Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

MA-Senate: Kirk is Frontrunner



Paul Kirk is the frontrunner to be the next Senator from Massachusetts.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) is leaning heavily toward naming Paul Kirk, a longtime aide to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, as the interim senator with an announcement in the next 24 hours likely, according to a source familiar with the machinations.

The final procedural hurdle to Patrick making that appointment was cleared Wednesday when the Massachusetts Legislature gave final approval to a bill that allows the governor to name an interim replacement for the U.S. Senate.

Patrick, who is recovering in the Berkshires from hip surgery, has said he would sign such a bill. He will still need to declare an emergency to appoint an interim senator immediately, filling in until a successor to Kennedy is chosen in a Jan. 19 special election.

The governor has said nothing in regards the pick, but most Massachusetts operatives expect him to make it formal Thursday.

Massachusetts lawmakers had already changed the replacement law in 2004, to take away appointment power from the governor for fear that Mitt Romney (R) would appoint a Republican to fill the vacancy if Sen. John Kerry (D) were elected president.

Kirk has emerged as the favorite over the last few days thanks to two major attributes: his closeness to the Kennedy family and a belief that his selection would do no harm to the political prospects of the governor or the state legislature.

Kennedy's widow, Victoria, as well as his two sons -- Rep. Patrick Kennedy and businessman Edward Kennedy Jr. -- had all made clear to Patrick that Kirk would be their preferred choice, according to the Boston Globe.

The Kirk selection is also regarded as a "safe" pick by many Massachusetts politicos who wondered whether the selection of former governor Michael Dukakis, the other name regularly mentioned as a caretaker, might overshadow the ongoing Senate special election and provide fodder for critics of the already embattled Patrick.

Kirk spent much of the 1970s working as a special assistant to Kennedy in his Senate office before doing a turn as chairman of the Democratic National Committee in the late 1980s. He is currently the chairman of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation board of directors.

His pick would also follow a blueprint used earlier this year in Delaware, when then-Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (D) selected Ted Kaufman, a longtime aide to Sen. Joe Biden, to fill the vacancy caused by Biden's election as vice president.

Kirk would be the fourth Democratic senator appointed to the chamber this year. Kaufman as well as Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) and Michael Bennet (Colo.) were appointed to fill vacancies earlier this year. Sen. Roland W. Burris (D-Ill.) was appointed last December and took office this year.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 23, 2009; 5:11 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Best State-Based Political Reporters
Next: Morning Fix: Leveraging Foreign Policy?

Comments

Advising people where I am going is hardly "beg[ging] for attention". Next canard?

Posted by: JakeD | September 29, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Do you ever ponder the fact that you're the only poster here who has to beg for attention?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 24, 2009 6:14 PM | Report abuse

If anyone else wants to discuss "life expectancy" / "infant mortality rate" comparisons or even the thread topic re: Senator-Designate Paul Kirk, I will be on the new thread.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Trying to evaluate the quality of a nation's health care by looking at life expectancy is like trying to estimate the birthrate by counting the number of flowers bought on Valentine's Day

==

Didn't think it was possible to out-stupid your earlier argument that evaluating the age of the earth requires allowing the possibility that supernatural forces could have altered the geological evidence but by dog you managed to out-stupid even THAT.

Life expectancy is about the best metric for the quality of a nation's corporeal health than just about anything.

Why don't you just stick to your widdle cause celebre over Obams's "African birth."

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 24, 2009 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Now, let's see if the Mass. Dems VIOLATE the law bypassing the 90-day requirement: The General Court has already rejected the emergency preamble; and, the Governor does not have the Constitutional authority to file with the Secretary of the Commonwealth a letter, in accordance with article 48, The referendum, II, declaring that the preservation of the public convenience requires that the law be immediately effective.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

New thread (thank God): Paul Kirk is the pick.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 11:25 AM | Report abuse

The life expectancy argument is so stupid even The New York Times hasn't made it -- except in news stories quoting others or in the ramblings of the Times' more gullible op-ed columnists. You mostly hear the life expectancy argument from Hollywood actresses and profoundly dumb Democrats, such as Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland.

Trying to evaluate the quality of a nation's health care by looking at life expectancy is like trying to estimate the birthrate by counting the number of flowers bought on Valentine's Day. (Or estimating future pregnancies of women with low self-esteem by adding up the total number of U.S. cities on a Bobby Brown tour and then multiplying by 2.)

