Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Blagojevich makes audacious move
It may be one of the most audacious political moves of the year: Scandal-ridden Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich defied his party today and appointed former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris to replace President-elect Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate. The announcement stunned Senate Democrats, who released a statement saying they will not seat anyone appointed by Blagojevich.
It is truly regrettable that despite warning from all 50 Democratic senators and public officials throughout Illinois, Gov. Blagojevich would take the imprudent step of appointing someone to the United States Senate who would serve under a shadow and be plagued by questions of impropriety. We say this without prejudice toward Roland Burris’s ability, and we respect his years of public service. But this is not about Mr. Burris; it is about the integrity of a governor accused of attempting to sell this United States Senate seat. Under these circumstances, anyone appointed by Gov. Blagojevich cannot be an effective representative of the people of Illinois and, as we have said, will not be seated by the Democratic Caucus.
back to top24 Comments to “Blagojevich makes audacious move”
Good for the Illinois Democratic party–I’m surprised I’m typing this. I’m glad someone is being an adult in this mess.
Report comment to moderator
Selective morality by Harry Reid and his cronies. Want to bet the US Democrat Senate will seat the clown Al Franken if he steals the vote in Minnesota?
Report comment to moderator
I agree with Michelle as far as it goes, but the man has not been found guilty of anything, nor has he been impeached. It would be helpful to hear the tapes to discover who, what, when, where and how. There is a part of me that wonders who else is involved and why the Dems are so unwilling to let this all come out. Blago is ineffective, he sounds guilty, but is he? Or more to the point, is he the only one who is guilty? Instead of get rid of him, let’s get him to trial and read it all into the record.
Report comment to moderator
Smooth move. Those corrupt Chicago politicians know how to work it.
Report comment to moderator
The cheek of this guy. How can he sit there and deny any wrongdoing? What the heck was he selling in those tapes? His CAR? Does he actually think he can beat this wrap?
Report comment to moderator
At least the guy he picked has two things in his favor: he is not from Chicago (so he is not part of the “machine”) and he is not tainted by the Blago scandal. (He was also an opponent in the 2006 Democratic gubernatorial primary.)
Report comment to moderator
Well, this is Chicago style politics. It was a surprise move, but it really shouldn’t be–Chicago politicians do what they want to do until someone stops them.
I am surprised and pleased that the Democrats said no–generally Democrats don’t stand in the way of one of their own who proves corrupt. This suggests to me that his corruption is unusually deep and we may not know everything yet.
Report comment to moderator
Burris will most likely turn this down. Any politician with half a brain would know you don’t want to be the Blagojevich appointee at this point.
Report comment to moderator
Not sure local laws allow, but it might be in the best interest of all involved to hold a special election amongst all who would desire the seat? Let the people decide directly, instead of indirectly through already elected leaders who have clouds hanging over their every move right now.
Report comment to moderator
Had it been me I think I would have selected a crony who was a lesbian parapalegic blind African American woman. Then anyone who opposed my appointing her would OBVIOUSLY be against lesbians, disabled folks, blacks and women.
I’d rather a statewide special election. But if that is not possible, the legislature should have final veto over any appointee to serve out the duration of the term. Surprised me that the Kennedys didnt put a bid on this Senate seat as well
Report comment to moderator
Boy howdy I tell you, our politicians down in Louisiana could take lessons from them Chicago boys.
Report comment to moderator
Ivan the Terribly Bad Thinker said: Selective morality by Harry Reid and his cronies. Want to bet the US Democrat Senate will seat the clown Al Franken if he steals the vote in Minnesota?
By “steal,” you of course mean, “get the majority of votes, even though by a very small margin.”
Report comment to moderator
Steve G (#12)
I think he means “using dubious counting methods that favor him.”
Report comment to moderator
It really doesn’t matter what Harry (the war is lost) Reid and his Dem friends want. They really can’t do anything about it. Why do I say that you ask? Well because of precedent already established by the Supreme Court. Ever hear of Adam Clayton Powell? Here’s a little about him.
“In January 1967, Adam Clayton Powell of New York was re-elected by the Harlem district he represented since 1942, despite allegations that he had misused official travel funds and made improper payments to his wife. The House, invoking a provision of the Constitution that says, “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members,” decided that Powell was unqualified and refused to seat him, declaring the seat vacant.
So, he sued.
The Supreme Court ruled — by a vote of 8 to 1 — that the House was wrong and that Powell must be seated. The court said in deciding whether to exclude, Congress is limited to considering only whether a member meets the very minimal requirements for office set out in the Constitution.”
So, as I said above, Reid can whine about not seating him, but in the end, whining is all he really can do. And I like that.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/12/30/1727681.aspx
Report comment to moderator
#14 – It’s a bit more complicated. They voted to exclude him; he won a special election but didn’t take his seat; he sued & won; he returned to the House but without seniority; he was defeated in the next primary by…………..Charlie Rangel, another paragon of virtue.
