Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Burris likely to be seated this week
01.12.2009 5:28pm EST
(Washington) Eager to put the scandal-tainted standoff behind them, Senate Democrats accepted Roland Burris as President-elect Barack Obama’s Senate successor on Monday and said they expect to swear in the new Illinois senator this week.
“He is now the senator-designate from Illinois and, as such, will be accorded all the rights and privileges of a senator-elect,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said in a joint statement after Senate lawyers determined that Burris’ paperwork met Senate requirements to be seated.The two senators said they expect Burris, a former Illinois attorney general, to be sworn in and seated this week, barring objections from Republicans.
The announcement is a major reversal for Senate Democrats. They initially balked at the surprise appointment by embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who is accused by federal investigators of seeking to trade the Senate seat for personal favors, amid fears that any appointee would be tainted.
Opportunistic, self-aggrandizing and to proclaim that God somehow has an interest in his personal political success – supremely arrogant. Perfect profile for a Chicago politician.
You are absolutely correct, Chris. This idiot has benefited himself temporarily while detracting from the potential for “change” that the new administration has proposed.
I don’t really care about the nonsense that was brought out regarding race. Were Burris to have wanted to become a senator, he should have acted with propriety and insisted that he be appointed by a non-corrupt governor or elected by the people. He would have or should have had EVERYONE’s backing at that point.
Why is it OK for Harry Reid to ignore the Constitution to indulge his own whims and prejudices?
As we now have learned, Reid did not want any Black person to be appointed because his psychic powers told him that no Black person could be elected in 2010. It wasn’t Burris who was negotiating with Blago, it was Reid.
Suppose Blago had appointed a Gay person and Reid had disregarded the Constitution to bar his entry to the Senate believing that no Gay man could be elected in 2010.
Reid was wrong — even Feinstein understood that Reid was wrong — all constitutional scholars I ahve heard said Reid was wrong — the Illinois Supreme Court disagreed with Reid — Obama told Reid to stop it.
May we Gays should stand for the Constitution even when the victim is not Gay.
Where is the GLBTQA-related content of this story?
If I want “other” news of the day, I read CNN; if I want GLBTQA news, I come to 365gay.com, for lack of anyplace ELSE to go.
Shouldn’t that actually be “less than 250gay.com,” since you take off weekends and holidays? … not particularly helpful for a national gay news service.
Let the big networks cover the “other” news; they have the resources.
And PLEASE, PLEASE, *P-L-E-A-S-E* get somebody more informed / more literate / with less of an axe to grind than James Withers to write for you! Today’s column on Cosby was EMBARRASSING!
Bud Burgoon-Clark
San Diego CA USA
@RICK:
Um, excuse me, but the reason Reid didn’t want Burris appointed by Blago was that NOBODY appointed by Blago would have a GHOST of a chance at re-election in 2010.
Despite their own penchant for graft, toe-tapping, etc., the Rethugnantclones would be screaming “corruption” at the top of their execrable lungs.
Burris has done his party GREAT harm by accepting Blago’s appointment. He should have waited for the impeachment process to play itself out.
If Blago is found GUILTY of trying to sell PE Obama’s Senate seat, what does that make Burris look like?
I’ll TELL you what: the north end of a south-bound FOOL, for starters!
Bud Burgoon-Clark
San Diego CA USA