Wednesday, January 07, 2009

An Unnecessary Distraction

The Democrats, as usual, are coming across like a bunch of quarreling children; or possibly people with a bad case of multiple personality disorder.

Harry Reid has been fighting the appointment of Burris because of the "taint" that his appointment to the Senate has by being made by not-yet-indicted Governor Blagojevich; while others have been questioning whether he has the legal right to do so. And now, Dianne Feinstein has said Burris should be seated. (And let's be honest, she is probably right).

In the meantime, on a separate issue, Feinstein had gotten into a snit about President-Elect Obama's appointment of Leon Panetta as head of the CIA because she hadn't been consulted about it - and VP-elect Biden agreed with her that it was "a mistake"!

Now, she says she approves of the appointment - but only after Obama apologized to her.

Democrats need to act like the Republicans have acted over the past 8 years. In unison. It wasn't until about a year ago that cracks in the GOP solidarity started really breaking open, when GOP members realized that aligning with Bush wasn't helping their own political chances. Until then, they were all for one and one for all. It's a lesson the Democrats need to learn.

President-Elect Obama is more open to other people's ideas than most presidents we've had, so it's not as if he won't be consulting with other Democrats throughout his tenure as President. And right now, in the very beginning before he's even officially President, if he occasionally overlooks some political protocol and doesn't consult with someone in the Senate before doing something, he should not be publicly criticized by his own team. This is madness.

As for Burris, seat the man already! We do not need these distractions. The country is going down the tubes! This just doesn't matter!

The Democrats are letting this story completely take over the airwaves and distract everyone from the fact that President-Elect Obama is having a very orderly transition and is already working on the economic disaster in which we find ourselves. Today he had a very bipartisan and statesmanlike meeting with all of the living former presidents, and I'd much rather the press be focusing on this story than Burris.

And now the news media are playing up the denial of Mr. Burris as racism! To say nothing of Bobby Rush (D-IL), whose accusations of racism were even more inflammatory. Of all the ridiculous things to be talking about, this takes the cake. Obviously racism has nothing to do with the situation but who needs this kind of notoriety? Certainly not the Democrats!

The Democrats need to seat Burris, and NOW. Get the conversation off of this harmless man, who apparently did not pay Blago for his Senate appointment, and get on with business.

Burris is a Democrat. It's not as if he's going to tip the scales in the Senate toward the GOP. He is only filling out Obama's term, which ends in 2010. True, it would be good if the person filling the seat is re-elected in 2010, but let's not worry about that right now. The Democrats must learn to move on! They have much more important things to be worrying about - like passing President-Elect Obama's stimulus package! Because if the economy is still in the toilet in 2010, NO Democrats are going to elected at that mid-term election!

End of rant.


splord said...

Hear hear!

Enough with the posturing, let's get to fixin' things.

Rass'n frass'n politicians.

Ruth Hull Chatlien said...

I've said it before, but the media does not have either a liberal bias or a conservative one. They have a bias for controversy.

Christopher said...

Lady DiFi isn't a lawyer, so all she offered was an opinion.

And you know what they say about opinions: they're like assholes, everybody has one.

The legal fact of matter, vis a vis Roland Burris is, he was appointed by a governor who was indicted on Federal corruption charges. Not exactly clean. Then there's the matter of the lack of the Illinois Secretary of State's certification of the appointment.

DiFi flapped her cakehole but ignored these salient points of fact. As I said, DiFi isn't a lawyer. She's a San Francisco socialite, who ran for the board of supervisors after her husband died and she had too much free time on her hands. DiFi became mayor after a political assassination that killed both Harvey Milk and Mayor George Mosconne.

Methinks she's still smarting that her BFF, Hillary Clinton, isn't the president-elect. I anticipate more problems for Obama from DiFi over the next four years.

In my opinion, DiFi needs to STFU.

Randal Graves said...

If Harry wants to talk about taint, can we talk about the Dems for the past eight years?

Wankers, the lot of 'em.

libhom said...

I actually agree with DiFi on Burris, and I almost never agree with that Phonycrat on anything. There is no legal basis for refusing to seat Burris. This is the same lack of respect for the rule of law that caused so many supposed Democrats to vote to fund a war of aggression and genocide in Iraq.

Mauigirl said...

Bob, thanks for the support!

Ruth, I agree - anything the mainstream media can do to stir up trouble and make problems seem worse than they are, they'll do.

Christopher, I agree any appointment this man makes has a cloud over it. However, in fact, Blago has not yet been officially indicted - I believe they have another three months to get that done. He was arrested but he is considered innocent until proven guilty by a court, unfortunately.

So the question remains, does this appointment count if the secretary of state of Illinois hasn't signed off on it? I personally believe that if the governor is not actually convicted of anything then the SOS's job is to sign off on it. So the whole thing is a mess. Of course Blago did this just to be a pain in everyone's rear end.

But in the interest of moving the conversation away from this and away from Blago, which just makes the Democrats look bad, it would be in their interest to accept Burris and move on since legally I think they will have to anyway.

