder for humorists and satyrists (sp?) everywhere.

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:57:52 PM PST

  •  Excellent discussion over at Ta Nehisi's Coates' (0+ / 0-)

    blog on Atlantic.com. Here's the link

    Lots of younger African Americans (including Coates) denouncing the assumptions behind Rush's racializing of Burris' nomination.  It notes that Rush's concern about AA political representation didn't stop him from supporting a white candidate against Obama twice, first in the 2004 Senatorial primary, and later in supporting Clinton in the presidential primaries.

    I think Obama, as the representative of a new understanding of race and politics, had a responsibility to speak out against this shit.  But others express this better than I do if you read some of the comments on the linked thread.

    "I may have fucked my life up flatter than hammered shit, but I stand here before you today beholden to no human cocksucker."

    by John R on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:03:42 PM PST

  •  Are we a nation of laws or not? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sebastianguy99, Inland

    Blago has the authority to appoint.

    Burris is qualified to accept the appointment.

    That's the law.

    Do we operate under the rule of law or not? Do we only operate under law when we agree with it?

    This is all melodrama.

    Political Correctness Police: may your puckered, disapproving lips forever cover your donuts.

    by FeloniousMonk on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:14:09 PM PST

    •  I feel I must remark (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anthony Segredo

      again: If John Paul Stevens keeled over tomorrow and Bush appointed a winger to the SCOTUS would you defend that choice on the grounds that it was perfectly legal? Would you argue that the senate must confirm the appointment because he is the POTUS and has the authority to make appointments?

      I think that time lines built into politics need to be somewhat flexible, by saying that an executive has an absolute right to appoint anyone at every opportunity is a page out of Nixon's playbook.

      •  Is there an advise and consent clause (0+ / 0-)

        with regards to Senate appointments made by governors? IIRC there is one for judicial appointments. Though I could be wrong about that and there may not be a confirmation process.

        Rub raw the sores of discontent - Saul Alinsky

        by JayGR on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:50:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The process for SCOTUS nominee's is (0+ / 0-)

        what it is. That's the law. The process for appointment of Senatorial replacements in Illinois is also what it is. I would recommend that we abide by the laws that apply. Why is that a difficult call?

        The "time lines built into politics" do not affect the fact that the Illinois governor has the right to appoint Burris right now. He's done that and nothing in the law tells him he must take into account others desires that he delay.

        It's done. It's legal. It's over with. Everything else is drama.

        Political Correctness Police: may your puckered, disapproving lips forever cover your donuts.

        by FeloniousMonk on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 07:08:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I was with you until you wrote "Race Card". (0+ / 0-)

    I hate that expression! BIGOTS use it when Black Folk act like White Folk (you know, the whole sense-of-entitlement thing?)!

    •  Clarify. The diarist is a bigot because (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Anthony Segredo

      he said the words "race card" or because you think it is bigoted to use the term in this particular case? Your comment almost sounds as if you think only bigots use the expression race card (actually, you say that)!

  •  Burris and B. Bush has drank a Gallon each of (0+ / 0-)

    Blagojevich,s kool-aid.I was willing to give Burris a chance but his flip-flop on Blago killed that.

  •  Danny Davis and integrity? (0+ / 0-)

    LOL.  Too much discomfort on my part and my family.  Oh yeah, that's a good reason.  And you're right, Danny, it would have been hard to "generate the trust level people would have to have in me."  

    If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

    by jhannon on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:31:21 PM PST

  •  Only Dems are stupid enough to turn down a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TheCrank, sebastianguy99

    solid Dem vote and attack a solid Dem. How we ever win I'll never know.

    Rub raw the sores of discontent - Saul Alinsky

    by JayGR on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:46:43 PM PST

    •  We're more principaled. Standing up to (0+ / 0-)

      corruption is something all good americans should do, democrat or republican.

      •  It's only principled if Burris did something (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kaolin

        wrong and there is no evidence of that so I'm not sure why he has anything to do with "corruption".

        It's GOP guilt-by-association (or lack of association in this instance) except the GOP would never be stupid enough to lose a vote they need in such a manner.

        Rub raw the sores of discontent - Saul Alinsky

        by JayGR on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:18:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hey, the monument just shows he plans ahead (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Anthony Segredo

    It takes a lot of foresight to print your resume on your own tomb! We need that kind of forethought in the Senate.

    I am vaguely remembering some wit saying you had better lie about yourself when writing your own autobiography because everybody else will get the chance to lie about you when you're dead.

    I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a democrat. -- Will Rogers

    by TheCrank on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:48:21 PM PST

  •  From what I just read on Huffpo (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    doc2, Anthony Segredo
    Buris is a far worst Bastard than Blago.Burris left an innocent man on Death Row so he might be Governor of Ill.he didn't want to be seen as soft on crime.The Maggot Burris is slime.
  •  Jesse White... (0+ / 0-)

    the Illinois Secretary of State, will not sign for Burris, so the Senate should be able to keep him out of the seat.

  •  Blago, Burris and the Senate (0+ / 0-)

    I believe the Senate should seat Burris.  Blago, right now, is not convicted of anything, has not been impeached, and still the elected Governor of Illinois.  One of his constitutional duties is to appoint a senator in the event the state has a vacancy. He has done so.  We may view him as tainted. We may not like what he's done or is said to have done, but he has not just the right, but the duty to appoint a senator.  Burris, however good or bad his reasons may be has accepted the appointment.  I see Blago's appointment as very analagous to the actions of a priest who  has fallen but who has not yet been defrocked.  As disreputable as he and his actions may be, the sacraments the priest confers are still valid.  I like the example of Graham Greene's Whiskey Priest, but the more contemporary situation of a pedophile priest performing communions, baptisms or marriages also works.  In the eyes of the church (and not just the Catholic church), those absolutions, baptisms and marriages do not become invalid just because a terrible person performed them.  I know this is NOT a legal argument, but Blago is still legally the Governor of Illinois. If he vetoes a bill, the veto must still be overridden. If he signs a bill, it still becomes law.  Burris, for all of his self-satisfaction and self-promotion, has not been implicated in any wrongdoing, is qualified, has been elected to statewide office in the past, and should be seated as the recipient of a legal appointment by a still sitting governor.

    Whether we like it or not.

    Zirc

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site