Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Burris To Be Seated?



Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (right) seems to be backing off opposition to seating former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris to the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

UPDATE, 2:20 p.m.: Burris held his own press conference moments ago in which he echoed the comments made earlier by Harry Reid and Dick Durbin. In short, procedures will need to be followed but assuming they are followed Burris has every reason to believe he will be seated in the Senate.

And, in the latest sign of Burris' sense of drama, he managed to mention that he had received a call from former President Jimmy Carter this morning and that Carter had told him to "tell everybody I said when you're in the Senate, Roland, you will make a great senator."

Original Post

Opposition to the seating of former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris in the Senate is softening and it now appears as though he will ultimately be sworn in to the chamber, a move that would end an impasse that threatened to overshadow the early months of the 111th Congress.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), following a meeting with Burris this morning, praised Burris as "candid" and "forthright" and seemed to lay out a two-pronged path by which the former state attorney general could end up in the Senate.

The first is for the Illinois state Supreme Court to rule on whether or not Burris can be seated without Secretary of State Jesse White signing the certification of his appointment. (White, for his part, appears to be distancing himself from his decision not to sign the certificate -- arguing he was never opposed to Burris.)

The second is that Burris appear before the state legislature to answer questions about any and all of his ties to embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich who appointed Burris to the post. Burris is scheduled to do so tomorrow.

"Once that's done, we will be in a different position," said Reid.

What was clear from Reid's comments -- as well as those of President-elect Barack Obama this morning -- is that the unified opposition to Burris's seating is dissolving rapidly.

Asked about Burris in a press conference, Obama called it a "Senate matter" but added: "If he gets seated than I am going to work with Roland Burris just as I work with all the other senators."

As we noted yesterday, Burris's media strategy -- appear everywhere and declare that the law is on your side -- had backed Reid into a corner. Reid was in the uncomfortable position of barring an African American from taking a seat in the Senate while his caucus appeared to be fracturing, with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) coming out in favor of seating Burris yesterday.

In a sign of the potential political peril present in barring Burris from the chamber, Reid as well as Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) were very careful to note that the procedure being undertaken to determine whether he could be seated had no racial component to it. "This is nothing that is racial," said Reid.

"By shifting their focus to Burris, his credentials and the transparency of the process - the process will allow them to save face," said one longtime Senate observer. "The entire senate will now have to vote on this not just Democrats and not just the Democratic leaders."

If Burris is to be seated, Democrats will have dodged the immediate impasse but may have created a longer term electoral problem.

Assuming Burris runs for a full six year term in 2010 -- and not doing so could well be part of the agreement that will allow him to be seated -- he will be a major target for Republicans who are sure to seek to tar him with the broad brush of the embattled Illinois governor who appointed him to the office.

Several serious Republican candidates are looking at the race. Rep. Mark Kirk, who is seen as the strongest potential candidate, ruled out a governor's race recently but left the door wide open for a Senate bid in 2010. Rep. Pete Roskam, who won a competitive open seat race in 2006, is also taking a look at the race.

By Chris Cillizza  |  January 7, 2009; 11:35 AM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Indecision Roils RNC Race
Next: NY-Sen: Did Caroline Campaign Too Much?

Comments

@I'd like to play poker with Harry Reid. He's sitting on a big stack and raises all-in with off-suit 7 and 2 in the pocket before the flop. Blagojevich had a better hand, but now Democrats have a smaller stack.
Posted by: geoffwawrzyniak | January 8, 2009 10:51 AM |

LOVE your NLHE analogy geoff!

I see it more as NLO-NO CAP-8 with Obama, chip leader, Reid #2 stack, Bobby Rush #3 stack, Roland Burris #4 stack, Rod Blagojevich short-stack.

REID: 2d-7h-8s-Qc he goes all-in...