Randal, for sure. DiFi and the others have not been helpful at all during the whole Bush administration.

Libhom, I think we're on the same page here, and I agree about the rule of law.

Christopher said...


Unless I'm not understanding the law as it is written, any appointment by the Illinois governor (indicted or not), requires the certification of the Illinois Secretary of State to legitimize the appointment.

From the Ed Schultz Show:

In addition, Jesse White, the Illinois Secretary of State, said he will not certify Burris as the replacement for Obama's seat.

And from the same piece:

Burris has been a consistent donor to Blagojevich, giving thousands of dollars to his campaign in recent years. Burris donated $1,000 to the Friends of Blagojevich fund in 2005, $1,500 in 2007 and, $1,000 in June 2008, according to Illinois campaign finance data.

Now, I realize we're living in the post-OJ, post-2000 SCOTUS installment of George Bush era, where the letters of the law have come to carry the value of the paper they're printed on but, my argument is, if the U.S. Senate, led by Harry Reid, ignores the law and seats Mr. Burris, then what's the point of passing any laws? I might as well march into the U.S. Capitol and declare myself Hillary Clinton's replacement. I mean, her U.S. Senate seat is vacant and I'm fairly versed in politics and law.

See where I'm going?

Mauigirl said...

Hi Christopher, I agree the SOS should sign the paperwork for it to be official - he is refusing to do so because he does not think anyone appointed by Blagojevitch would be acceptable. The question is, is he flouting his duties by not signing? The real question is whether or not Blago has the right to appoint Burris. If he does legally have that right (much as we dislike the situation) then the SOS is out of line in NOT signing the paperwork. That's the way I'm looking at it. Thanks for the info on Burris, however, as that does add "taintedness." But - the Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that Adam Clayton Powell had to be seated despite his OWN financial irregularities - because the constitution only requires certain things of a candidate, and unfortunately not being tainted or having financial conflicts of interest hanging over them isn't one of them. (Which explains why Ted Stevens could still be a Senator if he had been re-elected!)

And actually, I think you'd make a great replacement for Hillary Clinton! Go for it! ;-)

Christopher said...


OMG! Can you imagine me in Washington?

Limp Noodle Reid would be beside himself. He wouldn't have a chance!

Mauigirl said...

LOL, I think it would shake things up - which Washington really needs! ;-)

Utah Savage said...

I agree with you completely. I was going to say the same thing to your last post as well, but I'm sick and couldn't make it to the comments section. Great writing and thinking. Thanks for keeping the focus where it belongs.

Life As I Know It Now said...

you posted exactly what I was thinking!

Anonymous said...

I'm with Christopher on this one. the law says the SoS has to sign off on the appointment, and that isn't happening. Unless it does, Burris should not be seated, as a violation of Illinois law will have occurred.

Anonymous said...


You know, it was so good to be completely away from politics for a bit. What a difference it makes to take a breather from all the shit.

If you get the chance, please stop by my place today. Big changes underway.


Mauigirl said...

Hi Utah, hope you're feeling better now. The Democrats are really annoying me with this Blago situation!

Liberality, thanks, I think we are on the same page!

Jolly, I think it's a gray area, but now I just heard the SOS of Illinois WILL sign the paperwork. This gets worse by the day - we need to move on!

Hi Hil, I know - sometimes you just need a break from it all! Will be by to check out your place!

Fran said...

The whole thing has my head spinning. They need to take some time to see if Burris is tainted, or has connections w the Blago corruption.

I think Blago will be impeached before indicted.
They have the man on tape trying to sell the Senate seat. He's toast. His career is over.

Initially Obama said no to Burris as well, so that does raise a red flag.
I wish we knew who Obama did want to be appointed to the Senate seat, but that is not his place-although I am sure he has an opinion.

You make good points- he wold be a junior senator, a dem, and they can put him on less important committees.

I don't care if difi has her panties in a knot.

Yes the rampant infighting needs to stop.
Too many fires burning to have to squabble over every danged thing.

Dorothy said...

Great post giving me an update to some things I've missed. I like what the president said to Reid just get this thing done... Maybe we just found a man who will delegate and when necessary do what needs to making sure the problem is solved. I didn't vote for him however I am hopeful he's going to try to make things better..

Dorothy from grammology

Anonymous said...

Yup, it's all a big distraction from the business at hand. And Reid's looking like a bigger and bigger dope the longer this goes on.

Mary Ellen said...

What Randal said, perfect.

Comrade Kevin said...

But if the Democratic leadership has proven anything, they've proven so weak-willed and spineless that they can be easily bullied, intimidated, and railroaded.

I'm not saying Obama will or should do that, but I think all of this hype about the Democratic Congress digging in its heels is posturing.

Distributorcap said...

they are all children up there -- rome burns and they are playing barbie dolls

Mauigirl said...

Hi all, I think we're all on the same page with this - glad that it's apparently finally been resolved and they're going to let Burris in so we can move on to what really matters.