There are lots of ways to get pregnant that don't require flowers or a backstage pass to a Bobby Brown concert, just as there are lots of ways to die that don't require setting foot inside a doctor's offfice.

For example, more Americans are murdered with guns than in any other industrialized country. (And it would be even more without concealed-carry laws! See John Lott, "More Guns, Less Crime.") According to a 1997 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the homicide rate with firearms alone was 16 times higher in the U.S. than in 25 other industrialized countries combined.

That will tend to reduce the U.S.'s "life expectancy" numbers, while telling us absolutely nothing about the country's medical care. (I promise that if you make it to a hospital alive, you are more likely to survive a gunshot wound in the U.S. than any place else in the world.)

It's comparing apples and oranges to talk about life expectancy as if it tracks with a country's health care system. What matters is the survival rate from the same starting line, to wit, the same medical condition. Not surprisingly, in the apples-to-apples comparisons, the U.S. medical system crushes the welfare-state countries.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Its Christmas morning early for Ted Kennedy Jr. Senator Ted kennedy Jr.

Posted by: dtyreex | September 24, 2009 7:35 AM | Report abuse

but the great thing about him is that he says, I changed my mind or, what I used to think was wrong.

==

*so* co-sign

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 24, 2009 1:04 AM | Report abuse

Ever hear West Bank settlers on the radio? They brag that they're breaking the law and their government lacks the resources to do anything about it. They're quite calm about it. They get what they want by obstructing and delaying.

Settlers will shoot Palestinians traveling from their homes to their farms, and when they have prevented them from farming for a few weeks, murdering anyone who tries with the full protection of their government, they then claim that the farmland is "abandoned" and therefore theirs to occupy, building more settlements.

And calling it "natural growth."

Israel should not get one thin dime of aid or support until this movement is illegal under their law and its leaders in prison or in the ground.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 24, 2009 12:14 AM | Report abuse

"You try posting as much as I do and spell every word correctly."

A decent respect for grammar and orthography both demand that you post less, then.

Posted by: nodebris | September 23, 2009 11:55 PM | Report abuse

Settlers!

That idea should have died hundreds of years ago. The year all land had some hominid thinking they owned it.

After that, it was all war.

How do the Israelis get away with the use of that symbol?

It is psychotic.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Israeli settlers *brag* about it

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Soon, this 9 billion global population crisis is going to align the interests of the many.

This whole "middle east" thing has killed too many good people. It is a distraction.

Countries like Israel and Syria and Iran, they are jealous of the peace elsewhere. But they need all the big players to pick them up by their collars and to look into their eyes and then drop them on the floor.

China, US, India and Russia can get together and stop the "clash of civilizations".

Killing kids is sick, but it plays well to Republicans, it plays well to cold warriors too and people who enjoy, in today's parlance, values wars.


Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 10:00 PM | Report abuse

"democrats are just stone cold crooks, plain and simple.."

Yeah, they should spend time cruising public restrooms, and hitting up on teenage boys.


Posted by: JohnDebba | September 23, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse


Chris Fox seems to Be well known around here.

Posted by: snowbama | September 23, 2009 9:55 PM | Report abuse

I see that the photo caption has been fixed.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 9:43 PM | Report abuse

... clutching both arms around their swollen middles, rocking back and forth and moaning, unaware of the puddle widening beneath them

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Oh no!
Russia and the United States realize (finally!) that their interests are aligned.

Ancient cold warriors are going to be clutching their chests and complaining of left arm numbness. They will be sweaty, but feel cold, sooo cold.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 9:34 PM | Report abuse

Who cares if they were full of vigor? They didn't have a single whole brain between them. McCain would have tried to fix the economy by cutting taxes and spending and Palin would probably have poisoned him to get her mitts on the nukes and bring about the Rapture.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm trying to comment but I don't understand the District of Maryland. Do they have voter card check there?

Posted by: area51az | September 23, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

GoldAndTanzanite:

Yeah, but on the average they two were full of vigor and had passable foreign policy experience -- admittedly one was seeing what she thought was Russia through a wide open space and the other the inside of a dungeon in Korea -- whatever!

Posted by: kblgca | September 23, 2009 8:33 PM | Report abuse

No we say 2 cents here as well. The below posts support my oringinal point I think, that both democrats and republicans are being incredibly partisan.