OBAMA: 4h-5h-10d-Ks had the table covered, calls

RUSH: 7d-8d-9c-jc FOLDS

BURRIS: Ad-Ah-5d-5s CALLS

BLAGOJEVICH: Ah-2c-3d-3c CALLS

FLOP: 4c-5c-6s
TURN: 4s
RIVER: x

BURRIS WINS HIGH W 5-f-4
BLAGOJEVIC WINS LOW 6-4-3-2-A

NEXT HAND NLHE

REID: Has the hammer as you say, ALL-IN

OBAMA: Cambodia 7-4 RE-RAISE ALL IN

RUSH: k-x FOLDS

BURRIS A-Ko CALLS

BLAGOJEVIC: A-Ko CALLS

FLOP: A-x-x

TURN: 7 (Reid and Obama laughing)

RIVER X

Obama: "Harry, I believe you were very insenstive initially not letting one of my homestate's proudest African-American political trailblazers and a personal hero and FRIEND OF MINE AND MICHELLE'S, the Honorable Senator Roland Burris play in our game...I think you should consider seeing someone about that racial insensitivity you display from time to time."

Reid: "Would you give it a rest for once, Smokey?"

Burris & Blagojevich in unison: "Recolor and cash please!"

Posted by: DexterClinkscale | January 8, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Harry Reid and the Democratic leadership picked the wrong political battle. It says plainly in the Constitution that the governor gets to make a temporary appointment. Blagojevich hasn't been impeached (though we'll all agree he's slimy), so he's still the governor.

I'd like to play poker with Harry Reid. He's sitting on a big stack and raises all-in with off-suit 7 and 2 in the pocket before the flop. Blagojevich had a better hand, but now Democrats have a smaller stack.

Posted by: geoffwawrzyniak | January 8, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

If I were American, I'd be very proud of my country yesterday. Blagojevich, Burris, Bobby Rush, and the JUDICIAL WATCH organization showed you that no matter how strong the permanent government and the MSM are, you still have rights and if you exercise them, you can shake the world.

Harry Reid and Barack Obama two days ago were acting like a couple of cartel leaders and doing so in broad daylight. The REAL Americans didn't buckle. They knew they had a constitutional argument to make and they made it. And you better know that suit is going to be heard in Federal Court should Obama flip-flop yet again.

Reid was shown earlier in the week to be a racist. Obama was shown to be a bully, coward and weakling. How funny that he once again put on the regal robe of the civil rigths leader and DEMANDED that Reid sit Burris.

JUDICIAL WATCH is a far-right organization. They don't "like" Blagojevich, Burris, or Rush. But they believe in the constitution and don't like to see it disregarded and the government exproriating rights.

This was a time the American system worked the way it was supposed to. A good day in American politics to tell your kids about, I would think.

Posted by: DexterClinkscale | January 8, 2009 4:16 AM | Report abuse

Burris, you're a tool. Stop thinking about what's best for you and for the first time in your life consider what's best for your state.

Posted by: kill4allah | January 7, 2009 10:28 PM | Report abuse

If Harry Reid had exercised one tenth of one percent of the resistance he has shown toward Roland Burris becoming a member of the US Senate representing Illinois toward "W." -- our nation wouldn't be in a tittle of the sorry shape our nation is in now.

Blago is innocent until proven guilty.

"W." is guilty, guilty, guilty...

Posted by: BenAMarine | January 7, 2009 9:38 PM | Report abuse

There does not seem to be any indication that Burris paid for his job or that he is lacking in qualifications to be a member of the Senate. So the issue just seems to be finding a way to distance him from Blagojevich's legal problems.

Posted by: dnjake | January 7, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Reid and Durbin should be replaced ASAP! Here in Illinois the assembly is weak. Our State Att. has her sites on govership and so far the current gov. Rod Blogo. hasn't been charged with anything. Apointment perfectly legal. Jesse White now backing off and may sign off here in Ill. as Sec. of State to Burris. What fools these Dems be when real issues loom large. The earlier Neville Chamberlin comment was so on the nose.

Posted by: crrobin | January 7, 2009 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 7, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"Perhaps a wee bit too early moonbat. you still believe that Jimmah Cahter was a good president. I think the jury finally came in on Reagan. no progres since then."

He'd be with 64% of the country, I bet that poll drives you nuts:

"The CNN poll showed 64 percent of Americans questioned said they approve of how Carter handled his job as president and 60 percent said the same for elder Bush."

