Burris drama in the Senate

For all you libs out there....this is the change you voted for. Well done...morons!!!

Rod Blagojevich STINKS & Roland Burris STINKS

These guys have no SHAME...Burris is no better than Blagojevich.

Maybe Patrick Fitzgerald should have a look at this guy as well...birds of the feather!!!

Michael

Paragraph 6 ("Democratic leaders ... Illinois." is incorrect. Burris was not elected state-wide, he was appointed. And he is not the first African-American elected or appointed as Senator, I believe Obama is.

"Democratic leaders in the Senate face a dicey situation barring from their all-white body the first African American elected statewide in Illinois."

I took me a while to figure out what this sentence means since it suggests at first read that Burris was elected to this position...needs to be re-written to communicate more clearly. -Rev. MJ

how can he be "...the first African American elected statewide in Illinois" when he is replacing Obama?

Burris was the first African-American elected to a statewide public office in IL. Specifically, he was elected as IL's Atty General a few years back. His election to the statewide office of IL Atty General, preceded the IL Senate elections of both Obama and Mosley-Braun.

Burris was the first African American elected statewide in Illinois as it's Attorney General. The change we voted for had to do with the direction of our country and not the corrupt Illinois politcal machine. Change will only come to that state when it's voters stand up, let their voices be heard, and dismatle the corrupt policies that allow for their "leaders" to take a dvantage of them.

Its sad that given this point in American history that we are not nearly as united in looking forward as we are in our need to let our political/religious/social perspectives derail what could potentially be an era of great gains for all Americans.

What the author means is that Burris was the first black man to be elected to a statewide position in Illinois when he was elected to be our attorney general. So, yes, that sentence has some construction issues that make it confusing (so does this sentence.)

What the author means is that Burris was the first black man to be elected to a statewide position in Illinois when he was elected to be our attorney general. So, yes, that sentence has some construction issues that make it confusing (so does this sentence.)

Burris was the first AA elected state-wide as AG. Sloppy writing, but accurate facts.

Burris was the first African-American elected to a statewide office in IL's history. That may or may not have been his time serving as Attorney General of IL.
(I know he held that position, but I don't know if it's appointed or elected in IL.)

The problem with the comment in this story is that it is left parenthetical, instead of fully spelled out, and it can be misconstrued that he was elected to the Senate.

Now we hear the Gov of New Mexico may be facing indictments and had to withdraw his nomination from the cabinet; Al Frankenstein trying to steal a Senate seat, and Jailobovich's antics; a Great Start for Obama and "his people".

He was Illinois' first statewide elected African American when he ran successfully for Illinois Attorney General.

I don't understand that sentence either. He is neither "first" nor "elected." And as for RedState, no one in Boston voted for Blagojevich and voting for Obama has nothing to do with this debacle. Way to sound like an idiot.

The article was referring to the fact Burris was elected Attorney General of Illionois by statewide election BEFORE Obama was elected statewide as junior senator in Illinois.

Let's face it- Gov. Blago is doing this for spite for the exact reason it causes political headaches for Obama and Rahm Emmanuel and other Dems. It's "Blago's Revenge" if you will for being caught and subsequently villified for being the corrupt, moronic megalomaniac that he is by democratic party and others..

It's so comforting to know that there is such a bright mind out there who can articulate like the blogger "Redstate."

Burris has demonstrated today that he does not believe that he has much of a chance of becoming Senator. Reid is a slimy polition but on this issue he has reason on his side. Blagojevich declared on what is now public record that he can not be depended on to choose a senatorial candidate. Blagojevich's temporary statis as governor has not been resolved yet but his declaration of unwillingness to make a legal choice for Senator requires that he not be taken seriously. Had he thought that he had a reasonable chance of becoming senator when a just selection process was made he would have declined Blagojevich's offer. I favored Burris when he ran against Blagojevich in 2002. I now see that they were really birds of a feather.

They are all bums. The US Govt. is rotten to the core.

Burris was elected statewide, as Attorney General, before Obama was as senator.

"...the first African American elected statewide in Illinois" means he was the first African American elected in a statewide election to a position IN Illinois.