Anyway its half past one here, so interesting as this has been, I think I'm going to log.

Posted by: Christopher7 | September 23, 2009 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Before you condemn the citizenry as MORONS for electing Democrats you might just ponder what sort of electoral flotsam you guys have been offering up.

I mean, you're screaming about Kennedy and Kerry and you're loyal to the party whose last presidential candidate was a doddering and incompetent septuagenarian and whose VP candidate was a nasty vicious woman so shallow and stupid that she named being able to see another country through the mists as evidence of foreign policy expertise.

Get real.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:24 PM | Report abuse

The MORONS in this state of Massachusetts deserve what they get. Every time there is an election in this CORRUPT state you have nothing but a hoard of USELESS "HACKS" that are elected by the typical MORONIC citizens. All you have to do is look at undervalue, the useless POS we have for a governor. Now after changing the rules so that Romney could not name a replacement for kerry if he were elected, fat chance the people are not that STUPIDLY, now they want to turn it around, What a GROUP of friggen losers.

Posted by: otisplumber | September 23, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Christopher7:

Thank you for your two cents then (or is it schillings?). Speaking of which, can Kurt Schilling use this Dem hypocrisy to his advantage for the Special Election? DISCUSS ...

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

den put a widdle bip-bip onnat boo-boo baby an' 'top da weepy-weepy

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

justjoeking:

Of course it's all about healthcare reform right now, which is why the Dems changed the law yet again.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 8:17 PM | Report abuse

All I have to say is that in the Uk Healthcare is free (unless you count taxes, in which case the poor get a better deal because they pay less taxes, or if you choose a private hospital). If a certain area is lower than another area it will be because of the lifestyle of that area, nothing to do with the affluence. We could get into a discussion of health of the nation versus healthcare system but thats a whole different kettle of fish.

Nb: I'm not telling you to get a socialist system! :)

Posted by: Christopher7 | September 23, 2009 8:16 PM | Report abuse

As I have pointed out, before, the United States reports EVERY case of infant mortality (according to the strict WHO definition), and other developed countries do not:
"First, it's shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless. And some countries don't reliably register babies who die within the first 24 hours of birth. Thus, the United States is sure to report higher infant mortality rates."

"Most of the infants we lose today are born critically ill, and 40 percent die within the first day of life. The major causes are low birth weight and prematurity, and congenital malformations. As Nicholas Eberstadt, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, points out, Norway, which has one of the lowest infant mortality rates, shows no better infant survival than the United States when you factor in weight at birth."

U.S. News & World Report
http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/060924/2healy.htm

So, we have the best medical technology and personnel to keep premature babies alive, but some of those babies don't make it past a few days when they otherwise would have been still-born. As I said, these statistics CAN be easily manipulated.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats have the votes to end the supermajority rule altogether and the filibuster is on borrowed time. It's been too abused by the GOP, and as California is showing so depressingly well, minority veto is not a very good idea.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Interesting how the topic of Kennedy's successor turned to the health-care reform bill(s).

It shows that the reason Republicans don't want Kennedy replaced until January is that it keeps the Democrats from having a filibuster-proof majority until then. Because of the health-care bill. Pure and simple. Otherwise, noone outside of Mass. would care a bit about it.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Hmm, let's see.

Other countries have people living longer than we do, staying healthy later, with less diabetes and other preventables ... more of their children survive the womb, fewer of them exhibit developmental abnormalities.

To say that we have "the best healthcare" or "we live the healthiest lives" isn't even jingoism, it's simple a lie.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Reading your post carefully, I will note that you did not "tell us what to do." Please excuse the rudeness of some posters.

==

Not much you can do about their stupidity. Watch them scramble to excuse our infant mortality rate, between screams about how immoral abortion is.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Oh, no, life expectancy and especially "infant mortality rates" are EXACTLY the type of statistics which can be easily manipulated. The United States has the BEST AND MOST ADVANCED healthcare system overall -- yes, it costs more, but I'm fine with that because we live the best lives -- our system is better than other countries across the board. For example, in the United Kingdom, life expectancy in the wealthiest areas is actually several years longer than in the poorest areas. Admittedly, this may reflect factors such as diet and lifestyle as well as access to medical care. It may also reflect a selective effect: people with chronic life-threatening illnesses are less likely to become wealthy or to reside in affluent areas. In Glasgow, the disparity is among the highest in the world with life expectancy for males in the heavily deprived Calton-area being only 54 (or, 28 years LESS than in the affluent area of Lenzie, which is only eight kilometres away). What say you now?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 8:04 PM | Report abuse

In plain english just tell the people, What is the real deal, in plain talk, How much is it going to cost me as well as other retired people that has insurance. How much more will we/I have to pay.
How much more will people period have to pay that has insurance? Please be straight up!!!No Bull.My insurance comes out of my retirement, so I will pay even if I don't want to.

