People comparing not seating Burris to George Wallace blocking the admission of an AA girl

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

into local school...

ARE YOU SERIOUS???? what an offensive comparison.

Does this mean Barack Obama is like George Wallace too because Obama does not believe he should be seated. Is he also basically "lynching" Burris, as Bobby Rush said the people who don't want Burris seated are doing?

[GarbagemanLB]

1. It's pathetic. Some people don't understand the importance of having integrity in the

political process.

The Senators clearly have stated the problem lies with who is making the appointment, not the person taking the appointment. They would block ANYONE appointed by Blago regardless of skin color.

People making this into a race issue are doing an immense disservice to the black community.

[ellacott]

2. Who's saying that?

That's an offensive comparison to me also.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. Did anyone make that comparison on merit, rather than appearance?

I've seen people talking about the appearance, and they're right. It has bad echoees.

Of course the two are not at all comparable in the equities of the situation.

[amandabeech]

6. That's right. The picture itself might be just too close and will be compared.

It is the appearance, not the reality, that will make a lot of older people, like me, a little nauseated.

I'm someone who thinks that the better course would have been to bluster about Blago, and then seat Burris until such time as any wrongdoing by either Burris or Blago with respect to Burris' apppointment.

I've actually talked to some friends who are not political junkies, and they are less sympathetic to the Senate Dem position when they learn that Burris is clean and that there is no indication that he bought the seat from Blago. They don't see what the big deal is.

The bigger deal for them is to get the economy and the country moving again. Blago for them is just another stupid corrupt politician from Illinois. No surprise there.

[LostinVA]

16. The Dems really don't need a "photo op" like that

I understand Blago is being a jerk, but he has a LEGAL right to seat whom he wants to. I do understand the Senate Leadership can determine that someone is not fit for a seat, although I think that this sets a bad precedent.

Look, Blago is scummy, and he should have thrown the appointment to the IL legislature, and I think he is enjoying being a HUGE poo stirrer, but I really don't want to see a photo of a black politician being barred from the Senate floor by Caps or Marshals-- because of the Dem Leadership. It isn't the same, but the LOOK will be the same. Ugh.

I think all sides could be handling this better.

[amandabeech]

35. The Illinois legislature has refused to pass legislation providing for a

special election.

The legislature is counting on impeaching and convicting Blago by Lincoln's Birthday.

After that, the Lt. Governor would appoint someone else.

If Burris' mandamus action against the Sec. of State has been successful by then, I expect there to be an action in Illinois courts for a declaratory judgment as to who is the appointee.

However, the U.S. Senate is likely to declare that they have the right to determine who the appointee is without regard to what the Illinois Supreme Court says.

They'll seat the Lt. Governor's appointee, no matter what.

Burris will then sue in U.S. courts.

I simply would not want to speculate on the outcome of that suit.

As I have written many times, I think the best course of action for Obama and Reid would have been to issue a statement excoriating Blago as the scum he is, but leaving a little wiggle room in the event that Blago comes up with a clean candidate concerning whom there is no allegation of quid pro quo.

The Dems might need that extra vote in the next month or two.

And for heavens sake, they shouldn't seat Franken while litigation is still going on in Minnesota.

[LostinVA]

41. Yup, there IS a real reason not to seat Franken

Your post was very well-written and informative -- I didn't know about some of what's happening in IL. Thanks!

[amandabeech]

42. You're very welcome.

I'm a lawyer who doesn't go back to work until Monday, and I think that Illinois politics is a great spectator sport. It may tide me over until the U.S. Figure Skating Championships comes around!

[LostinVA]

43. I grew up in NJ and am living here again

Politics are also a spectator sport here!

btw -- my boss has tickets to the Championships!

[amandabeech]

46. I went once, and it was a blast!

I hope that it comes around my way again.

Your boss is about to "OD" in the best way possible--watching too much figure skating!

[LostinVA]

49. She goes every single year!

[amandabeech]

50. Now that's a fan! n/t

[BlooInBloo]

4. No, he's like Wallace because he hates gay people...

I'll give you 10 minutes to get your memos straight. :P

[John Q. Citizen]

5. Got a link to where Obama says Burris shouldn't be seated? Thanks

[Uzybone]

7. there are many

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/31/us/31illinois.html


"Mr. Obama, on vacation in Hawaii and who, aides said, was surprised by the news of the appointment, issued a statement condemning the move.