Clinton gets 69 percent (he he), Bush II gets 27%...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090107/en_afp/uspoliticspresidents_newsmlmmd

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse


so they are backin' off Burris.
this is good.

classic case of state law versus federal law.
i'll take federal law anyday.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | January 7, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

The Borgen Project has informative statistics on addressing global poverty.

$30 billion ends world hunger
$550 billion is the US Defense budget

This organization has the ability, resources, and policy-makers to suppress the threat of global poverty by enacting legislation here in the US, which is tied to the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals. Please support organizations such as The Borgen Project so that we may rid the world of poverty.

Posted by: atsegga | January 7, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

The Borgen Project has informative statistics on addressing global poverty.

$30 billion ends world hunger
$550 billion is the US Defense budget

This organization has the ability, resources, and policy-makers to suppress the threat of global poverty by enacting legislation here in the US, which is tied to the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals. Please support organizations such as The Borgen Project so that we may rid the world of poverty.

Posted by: atsegga | January 7, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

zouk: for a majority of the country, after 8 years of Drooler McDimwit, Hopey McChange looks pretty darn good.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | January 7, 2009 5:09 PM | Report abuse

"I am pretty sure the deal will be along the lines of clinton's arrangement with N Korea and that old rat Arafat."

You mean the N Korean deal that was working until Bush abandoned it, allowing N Kroea to build and test a weapon? And which deal with Arafat? Those all wroked out rpetty well- empowering Hamas on the other hand by pushing for elections....

"Obamanomics is going to ruin us for years."

You've seen the $11.2 trillion defecit at the hands of Reaganomics, the $1.2 trillion deficit thanks to Bush? Bush and Republican policies have already destroyed this country, nowhere to go but up.

"suicide is assigning the CIA to a political hack with no experience."

George H. W. Bush? John McCone? Porter Goss? Oh wait, he was a political hack who HAD experience...

On one issue most authoirities on intel overhaul agree- the IC needs strong management to protect the agencies and let them do their jobs, and a hands off approach to the production of intelligence which should be left to the analysts and the directorates. Panetta is ideally suited for that role, protect the agency from attacks from left and right, overseeing the rebuilding of the agency, and getting out of the way of products to let the branch chiefs do their jobs.

I know, you prefer directive, manufactured intelligence designed to promote a hawkish policy, and no, you're not going to get that with Panetta. Sorry, get over it.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Once again, Shady-land-deals Reid and the other congressional d-crats show that they have even less backbone than Neville Chamberlain.

It's hard to believe that the pathetic stature of congress could be even more diminished, but blago-burris will do it.

Posted by: LoonyLeft | January 7, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

It seems like all the discussion about everybody's slime, particularly Blago's super slime detracts for what seems much more relevant: the attempt by Burris, while IL Attorney General, to deny a new trial to an innocent man who was on death row for a rape that somebody else had confessed to and that DNA exonerated him. Burris was running for governor and didn't want to appear soft on crime. The prosecutor for the case ended up resigning in disgust over Burris' lack of ethics. Yes, it is about Blogo, but it should be about Burris and he should be denied because of his own actions.

Posted by: hecorte | January 7, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

"Obama Breaks Silence On Gaza - Saying Nothing Posted by: king_of_zouk"

King of Zouk, again breaking wind

Posted by: Thatsnuts | January 7, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

If Burris is seated the real winner is Blagojevich. It is unlikely anything can keep Hot Rod from prison, but if he has any hope at all of staying a free man he has to be the governor. By appointing someone, anyone, to the seat and having the US Senate seat him or her Hot Rod has proven he is still the governor doing governor like things. His entire legal defense will have to be along the lines of "this is all taken out of context." That line of reasoning is much harder for a jury to buy if you have been marginalized in your role as governor. Hot Rod is not dead yet!

Posted by: caribis | January 7, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I am a white democrat and am totally behind Senator-designate Burris. With that said, President-Elect Obama vowed to stop the Good Ole Boy Network in Washington DC if he was elected. We elected him and we still have the Good Ole Boy stuff going on in the Senate.
The 17th Amendment of our Constitution was ratified for the very reason of what Senator Harry Reid and others have been doing. He has been engaging in the corropt activities of negotiations and making deals with Senator-Designate Burris in order to allow him to hold the seat. This makes him no better than Gov. Blagojevich, and he has only been accused. The 17th Amendment is very clear and simple. If you meet the qualifications set forth, you are in. If after you get in, they find a problem with you, then, and only then, can they move to expel him under Article 1 section 5. I believe it to be that Article.