Posted by: onesugar1 | September 23, 2009 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Despite the old saying, statistics don't lie. Something is wrong if the richest country in the world has a crap health care system.

Anyway, I'm not telling you what to do, I'm saying from the point of view from someone outside of America, the republicans look pretty bad in terms of partisanship, which is what the orignal discussion was about.

Posted by: Christopher7 | September 23, 2009 7:57 PM | Report abuse

The US is 37th in health care, Christopher7.

Reading your post carefully, I will note that you did not "tell us what to do." Please excuse the rudeness of some posters. We're not all Ugly Americans.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 7:56 PM | Report abuse

It has been an excellent week for Barak Obama.

He is doing a 180 in Afghanistan and everyone is...relieved. Lets get out of there. Anyone seen Blackhawk Down?

He killed the Star Wars confabulation of Ronald Reagan...and everyone is so happy about it Russia is about to tell Iran it needs to kiss our as*s.

Equity markets, check.
Interest rates, check.
Health Industry force feed stimulus on track, check.

Obama is a genius. He has made stupid mistakes, they all do, but the great thing about him is that he says, I changed my mind or, what I used to think was wrong.

Republicans need to figure out how that works. You can not just keep saying I was right, we did the right thing, we are infallible.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute, you're from England telling US what to do??? LOL!!!

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

well then don't have a bill to take over the health care system, but reform something.

America spends twice the money per head than Britain, and yet the british have a higher average life expectancy. I don't know the statistics for other Eu countries, but I know that my country's healthcare system is far from the best, so how much worse is Americas?

there is something wrong when young workers die of curable problems whilst disproportionate funds go to keeping the least productive part of soceity alive.

In the end something will have to give, yet the republicans stoutly refuse to even look at any form of health care reform. Screaming death panels in the hope of tripping the democrats up will not help anyone.

Posted by: Christopher7 | September 23, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

"democrats are just stone cold crooks, plain and simple.."

Yeah, they should spend time cruising public restrooms, and hitting up on teenage boys.


Posted by: JohnDebba | September 23, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

SMWE357:

I agree and wish for a time when Democrats like Truman or JFK could be trusted at least.

Christopher7:

I don't support healthcare reform, so there is an honest disagreement whether the federal government should be taking over 1/6 of the U.S. economy (in addition to AIG, GM, and everything else it already owns). How much is enough?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully, the rest of the country sends Mass. liberals a message and throws out enough Dems next year.

==

That would mean electing Republicans and you won't find enough voters irresponsible enough to do anything as stupid as that.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 7:18 PM | Report abuse

democrats are just stone cold crooks, plain and simple..

Posted by: SMWE357 | September 23, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Why do People talk of partisanship by the democrats in this case without noting the republican knee jerk reaction to a health care bill.
A health care bill to reform the current system in any direction is needed, and yet the republicans refuse to even negotiate in most cases.

Posted by: Christopher7 | September 23, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Jake, put some bib-bip onnat boo-boo, baby.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 23, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse


So it took two tries to get a good law. I read last week that this version requires the governor to appoint someone of the same party if a Senate seat is vacant.

I think all the states should pass a law like this.

Posted by: dotellen | September 23, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Hopefully, the rest of the country sends Mass. liberals a message and throws out enough Dems next year.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Politicking at its worst - legislating for political advantage. Legislating to reverse legislation that was for political advantage, in order to regain political advantage. What a circus! Massachusetts should be ashamed but alas, the state is too liberal to realize this is wrong!