Roland Burris became the first African American to win a statewide election in Illinois when he was elected state comptroller in 1979. Your language is confusing, however it is factual.

he was the first "African American elected statewide in Illinois" to an Illinois state office... not a national office. And He was elected to the Illinois office before Pres Elect Obabma was elected to the senate.

He was elected AG of Illinois in 1991.

where is the rev. jesse jaccccccckson when you need him!!!

Once again, a fine piece of writing AND editing by the once mighty Boston Globe - don't let the facts get in the way of a great story

Obama is not African-American, he is mixed race.

What a disaster the Obamacrats are turning out to be, even worse than I had feared.

John, I think he was elected to the position of attorney general before Obama was elected? Which means he would be the "African American elected statewide in Illinois", just not the first senator.

I think what it means is that Burris was the first African American elected to a statewide office in Illinois...not the US Senate. It's a bit unclear.

he was the first african american elected statewide as attorney general you morons.

OK People, here is what Poorly written paragraph 6 is talking about. The all white body it refers to is the current U.S. Senate, which now that Obama is out as Pres.-elect lacks an African American senator. I don't believe Obama was the first non-white U.S. Senator but this article could be construed to imply it if you don't read carefully. The sentence containing "first African American elected statewide in Illinois" refers to Burris being previously elected as attorney general in IL (being the first candidate of his race winning any statewide election there). The fact that he has now been appointed as Senator by Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich further confuses things because vacant seats are filled via appointment in IL until the next election cycle when a special election can be held like in most state (except MA). I hope that clears thing up for everyone.

Throwing "firsts" and other progressice "stats" around in this time of "change" may be all the rage lately, but it just makes articles like this confusing when the writers don't explain where their facts are coming from or what they apply to because they are more interested in announcing as many "firsts" in a paragraph as possible.

He was the first African American elected in a state wide race I think it was as the AG.He did this before Obama was in the Senate.
So the story does not have to be re-written.

REDSTATE isn't too bright. We don't need to look too far down the Republican aisle to find sickening corruption among the conservatives. Look no further than the most senior of Republican senators, Ted Stevens. As soon as Republicans come down from your self-appointed high horses of morality, the country might take you seriously again. Until then, enjoy your time as a minority party characterized by winners such as George Bush, John McCain, and Sarah Palin. See you in oblivion.

Burris is the first African-American elected to a statewide office in Illinois -- attorney-general, if I'm not mistaken -- and adding the office would have made the sentence a LOT clearer.

But the fact still remains that Roland Burris WAS properly appointed by the governor of Illinois, he is old enough and has been a citizen long enough, and the only valid reason for keeping him out is that, for the time being, the Secretary of State of Illinois has not signed the paperwork. The Supreme Court has already ruled on an analogous case for the House of Representatives, and Harry Reid knows that he does not have a legal leg to stand on.

If Harry Reid, a clear victim of Stockholm Syndrome, had spent one-tenth of his energy in standing up to George W. Bush and the Republicans in the Senate as he has in sabotaging the agenda of his fellow Democrats (not just about this, but about a lot of things), 300 million Americans would be a lot better off. After all, you've never heard him advocate barring Sen. Jon Cornyn, who has publicly encouraged violence against judges. But then, Cornyn is a Republican.

Why is Burris negotiating with the Senate? He should be negotiating with the IL secretary of state. This is a state matter not a Senate matter. The rejection was legal. Until his own state wants him, why should the Senate?

Illinois and Minnesota do not have both their senators representing them?
Welcome to the club, Massachusetts has Kennedy and Kerry they haven’t represented anyone but themselves for years.

Blagobama, what do you think this has this got to do with Obama?

Neither party has a monopoly on corruption. We should simply decry and punish the corruption without trying to make it a partisan issue.

@blagobama: Obama IS African-American - Father is African born, mother is American born. You are confusing this with the more delicate issue of whether or not he should self-identify as 'black' or of mixed race.

For all the right wing morons commenting here...
Yes, this is the change we voted for. We voted for people who follow rules. We voted for an administration that will work for the people rather than their rich corporate friends.
Funny how you could live through the destruction of 8 years of Bush and Cheney and thing it was all so well. They screwed you, ruined out nation's reputation in the world and destroyed the economy, and are responsible for an immoral war that has cots over 4000 of your countrymen to lose their lives for nothing, not to mention the destruction of a sovereign nation that was no threat to the USA.
Try living in the real world.