I am so disgusted with the recent news conference of Senator Reid and Durbin. That is just wrong, wrong, wrong. How can we teach our children right from wrong when these senators are doing what they are? They talked about having a hearing and voting on it to allow him in. I have heard of no other hearings or votes for the new senators who were just seated. Did I miss it. Could you lead me to the official website that showed these hearings and votes cast?

This whole thing has got me so upset, that the only thing I can think to do is to begin a campaign to have the senators responsible for blocking this appointment expelled from the senate. It may take a while to convince 2/3 of the senate to vote on it, but with enough of us campaigning for this cause, it could happen.

Posted by: litlflea | January 7, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

""Obama indeed offered a promise of long-term fiscal discipline at a news conference that he held just a short time after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office came up with a new — and unprecedented — estimate of the deficit expected for the 2009 budget year: roughly $1.19 trillion.

Such a red-ink mark on the federal ledger would dwarf last year's record of $455 billion deficit and represent more than 8 percent of the size of the economy, which is higher than the deficits of the 1980s.""

so let me get this straight, he is so frugal and sensible, even though he is planning on spending more then anyone ever did in history? what happened to those campaign promises about pay-go and revenue neutral?

Replaced by pay to play and THE SPLURGE, of course. If you ever believe a Lib's promises you deserve all the agony you are about to get, courtesey of broken promises cabal abd your own gullibility.

Next up, surender to win.

Lib logic.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

We'll re-elect President Obama in four years.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Maybe by then he will have made his first decision. Other than running for reelection decision, that is.

Obamanomics is going to ruin us for years. It will be about the economy stupid, same as it always is and by then, you won't be able to blame anyone but your messiah. even Libs aren't stupid enough to fall for that shell game.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Hopey McChange has already sent the economy into a tailspin, promised to double the deficit for years to come, has begun dismantling the CIA, will suck up to enviro-nazis, and appointed a bunch of unqualified retreads to office. Looks like one term and out. Just like Jimmah. Can Barack swing a hammer? He might want to start practicing now.
*******************************************AND- We'll re-elect President Obama in four years. It burns, doesn't it? To be a pathetic little weasel, on here every day spewing sewer to sully everyone else. You're the new Hitler, scorched earth policy and all, dumb as a rock.

Posted by: md83 | January 7, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

Obama's not falling for it, he needs his hands totally clean of this in order to remain credible to broker a deal once in office

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am pretty sure the deal will be along the lines of clinton's arrangement with N Korea and that old rat Arafat.

We agree to lay off and do all sorts of nice things, you do whatever you like and lie about it. typical Lib solution, it always involves surrender and/or suicide.

suicide is assigning the CIA to a political hack with no experience. what do you expect from the president with no experience? keep telling yourself he's really smart and went to Harvard. the diet of hope and change is already run dry.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Wow, first Senator Reid said they could day anything they want, now seems they can't, now these same idiots are getting ready to spend a trillion of our hard earned money, I have a warm and fussy feeling,

Posted by: bconner1 | January 7, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

The Democratic Party is off to a great start. Both Reid and Obama saw and helped in their fellow Democrat slandered and libeled by Fitzgerald and the Press. They must still be pissed Blago didn't go along with one of their selections of Senator of Illinois.
Just about everyone bought Fitzgerald's one sided Blago(apparently he is only after seller, not the buyers in pay for play)trial in the Press without judge, jury or defense. Blago didn't do anthing cute except to turn down Reid's and Obama's picks (this is going to be good when it gets to court when the quid for pro for Blago secretly accepting the Reid or Obama pick is trillions of pork). The Chicago way.

Posted by: Donschott | January 7, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

"kept us safe, ran the economy well until the Libs took over"

It seems to me that Bill Clinton kept us safe until Bush took over by your logic (Oh, I forgot, the Bush presidency began Sept 12, 2001, right?)...