Posted by: Chamaco | September 23, 2009 6:46 PM | Report abuse

BTW: why does the photo caption read: "Paul Kirk IS the next Senator from Massachusetts"? (EMPHASIS ADDED) Until it's announced and the Senate swears him in, that IS not the case.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

http://www.mass.gov/legis/legishistory.htm#1.9 Effective Date of Legislation

Interesting reading. I haven't read the bill as passed, but I'd be shocked if it did not have a shorter effective date -- only if a bill does NOT have an effective date, then does it become effective 90 days after it was signed by the Governor -- something to look at though ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Gee, Bubbette, don't you think Patrick considered that before he supported the bill? They started calculating the timing when they got Teddy's letter, the week before he died. Waiting 90 days would leave only a month before the Special Election. That would be sillier than calling the emergency. He WILL call it an emergency, and appoint Kirk. Probably tomorrow.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

all is fair in love and politics... the repuglicans would not hesitate to do the same.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | September 23, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

One of the few words that the loony-left d-crat socialists in MA understand: "HYPOCRITE".

Posted by: LoonyLeft | September 23, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Bubbette1:

Why is there a 90-day requirement?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

This appointment may have to wait 90 days for the law to take effect from the date it is signed. Unless the governor phonies up some kind of emergency and tries to pass it on that basis. If so, expect a legal challenge that will drag this out until the election in January 2010.

The stench of hypocrisy and dirty politics hangs over Massetuchettes. It will be interesting to see how the citizens of that State react in the 2010 elections.

Posted by: Bubbette1 | September 23, 2009 6:21 PM | Report abuse

The good news is.
Kennedy is taking a dirt nap.

The bad news is.
We get another bleeding heart liberal, too vote in place of, Teddy-Jo.

Posted by: dashriprock | September 23, 2009 6:19 PM | Report abuse

It started this week.

Now Russia and the US will get together on Iran. Then the AQ/Taliban killers will be toast.

The big powers are all hated by the Sunni jihadis and the feeling is mutual. As long as the Persians feel as much love from the world as the Sunnis, they will be just fine. They do not want to die and they know what MAD is.

Once the American cold warrior neocon cabal is well and truly dead, the countries that have aligned interests in the region will crush the jihadi cave dwellers.

But the Republicans destroyed the lives of many thousands. Their accomplishment to date? Life is good for Chinese oil interests in Iraq. They can outbid the West at every turn.

No wonder Dick Cheney is back in hospital. He actually had a formula for how we would divide up Iraqi oil (after the happy people were done throwing flowers at our soldiers, remember, "freedom is messy". Where is Rummy now anyway?).

Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 6:05 PM | Report abuse

So, we have new addition to the grammar police. You try posting as much as I do and spell every word correctly.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse

had this law been made at a time when it was not so critical to any party i might have accepted it.

what i see now is simply dispicable.
whatever happened to THE ONLY WAY TO BE FAIR IS TO BE FAIR?

how DO these people look at themselves in the mirror to adjust their tie or brush their hair? be careful of the laws you make today because you might have to live with them later. but not if you are a democrat?

Posted by: ChooseBestCandidate | September 23, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Technically, Burris was appointed in 2008. That was last year.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Pretty sure they haven't changed the location of the Senate men's room since '77.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Two extra letters to spell "amok?" How very liberal.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

fifth--remember Burris.

Posted by: hemmeralex | September 23, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

no sir, just using your words as they are very, very appropriate. :o)

Posted by: ohboy3 | September 23, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

ohboy3:

Are you calling ME a "hypocrite"?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 5:48 PM | Report abuse

justjoeking:

That might be true if Paul Kirk had been a recent SENATE aide (instead of 1969-77). Kirk currently runs the JFK Library.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

my, my, now the shoe is on the other foot, and my, oh my what a nice fit. Too bad it smells of stinky feet! "Hypocrisy run amouck" amen.

Posted by: ohboy3 | September 23, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

The "longtime aide" makes more sense in this case than the ex-governor. Presumably Kirk knows a lot about the way the Senate works, while Dukakis would be done before he found the men's room.

Posted by: justjoeking | September 23, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

5th Appointment:
Kaufman, Bennett, Gillibrand, LeMieux, and then Kirk.

Posted by: sjxylib | September 23, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

den put some bip-bip onna boo-boo baby an' stop dat weepy-weepy

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

As our gracious host points out on every thread, the Dems specifically changed the law five (5) short years ago so that a GOP Governor could not name an interim Senator. Hypocrisy run amouck, and I hope the voters of Mass. exact political justice for this naked partisanship.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Recovering in the Berkshires.
What fun.
I went to Williams and I recovered in the Berkshires every Monday.

Posted by: shrink2 | September 23, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company