Jan 07 2009
Should Burris be seated? Should Coleman concede?
Yes.
Regardless of Blago being a greedy scumbag, he is still the elected governor of Illinois, and according to the law, he has the right to appoint the replacement for Obama’s senate seat.
Yes, under the stinky cloud of self interest he raised, he should have resigned and let another make the choice. Burris will always face a bit of cynicism due to the whole situation, but the law is clear: Blago has the authority.
Harry Reid and the Senate are meddling in state politics and they need to stand back and let the states conduct their business.
So far there is no indication that Burris bribed Blago for the appointment, so I do not see the point of Reid’s interference.
I do find it ironic that Reid will stoop to interfering in a clearly legal selection, and at the same time tell Coleman to not utilize his legal option to contest the recount in Minnesota.
While Reid did agree not to seat Franken (something that was a pointless gesture anyway, as Franken cannot be declared the winner and seated until the legal challenge is answered in court), the fact is that Reid has no business in either race, until the laws of the states in question have determined the respective winners.
Coleman has the legal right to challenge the recount, and he should utilize that, particularly with the number of clearly shady decisions that were made.
I will blog on that in depth tomorrow, when I have more time.
The Blago scandal is revealing in that it finally exposes what everyone has always assumed: Politics is the land of quid pro quo.
The Coleman Franken race is also revealing, in that it clearly shows how to steal an election.
In both cases, people should be outraged.
Trackposted to , Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, third world county, Political Byline, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, DragonLady’s World, Rosemary’s News and Ideas, The Pink Flamingo, and A Newt One/ American Truth Warriors, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
2 Responses to “Should Burris be seated? Should Coleman concede?”
Touchy questions. I hold that, in order to reduce its appearance of stupidity, the body of Dhimmicrappic seantors should NOT seat anyone who talks, as Burris did on the record, of going to Washington to deal with “converging parallel crises”. (And the high school, college and law schools he graduated from should have their collective knuckles rapped for passing such an illiterate boob on–parallels, by definition–canNOT converge.)
As to Coleman throwing in the towel, nope. Any rational analysis of the shenanigans Franken and his partisans have engaged in would mean he’d be conceding the race to a far, far bigger crook than he is. Why make the senatorial half of Congress any more crooked (and stupid) than it already is?
Oh, and the Constitutional/legal question? Who flippin’ cares any more? The Congress (and successive presidents) for the past 40-50 years haven’t given a fig for Constitutional limitations, nor have the laws on the books meant anything to them but rules to game. Anarcho-tyranny is the only rule of the day.
Hmmm, maybe it is coming up on time for a third American Revolution, since the first two were such successes for those who waged them (although Lincoln’s revolt against the Constitution has had a longer success).