I paid good money for that senate seat and I want it NOW.
Token Burris

Let's get to something more important....like could someone explain to me Blagojevich's hair? What's that all about....

The circus has begun! Obama hasn't even been inaugurated yet, the new Congress hasn't even been seated yet, but we're already seeing the kinds of "Hope" and "Change" we can expect from the "democrats", that were foretold. Richardson, Panetta, now the Burris meltdown! I suggest that we might now consider an additional descriptive term besides the commonly used "Cluster----", we could also refer to this type of situation now as a "Full Blagojevich!" This is to be expected when qualifications, experience, patriotism, and the best interests of the nation are held in contempt, and only naked politics, cronyism, and self-interest are valued. (By the way, how much did BURRIS pay for the appointment?)

Giving the fact that Illionis so corrupted all the years, all becuse of the white boys
didn't play the card fairly, It wouldn't hurt to have a few black leaders in that state.

Todd (#29) says "I don't believe Obama was the first non-white U.S. Senator but this article could be construed to imply it if you don't read carefully."
~~~~~~~~~~~
No, he wasn't. That would have been Hiram Rhodes Revels, a black man elected as a Senator from Mississippi back in 1870. (Check Wikipedia, since any links, even when relevant, rarely get published by this particular blogger).

Reading carefully goes hand in hand with writing carefully. And in this case, it STARTS with writing carefully. If the "article" had been clearly written and edited (do Globe bloggers not have editors?), perhaps the entire comments section would be discussing something else rather than trying to determine what was actually meant in the confusingly written "article".

as someone who leans more right then left, I must applaud the dem's for blocking this fraud. A rare ethical move in the political world.

He IS African American. Given that his father is Kenyan and his mother is American, he is both African and American. When you put the two together, what do you get? DUH! All African Americans are of mixed race. Otherwise they would be only African or only American. Seriously, did you actually think at all before you wrote that, Blogobama??

The New York Times wrote it better... as usual

"For all you libs out there....this is the change you voted for. Well done...morons!!!"

Well-reasoned, logical and enlightening political debate and commentary from conservatives like the above makes me wonder why I'm still a liberal and haven't yet taken up with the obviously more intelligent conservatives who elected George W. Bush....twice. ;-) LOL

AcheG said "All African-Americans are of mixed race...." That is not true, not true at all. Some, maybe many African-Americans are of mixed races. It would be impossible for AcheG's comment to be true.

Yo RAD,
I live in the real world, that's why I support the war that toppled Saddam Hussein, a truly brutal dictator who terrorized the people of Iraq for nearly 30 years. The only thing immoral about the war was that it didn't expand to include other repressive regimes in Iran, Syria, or North Korea. Maybe Barack Obama will carry on the fight.

At least the Israelis are going after the Hamas death-cult in Gaza. Their victories will be another small gain in the long, terrible struggle against barbarism.

With respect to Bill Richardson, NO one credible and virtually no one incredible has accused him of any wrong-doing, nor does it seem at all likely that they will. This garbage appears to be part of a string of accusations, some maybe valid (e.g., Blago) and others blatantly concocted, against Democratic governors as part of the slime machine that Karl Rove has bragged about, starting with Don Siegelman of Alabama. But dealing with it represents what is likely to be a drawn-out effort that will both distract from the agenda of the tens of millions of Americans, Democrats and Republicans, who voted their disgust with the Cheney-Bush-Rove regime and prolong Richardson's own confirmation process.

Rather than do that, Richardson has opted to step aside. And good for him.

I have no understanding whatever why "Lightnin" referred to Leon Panetta in post 40. And the allegation that Al Franken has "stolen" anything is a complete fabrication, as the recount showed. (Norm Coleman, by the way, was against recount when he thought he was ahead. Now that the recount has shown clearly that he's a loser, he's decided that it's OK for HIM to go to court.) But then, no one expects Republican Bush-supporters to believe in consistency or reality.

The Democrats, the party of Jim Crow, George Wallace and the KKK are back to their old tricks.

AcheG (#44), why does it have to be "African-American"??? Why can't it just be "black", if one chooses to go by that race on a census form? Whites aren't called "European White Americans" (or wherever they're originally from). Not ALL blacks are from Africa - so why are all blacks termed African-Americans?

Political correctness gone so far awry, it's become ridiculous.

You're the Moron "Red State" - fortunately for you, you are anesthetized by intelectual laziness steeped in false American mythology, therefore do not feel the burden and pain of your abject ignorance. Unfortunately, we Blue Staters do. Go polish your guns, your Bible, and your ego.

AcheG - Not all African Americans are mixed race, that's not what it means.
American is not a race, it's an identifier. In the context of 'African American" , African is not a race, it is an identifier. If you say "I am an American", it typically means you are from the USA, but could cover anyone from any country in North,Central, or South America. Not all black people in the US are African Americans - Ask anyone form Haiti, Jamaica, or the Dominican republic and they will explain.

One can be whatever they want to be, Linda. I was referring to what Obama calls himself and why he is entitled to call himself that. He is African American because he is both American and African. Yes, he could also call himself "mixed race" if he chose but he is not one without the other. I'm only speaking of him in particular.

to EdA (#49) - if you SERIOUSLY believe that the recount by the heavily Democrat Canvassing Board that claims that Franken has won is actually valid, you're seriously mistaken. Why did they count boxes and boxes of votes that were left in cars for days after the election? What about the "lost votes" that were miraculously "found" and ALL were for Franken? Why were marks made for a Independence or Libertarian candidate counted as one for Franken, but the exact same type of mark made for Coleman was cast aside and not counted at all? What about double-counting absentee ballots that end up going Franken's way? Google "Tipping the Scales in Minnesota's Senate Recount" and see pictures for yourself. Then please tell me they didn't change votes in favor of Franken.

The only fair way to deal with this in MN is a special election. But oh NO, they're not going to do that, are they? Now that they've swayed the vote in their favor, they wouldn't let the people decide!

They're giving Burris a hard time strictly because he's black, just like with Wilkerson and Turner.

By the way, I stand corrected as regards all African Americans are of mixed race. I guess what I meant is that African Americans like Barack Obama are of mixed race-i.e., those who are decended from one from an African nation and one from the U.S.

This is better then any soap. The dummiecraps are off to a great start, throw in all the mornic statements from this board and this next four years would be better then a comic relief act if not for the fact these same idiots have too make real decisions that affect all of us. God help us with the likes of Reid and Pelosie. Its like putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop. Hopefully there are still a few middle of the road Demmies left and they will help hold the fort from being robbed. I don't trust any of the sorry SOBs. The present fools spend more time doing nothing then they do helping us. Pitiful

To RAD #37 - you said "We voted for people who follow rules. We voted for an administration that will work for the people rather than their rich corporate friends."
~~~~~~~~~~~
Rezko. Blagojevich. Richardson. Franken. Bill Clinton.