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Again, Zokuk amazes us all with his ignorance of the national security apparatus. Israel is conducting a shaping operation right now, trying to dredefine the nature of the Israel-Hamas stalemate in the waning days of the Bush administration and trying to force Obama's hand on the matter before he enters the office. Obama's not falling for it, he needs his hands totally clean of this in order to remain credible to broker a deal once in office, well after this conflict is over.

None of this matters of course to Zouk, all he has is smears and lies (the scary thing is, I bet he actually beleives some of that nosense on his last post that soehow Obama is responsible for a recession that began in December 2007, that the Democrats who he lambasted for two years about being so weak because they wer eoutmaneuvered by Bush and his veto threat on nearly every budget move are responsible for the state of the nation's economy, and that his over 80% approval rate for his transition picks spell a one-term presidency- pure insanity). No concern for this nation whatsoever. That's KoZ for you, though, just a worthless hack.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

WHILE THE MEDIA OBSESSES OVER BLAGO-BURRIS...

...government agencies alleged to be involved in domestic torture with radiation weaponry and devices are trying furiously to contain the impact of a recent series of articles exposing "homeland" crimes against humanity.

HERE IS A LINK TO AN ARTICLE THAT WAS PURGED (BY A THIRD PARTY?) FROM POLITICO.COM ON FRIDAY... along with dozens of posts by the author.

Please read, than ask yourself: What is it THEY don't want us to know?

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/domestic-torture-radiation-weaponry-americas-horrific-shame

OR (if link is rendered disabled):

http://Members.NowPublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | January 7, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

The jury is still out on the Obama people but a verdict has by now been rendered to the Bush clowns.guilty of incompetence.

Posted by: Opa2


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Perhaps a wee bit too early moonbat. you still believe that Jimmah Cahter was a good president. I think the jury finally came in on Reagan. no progres since then.

I don't suppose history will treat clinton well and will do much better for Bush2 than you think. He freed Iraq and won the war, despite the loons fighting their own side the whole time, supported Africa, kept us safe, ran the economy well until the Libs took over, never stole, etc.

Hopey McChange has already sent the economy into a tailspin, promised to double the deficit for years to come, has begun dismantling the CIA, will suck up to enviro-nazis, and appointed a bunch of unqualified retreads to office. Looks like one term and out. Just like Jimmah. Can Barack swing a hammer? He might want to start practicing now.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I am an Internet writer and in my latest column called into question Harry Reid's leadership abilities and have been supportive of Roland Burris. To read my latest piece, please go to this link: http://www.marymacelveen.com/blog/_archives/2009/1/6/4048212.html

Incidentally, the media and even Harry Reid should take a look at the Illinois State Constitution. Below is my letter to the media citing the duties of the Secretary of State of Illinois.

To the Media,

In reading the Illinois State Constitution here are the duties of the Secretary of State whose signature was not on Roland Burris’s appointment letter coming from and signed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

SECTION 16. SECRETARY OF STATE - DUTIES

The Secretary of State shall maintain the official records of the acts of the General Assembly and such official records of the Executive Branch as provided by law. Such official records shall be available for inspection by the public. He shall keep the Great Seal of the State of Illinois and perform other duties that may be prescribed by law.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)

No where does it state he must sign off on this appointment.

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con5.htm

Best,

Mary!

Posted by: MaryMacElveen | January 7, 2009 1:40 PM | Report abuse

I get a kick out of King Zouk. He quotes bartenders, etc as being able to do a better job than those the Obama team appointed. Even Zouk must admit that bartenders surely would have done a better job than the clown we have had for the past eight years. The jury is still out on the Obama people but a verdict has by now been rendered to the Bush clowns.guilty of incompetence.

Posted by: Opa2 | January 7, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama Breaks Silence On Gaza - Saying Nothing

Obama broke his silence about the violence in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday, calling the loss of civilian lives in Gaza and in Israel a "source of deep concern for me."


another non-decision by the milquetoasted one.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

The bottom line is that this will give the senate 59 persons who normally will vote Democratic. (Once Franken is seated, which is a matter of time)That means only one Republican needed to stop a filibuster Harry Reed may be dumb as an ox as some of you allege but he certainly knows how to count. All it takes is for one Republican to be promised only token opposition in 2010 and we will have a filibuster proof senate.