Report comment to moderator
The Constitution requires special elections to fill vacated Senate seats but calls for appointments to temporarily fill the seat until a special election can be held. Those appointments are to be made by those given the authority by the state. Blago is still that person for Illinois, regardless of indictment or scandal.
The Senate, under Article 1 of the Constitution, is given the privilege of establishing its own rules for seating members. The Powell case is regarded by some legal commentators for that reason as a dubious decidion, but it has been decided nonetheless.
Reid will have no choice when it comes to seating Burris, but as has been pointed out, Burris should not expect much coooperation or committee leadership consideration.
Report comment to moderator
Before the US Senate sees any appointee to the Obama’s seat, the Illinois Secretary of State has to certify the choice, and he has been quoted by the Associated Press as saying he will not certify Burris. (IMO, most likely if Burris were appointed by a “clean” governor, his certification would have been immediate.)
Report comment to moderator
And now, the USAtty Fitzgerald is seeking an extension of time for the indictment to April 7th, to which Blago’s attorney doesn’t seem to object. This makes sense from Fitzgerald’s point of view, but it makes me wonder why he had Blago arrested if he couldn’t produce an indictment on time. What was he trying to stop? If he had allowed the “sale” of the seat to go forward, who knows what would have happened or who would have done it? Ah, the what ifs of history.
Report comment to moderator
Smooth move. Those corrupt Chicago politicians know how to work it.
Stop gloating, XION.
. . . he couldn’t produce an indictment on time.
Hi, NJLAWYER! Do you think Fitz is dealing with some reluctant witnesses? Any politician who talked to Blago must be worried about being criticized for failure to report a suspected attempt at bribery. Even if a politician is innocent of criminal conversation, that politician may want to minimize the scope or import of such conversations. “Hey, I didn’t really know what the guy was talking about!” All the slick politicians apparently were holding Blago at arm’s length, but one wonders if they were too lazy or cowardly to blow the whistle, and are now embarrassed.
Report comment to moderator
Ken – The Constitution does NOT erquire special elections for Senate Seats. One option is a special election, the other is a Governor’s appointment. Illinois law provides for the Governor to appoint until the next regular election (which would be 2010, when the term expires anyway) with no special election being held.
Peter L – Burris ran in the 2002 Democratic Primary against Blago, not the 2006.
Burris is actually a good choice for the seat – a long time statewide official of (relatively) good reputation (by illinois standards, he is sterling), and comes from downstate Illinois rather than Chicago. He is also old enough (and has done sufficiaently poorly in Democratic primary elections) that he isn’t likely to plan on sticking around past 2010. The race factor also works in his favor.
The Secretary of State doesn’t have the power to refuse certification, and the Senate doesn’t appear to have any legal justification to refuse to seat him.
All in all, this was one of the better moves in Balgo’s whole 6 years as Governor.
Report comment to moderator
NJL – By puting the complaint when he did, Fitz stopped the sale of the seat before it could be closed. Fitz probably also guaranteed that Obama has to keep him as US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois (politically, the One really can’t can Fitz now, can he?).
The complaint also opened the floodgates of people to his office looking to deal and/or just looking to toss more data/evidence into the mix. Many people are having their interviews delayed due to all the people coming forward, swamping Fitz’ staff.
The curenly pending two counts of the complaint are likely to fail to generate any conviction. The potential several thousand counts in an indictment to come are likley to generate hundreds if not thousands of convictions. The extra time might be needed to process all of the material coming in.
Report comment to moderator
Good enough for government work.
Report comment to moderator
Despite coming from downstate Illinois, Burris seems like he belongs to the generation of grandiloquent Negroes like Adam Clayton Powell. I think he’s silly as he wants to be, accepting Blago’s nomination. He’s got loser all over his face. With his grooming and haberdashery expenses, he’ll be the Black Caucus’ answer to Sarah Palin.
Report comment to moderator
OK, one thing has really been bugging me…
Why are the Democrats acting so ethical all of a sudden about one of their own? Everyone knows that Democrats never apply ethics to themselves. The less ethical a Democrat is, the more he is praised and reelected by Democrats. A lengthy list of examples: Bill Clinton (an American hero), Barney Frank (savior of banking), Ted Kennedy (a friend of rogue nations) and Sandy Berger (caught with his pants down) more than illustrate the point.
The double standard is legion! Another example: Harry Reid called Blagojevich to tell him not to appoint any blacks to the seat and no one, not even the press even blinks. Who cares?
Finally … finally … tonight I heard a plausible explanation that starts to make sense:
The only ethical thing to do in Illinois was to call for a special election to fill the Senate seat. However, there was a chance that a Republican might win the seat.
Ahhhhaaaaaa! Nowwwwwww, it all starts to make sense! Machiavellian logic says it is better to cannibalize one of your own than to concede even a single inch to the Republicans. Here we see the dark ethics at play beautifully and all is right with the world once again in the underbelly of leftwing politics.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!