With Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White starting to
distance himself from his refusal to sign the certificate of
appointment, with Senate Democrats starting to
splinter, with key members of the Congressional Black Caucus
calling for Burris to be seated, and with Harry Reid making
conciliatory noises after their meeting, I’d say the odds are
heavily in favor of Roland Burris becoming the next U.S. senator
from Illinois.
How did Rod Blagojevich manage this? He knew that if he picked a
respected black politician, there was virtually no way that the
Senate Democratic leadership could stand by its refusal to seat a
senator he appointed. By bringing in Bobby Rush and making the
race issue explicit, he pretty much sealed the deal. Burris was a
perfect choice — credentialed and respectable enough to be a
plausible candidate, desperate enough to take a Blagojevich
appointment (Burris has lost races for governor, senator, and
mayor of Chicago and is now 71). Burris’s decision to take a high
media profile while confidently asserting that the law is on his
side has also helped move momentum in his direction.
Although things could still change and Reid might find a way to
keep Burris from serving as a voting senator for the next two
years, it looks like Blago won this round. He didn’t get any
obvious financial reward, but he proved that he still held the
powers of the governor’s office and forced the ball in his
detractors’ court. In other words, he didn’t just f—king give
the Senate seat away for nothing. It’s a very valuable thing.
Bob| 1.7.09 @ 12:50PM
Like I said when you first posted this, it is not real -- it is a political shell game. Reid gets to look outraged and Burris gets in. The public is being played here.
Doug Bandow| 1.7.09 @ 1:22PM
Blago also eliminated one reason for the legislature to speedily impeach and remove him. And what he most needs now is to slow down the train.
Sean Higgins| 1.7.09 @ 1:32PM
I think you're off Bob. Reid wanted somebody with a better chance of keeping the seat in the Democratic column after 2010. As Jim points out, Burris has lost several statewide races. Maybe he'll do better as an incumbent, but he is not the sure bet Reid would have preferred.
Bob| 1.7.09 @ 1:36PM
Sean, I don't give Reid that much credit -- he's not a mental giant. I still think it is simply optics to position Democrats as anti-corruption. I.e., just another opportunity to make points with the public.
tony| 1.7.09 @ 3:07PM
Sean and Bob:
I think you're both wrong, or at least not entirely correct. Yes, Reid isn't very bright. We all know that. But what Reid really fears is a backlash against his refusal to seat a black man as Obama's replacement. Most liberals are obsessed with race and racial issues. Reid is no exception.
G| 1.7.09 @ 3:32PM
FREE ONLINE TV, MOVIES, MUSIC, VIRTUAL WORLDS, GOOD GAMES, AND FREE COLLEGE EDUCATIONS @ INTERNETSURFSHACK.COM
Interloper| 1.7.09 @ 3:35PM
Told you so.
Reid has become so used to Congress that he did not even bother to look at the legal authority before making his initial stance, or, it would not have been so extreme. Burris certainly outlawyered him.
There are no legal grounds to have a non-voting senator. Whoever came up with that crackpot idea is embarrassing him or herself.
Burris likely wants 'senator' on his gravestone as part of his legacy. Two years of service will allow him to retire, happily, at 73.
Doug Bandow| 1.7.09 @ 5:18PM
Don't bet on him retiring. He obviously fancies his chances a lot more than do the voters. I doubt he's learned from his experience.
Stan25| 1.8.09 @ 11:24AM
One thing this whole sordid affair did bring to light is the hypocrisy of the Democrats. While saying that they are the party of inclusion, they now have shown their true colors. They are still the same racists that supported Bull Conner and George Wallace.
sidnee| 12.11.09 @ 12:54PM
jack wills
ugg mayfaire boots on sale