Posted by: Opa2 | January 7, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Another, really - really - really bad day for the DEMOCRUDS.

Posted by: hclark1 | January 7, 2009 1:11 PM | Report abuse

You strike me more as an appletini drinker, Zouk. An alcoholic for sure, but tequila's probably a bit much...

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 1:03 PM | Report abuse

I would be interested in seeing how Mr. Burris responds to the United Nation's Millenium Development Goals, which aim to cut world hunger in half by 2015 and eliminating it completely by 2025. An estimated $19 billion would eliminate malnutrition and starvation around the world. Our current defense budget is $522 billion, in comparison.

The Borgen Project (borgenproject.org) provides lots of information about this issue.

Posted by: alenka | January 7, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

I would be interested in seeing how Mr. Burris responds to the United Nation's Millenium Development Goals, which aim to cut world hunger in half by 2015 and eliminating it completely by 2025. An estimated $19 billion would eliminate malnutrition and starvation around the world. Our current defense budget is $522 billion, in comparison.

The Borgen Project (borgenproject.org) provides lots of information about this issue.

Posted by: alenka | January 7, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone surprised that spineless Harry caved in in less than a day? this guy could give the French lessons in surrender. he has the constitution and morals of a snail. make that escargot.

not only does he wish to give up to our enemies, now he is willing to redeploy and surrender to his own party.

this is classic Dem leadership on display. More weak kneed showwomanship to follow. we are now being run by the all feminine congress.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

We are still a nation of laws and, being innocent until proven guilty, thus "under investigation" and "might be a crook"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We are going to be hearing that a lot in the coming months. this culture of corr....er I mean Liberals is as slimy as they come.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 12:53 PM | Report abuse

I know a bartender on K streeet who would make a fine commerce Secretary. he has NO experience, as the president, SoS, DHS, CIA, NY Senate, and others, a condition of Lib employment, but he makes a mean margarita. Plus he knows all the lobbyists and can solicit donations for the reelect.

there is a guy who read a bunch of GI joe comics once who could take over DoD after we surrender and lose in Iran/Iraq/Israel.

I also know the wife of a famous guy who could easily run the energy Dept. She has been switching off lights and changing bulbs, not to mention she is highly skilled at inflating tires.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I think the real problem here is the media and the "leak" of "transcripts from an FBI wiretap of the governor's telephone call".

The Constitution should still be in force and EVERY citizen is INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. Until there is a conviction after a trial the Senate MUST accept the appointee. Not to do so would be against the Constitution, against the interests of government and the American people. To prevent the appointee from entering would be to allow the media and FBI, government employees to have judicial powers bringing in the new form of "mob rule" and vigilantism. This must be stopped.

Posted by: midniteride1776 | January 7, 2009 12:50 PM | Report abuse

As a democrat, I believe Sen. Reid is an idiot for his lightning-quick overreaction to the issue by declaring he will not seat anyone appointed by the governor.

And while it's a tiny kerfluffle in the grand scheme of things, Obama should have had the common sense to stay away from the issue, being a Harvard Law grad and all.

We are still a nation of laws and, being innocent until proven guilty, thus "under investigation" and "might be a crook" does not absolve the governor of his constitutional authority and obligation to name a successor.

Personally, I do not like Sen. Reid's "leadership" nor his antics. I wish the Obama team would replace him.

DAStubbs,
Minneapolis

Posted by: dastubbs | January 7, 2009 12:46 PM | Report abuse

The issue here is not the possibility of Dems upsetting people. I am a Dem and I don't like the fact that Blagojevich appointed Burris but as a governor it is his prerogative who fills that seat. If the IL legislature wants to impeach the Gov., do it, and remove his ability to appoint somebody. As long as he is governor he is legally allowed to appoint somebody and it is not up to the senate whether he can take his seat or not.(I'm not 100% sure of the rules, so the fact that the IL Sec. of State hasn't signed the paper yet may make it a different story, but I'm looking at the legal point here.)

Nobody in the Senate, Dem or Rep has the authority to block the appointment of Burris.