“Roland Burris is a good man and a fine public servant, but the Senate Democrats made it clear weeks ago that they cannot accept an appointment made by a governor who is accused of selling this very Senate seat,” Mr. Obama said. “I agree with their decision, and it is extremely disappointing that Governor Blagojevich has chosen to ignore it.”"

[backscatter712]

56. Obama said the right thing there.

It's not about Burris (though I think Burris is an assclown and there's plenty of reasons to reject him, such as his pushing to execute an innocent man...)

It's about Blago. Blago clearly picked Burris for the sole purpose of creating a distraction from his upcoming corruption charges. That right there makes any pick Blago makes unsuitable for the Senate. Because of his corruption charges, any decision that Blago makes, including his decision of who will fill Obama's old seat in the Senate, is called into question.

That's why the entire Democratic Senate is moving to block Burris from being seated, and why the Illinois legislature is moving to impeach. After Blago's removed from office, his successor can pick someone and the Senate will be more than happy to seat him without a huge fuss.

[terisan]

8. The Senate leadership has role confusion. They are interfering in a democratic process.

The governor was elected by the people. He has the legal right and responsibility to appoint someone to fill a vacancy. Obama is free to express his opinion but it is merely his opinion as a citizen. He has no legal role in this matter.

There is no evidence that the appointment of Burris is corrupt. There is no evidence that Burris is unqualified.

If the people who make the laws and the people who administer laws concentrate on following the law maybe someday we will have a true democracy or democratic republic.

[redstate_democrat]

17. Well said.

[mkultra]

25. There is strong evidence to suggest that blago has lost the credibility to lead

this is what makes his impeachment possible and what makes his appointment meaningless.

[terisan]

39. The appointment is legal; we operate under the rule of law unless our reps undermine the rule of law

and if so, they must be held accountable.

[mkultra]

57. and the rule of law stands againts you and your buddy blago

congress has the right to choose not to seat someone. that is the rule of the law so good luck with getting the bullshit through.

Congress can legaly choose to judge the appointment corrupt and thereby refuse.

[IsItJustMe]

44. That's the way I see it.

[Critters2]

9. On one hand, we have Dems threatening not to seat an African American

duly appointed to serve in the US Senate by a sitting governor; an African American who has worked his way up from local office through statewide office before this appointment.

On the other hand, we have Dems cheering the naming of a wealthy white woman who has never held public office, interviews badly, but has an important surname and the "right" pedigree.

No further comment needed.

[ellacott]

10. But they aren't refusing to seat him because he is Black

Big difference between this and what George Wallace did. No comparison.

[Critters2]

11. You mean they're not saying they are. Either way, he's legally appointed.

The ol' boys' club needs to open its doors to this man.

[ellacott]

12. I said what I meant

Burris should realize he's being used. This is not about Burris. This is about a Dem being able to retain the seat. Burris is not the only black person who is qualified for the position. The other qualified AA withdrew because he had the common sense to know that their would be cloud over whoever Blago appointed.

This is not about race.

[Critters2]

13. He's constitutionally qualfied (I keep hearing that's why Caroline should inherit her seat)

and named by an elected governor. There's no reason not to seat him. Much as it makes the white boys uncomfortable.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

14. Why do you keep bringing up race? Do you believe Obama is being racist when he says

Burris shouldn't be seated?

I don't agree with Caroline being appointed either, but the Gov. Patterson isn't about to be impeached and defiantly not stepping down. Then I think most people would have a problem with him naming someone..

[ellacott]

15. You're determined to make this about race

This isn't about him being qualified. Most of the population of IL are qualified. Why can't he realize that this is just messy? Why couldn't he wait to see if Blago was going to be impeached? The other AA had enough sense not to be a part of this mess.

[Critters2]

19. Blago is the duly elected governor of this state. He has the right to name

a Senator. He's named one. Now he should be seated.

[ellacott]

21. If that's your rationale....

then you are correct.

If you try to say it has anything to do with Burris' race that's where I disgree.

[Critters2]

23. Burris is African American. He gets threatened with being physically blocked from entering.

Stevens is white, and convicted of corruption. He gets a long standing O.


Speaks volumes.

[ellacott]

26. Jefferson was black and had 90K of cash in his freezer

He was allowed to stay until his constituents voted him out.

They would try to block a white person if that's who Blago appointed. You know this.

