They Were Against Him Before They Were For Him
Proof of how screwed up our Democrat controlled government is, the US Senate will seat Roland Burris.
After they swore they never would—these are the people who are running our country.
“So that letter in December from Senate Democrats about not seating any Blago appointee? Nevermind. They never meant it. What a humiliating embarrassment for Reid and Durbin.”
I don’t know about Reid, but I do know that this “humiliating embarrassment” isn’t enough to stop the dimwits of Illinois from re-electing Durbin in 6 years, 12 years, 18 years. . . once they’re in you can’t get ‘em out.
The call came down from above that this candidate must be seated. He met 2 important qualifications for Obama. First he is Afro-American and second he is a liberal democrat. Better to take the bird in hand and get someone seated for the bum rush that is coming. How many of you feel he is representing the people of IL? Hell he couldn’t get his own parties nomination so that leaves a huge majority that will not be represented in DC. I hope he can’t win next election like last time he ran.
Comment by Tspud1 | January 13, 2009
Well no, I don’t think Burris represents me, but neither does the entire Illinois government. Neither would Quinn’s pick, whoever that might have been.
The best thing about Burris is that he was able to expose Obama, Reid, Durbin and the entire Democrat caucus as incompetent fools.
I’d say that’s worth the price of admission!
Comment by qcexaminer | January 13, 2009
Obama is
mr.
aka harry reid went 
when his ineptness was put on display the he, like Obama was 
The Senate was
from the very start. Durbin was dancing his 
puppet dance for his masters. Now like Obama they all 
to deal with.
Burris during the whole process was Mr.
when he should have been Mr. 
theScoundrel who was
about the choice because the choices were limited is having a grand 
moment 
watching the clowns perform in the circus. Which is unusual because circus clowns have never struck me as 
funny. But this particular batch which are not even licensed clowns to my knowledge are doing a much better 
job of being ridiculous than any other batch of clowns I have ever witnessed.
Comment by thescoundrel | January 13, 2009
The whole thing is disgusting. However, if we were to hold a special election, what kind of person would we have ended up with? A liberal from the Chicago area, most likely.
Comment by ursadailynews | January 13, 2009
What is the evidence for Roland Burris being a liberal? He was an effective director of CMS at a turbulent time in our state’s personnel history. He was a very decent comptroller who brought in good, new downstate people to the important office. In neither of these positions did he take any lefty positions that I can recall.
He was not a stellar AG but there are a a few inside baseball reasons for that which were out of his control. He made a few unfortunate personnel decisions but he was also forced to cut good people when the regional funding for his office collapsed. Again, I can’t remember any pronounced lefty postions advanced by him. He was pretty much the Government’s lawyer, which is the principal job of the AG. He actually REDUCED the non-lawyer technocrats known as “advocates” in the Great Office. That’s sure not a liberal position.
Finally, keep in mind he’s a Centralia Orphan by birth and graduation. Hard to find a lefty coming outta there.
He’s black. He’s from Chicago. Let’s add up two and two and get twenty-two.
Comment by UMRBlog | January 13, 2009
Holy cats Scoundrel, your comment has got to be the record for the most emoticons in a single comment.
Nicely done!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I dunno udn, you might be right, but I gotta wonder why the Dems, both state and national killed the special election idea after they were initially FOR it? They must have had serious doubts about ANY Democrat getting elected.
An editorial in The Chicago Tribune today said that every time we see Burris we will be reminded of all the dirty dealing that went down with his selection, and when ‘10 rolls around, voters will remember all this and vote against The Machine and Democrats.
I have my doubts. In two years time, all this will be old news and it will be a return to business as usual—or maybe even worse, if that’s possible.
So while I think it might have been possible to get a GOPer in the US Senate if we had a special election this spring, I seriously doubt it will happen in ‘10.
Comment by qcexaminer | January 13, 2009
UMR – I said if we held a special election, we would have gotten a Chicago liberal. I probably wouldn’t vote for the guy, but I believe Blago appointed him legally and without receiving a big wad of cash for doing so – after trying to do the opposite. I would much rather see him seated and wait for the next regularly scheduled election than see the state spend millions on a special election and possibly sending someone much worse than Burris to DC. Whomever the Dems would have picked to run for the Senate seat in a 2009 election would be somebody that would have received a glowing endorsement from PEBO – which would carry a lot of weight right now.
Comment by ursadailynews | January 13, 2009
Well I was just practicing my smilies in case Al Gore decided we need to reduce my time on this Internet he invented due to its carbon footprint. Besides aren’t smilies just another form of hieroglyphics? Let us talk in pictures instead of words. It is a case of everything old is new again.
I have to agree there could have been a lot worse choices than Burris. I have been hoping that some of his middle state upbringing might pull the leadership towards more sensible paths. I will not count on it but anything has to be better than another bleeding Chicago-thuggery politician.
Comment by thescoundrel | January 14, 2009