Posted by: DAL333 | January 7, 2009 12:45 PM | Report abuse

And yet he decisively won the Presidential election and has a strong Congress behind him. These truly must be dark days for KoZ, which explains his irrational lashing out. Too bad.

Pinetta has one thing no current Intel leader, to include Hayden, has - the political strength to portect the agency and in doing so to reform it. It does show how little KoZ knows about the national security apparatus, though.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 12:42 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama has declined to support giving his vacated Senate seat to former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris.

Obama told a news conference on Wednesday that the decision on whether to allow Burris to join the Senate is one for the Senate to make.

A mind is a terrible thing to make up. I assume Obama is still overwhelmed with the Dog decision. hopey McChange is way over his head. He has already indicated he is surrenduring to our enemies with his CIA pick.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | January 7, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Typical of politicians in general, and lawyer-politicians in particular, to use procedure to impose their will, or to thwart their opposition. While it's effective, it obscures the real issues and arguments.

I can only imagine the amount of B.S. senators have to put with from one another. It's not surprising very little gets done.

Posted by: jhimmi | January 7, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

"That's the crux of the issue. It is not clear that barring Burris based on innuendo is legal."

And most constitutional scholars are coming to the conclusion that they do not, which is why yuo see the senate doing what they do best (no matter the party in charge)- stall. They stated they'd bblock him, so now they are going through a bunch of mostly symbolic motions, like Secretary White, to say they founght for their principles but in the end had no other recourse and their hands were forced, even though the end game is pretty clear for anyone paying attention.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

So, if it's racism, why is a black man like White refusing to sign off on the certificate, especially when it's just "ceremonial"? It's not required by law, but it is required by Senate rule. It may be a cop-out, but it is absolutely true. So why is he not signing this "Ceremonial" certificate? For the same reason Reid is using his failure to sign as one cause to delay seating him, not out of racism, but following through on a pledge not to seat anyone Blago appoints

From your same article:

"White said he had pledged, shortly after Gov. Rod Blagojevich was accused of trying to make a deal for his appointment to the Senate seat, to not sign off on anyone selected by Blagojevich. And he said he will continue to honor that pledge unless ordered otherwise by a court."

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/01/jesse-white-ive-been-made-the-fall-guy.html

So sad when Republicans try to play the race card, it just shows how tone deaf they are on the issues of race in America and why they continue to hemmorhage minority votes.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | January 7, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse


The Senate always reminds me of five fat guys in a row boat trying to change seats without capsizing it. It must be the jockeying to get everyone before the microphones and cameras, but it seems so apt.


Posted by: blasmaic | January 7, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

diesel4 writes
" If it's in the Senate's legal power to refuse to seat him (which I believe it is, but I'm certainly not an expert on the legalities), they should."

That's the crux of the issue. It is not clear that barring Burris based on innuendo is legal.

Posted by: bsimon1 | January 7, 2009 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Harry Reid is a Racist and a Liar.

Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White said this morning he has been made "the fall guy" by the U.S. Senate, which he said is using him as an excuse to not seat Roland Burris.

"They could have seated him without my signature; my signature is not required," he told WGN-AM 720's John Williams.

The Senate barrred Burris Tuesday, saying he lacked proper credentials because his appointment was not signed by White.

But White said today, "My signature is mostly ceremonial, rather than a point of law."

"They played a little bit of a game with [Burris] yesterday," he added.

Asked by Williams if he had been made "the fall guy," White said, "You're absolutely correct."

Bostonred

Posted by: ma66 | January 7, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Dems really need to grow a pair. They're always so afraid of upsetting people that they're willing to compromise on things that they shouldn't compromise on. If it's in the Senate's legal power to refuse to seat him (which I believe it is, but I'm certainly not an expert on the legalities), they should. Reid should've gone all over the media and made the argument that such a move would have nothing to do with race and everything to do with the fact that the Senate believed Burris' appointment to be the result of a corrupt process. It's pretty obvious to most that Burris is a self-centered, opportunistic clown and if Reid had made a coherent, legally justified argument against seating him, Burris probably wouldn't have received much sympathy.

Posted by: diesel4 | January 7, 2009 11:56 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company