[Critters2]

29. I don't know it. nt

[ellacott]

32. You really should

THAT speaks volumes.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

22. So why exactly did you bring up race? If it's about race, I guess Obama is a racist too?

[Critters2]

24. Obama isn't threatening to block Burris. Reid is. nt

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

27. Obama agrees with it. So I guess Obama agrees with trying to keep black people down.

[Critters2]

31. Obama hasn't made any statements about physically barring Burris from taking his seat.

Nice try, though.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

33. What difference does it make? He agrees with the Senate Dems that Burris should not be seated.

If he disagreed with what they're doing he would've said something about it.

that Obama...always trying to keep a black man down.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. Damn right. Reid is an idiot.

[LostinVA]

18. You just think that because of whom you supported in the primaries

I'M JOKING!!!

I've been told that several times because I disagree with the appointment of Caroline Kennedy for the same reasons you do. Electing her is a totally different thing -- the people of New York have a right to elect whomever they wish. Tyhat's why I don't even bother anymore. But,I agree with you.

[Critters2]

20. I supported Edwards in the primaries.

Which has it own set of problems.


If you and I agree, it's clear that those who disagree are in the wrong. They'll just have to learn that the hard way.

And we can say "we told you so"! :hi:

[LostinVA]

28. I know you did

It just amuses me that I keep on being told it's because I voted for Senator Clinton. I was just told this AGAIN in another thread.

I also don't agree with RFK, Jr. getting the seat -- and who did HE support??? CLINTON.

I do think Caroline Kennedy would do an okay job, but some have already said she sholuld run for President in eight years. JEEBUS!!!!!!!

[Critters2]

30. I read that, too! Hell, let's do away with elections. They're such a PITA.

Coronations are so much cooler!!

[LostinVA]

34. I know "God Save the Queen"

[Critters2]

36. Her Majesty, Caroline I.

My curtsyin' skills are a little rusty! I'll have to practice!

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. You have been quoted:

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/16311

[customerserviceguy]

37. The racists Wallace believed he was representing

considered the Federal court decisions that mandated integration to be as tainted and illegitimate as people here consider the Blago appointment of Burris. That didn't make them right.

All I know is that when I go check on what the freeptards think about this, they're giddy with glee. They know it will divide the Democratic Party to see this play out in the media.

Seat Burris, and work for a better nominee in 2010. I might have to settle for Caroline Kennedy until other New Yorkers have a chance to be approved by the voters at the same time.

[democrattotheend]

38. If he's not seated, it has absolutely nothing to do with race

I don't see how anyone can credibly claim that he's being denied a seat because he's black, especially when the seat he'd be taking was vacated by a black man who just got a big promotion.

[AZ Criminal JD]

45. Yes, vacated by a black man who was elected so they couldn't stop him.

With one that is appointed, even thought he is very qualified, and it is a completely legal appointment, they think they can stop him. Now when Caroline, a white woman with no qualifications gets appointed they will literally bow to her like royalty.

[democrattotheend]

48. Do you honestly think race is the issue?

Come on...even my non-political Dad could see right through Blago's lame attempt to inject race into this. Senate Democrats had said they would not seat anyone Blago appointed before they knew who he would appoint or what race the person would be. Blago picked Burris in part with the hope that it could make it about race but I can't imagine anyone honestly believes that race is the reason Senate Democrats won't seat Burris. And it has nothing to do with whether they are qualified or not...both Burris and Caroline Kennedy are constitutionally qualified, which is all that matters in terms of the formality of seating a senator. The issue with Burris is the process by which he was selected, and the fact that the governor who appointed him is under federal investigation for actions involving the filling of that seat. If Burris were white they wouldn't seat him either...race is not the issue here.

[AZ Criminal JD]

51. Race is the only issue here

Reid has said no African-Americans need apply. http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1360191,harry-reid-blagojevich-jesse-jackson-010209.article He was willing to accept a white woman who has never won an election. Burris is just the latest African-American to be rejected by Reid. He has let his church teachings of racist Mormanism to bubble to the surface.

[NashVegas]

40. Although I Believe Burris Has a Right to Be Seated, I Think the "Racism" Campaign Is Beyond

the pale.

[AngryAmish]

52. The fact that Reid is a bigot does not help

[ShortnFiery]

54. Reid's wife is STILL lobbying because hubby made sure she didn't have to be under the NEW rules

for ethical conduct. :puke: Reid and his entire family are infamous in Nevada for both nepotism and cronyism. :thumbsdown:

[kiva]

55. Could you provide some details about this?

I've not heard this particular accusation against Reid--what has he said/done?

[ShortnFiery]

53. Don't agree with the analogy, but Burris has been LEGALLY APPOINTED and the nay-sayers are WRONG.