Yeah, how are those Democrats who follow "rules" workin' out for ya? Oh - and when the rules don't work in your favor? The Dems change 'em so they DO. Witness: The MA Dem Legislature changing the rules so a Republican Governor can't appoint a successor to the Senate when there was a faint hope in their hearts when Kerry might have become President.

"People who follow rules." RIIIIIGHTTTTT!

By the way, I stand corrected as regards all African Americans are of mixed race. I guess what I meant is that African Americans like Barack Obama are of mixed race-i.e., those who are decended from one from an African nation and one from the U.S.

Burris appeared so humble and qualified and squeaky clean until he showed up in Washington expecting to be seated without certification for the Sec. of State. And, with three lawyers at his side. This is basic stuff - the U. S. Constitution and Senate Rules and other simple laws. With his three lawyers at his side he has made it into a circus.

According to the NYT... Rule 2 of the US Senate requires appointees to be affirmed in a letter signed by both their Govenor and Secretary of State. The Secretary of State of Illinois refused to sign Mr. Burris's letter of appointment, therefore for the time being he didn't meet the Senate's requirements.
The Globe didn't report the whole story.

REDSTATE, so it sounds like you're saying you object to questioning the appointment of a regular contributor by a governor who was busted trying to sell the senate seat... well yeah, that does sound like GOP business as usual so I can see why you'd be upset.