• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Blagojevich to name Roland Burris to Obama's Senate seat

You're right, he is innocent until proven guilty, which is why he's not currently in jail. However, the fact that he's not yet been convicted of a crime doesn't mean that I or anyone else have to think that he's innocent or that he shouldn't resign.

If the Illinois House is unable to write any articles of Impeachment, why should he resign?

There is a great set of Articles of Impeachment for Bush, all of them actually true. But why hasn't Bush resigned? Becuase Cheney is in charge anyway?

I still don't see anyone posting their most apparently incriminating snippetts of ranting phone conversations.

..
 
Last edited:
What are you talking about? No one I've ever had a conversation with including myself has ever suggested a desire to force a woman to have sex with them against their will.

You might want to expand your circle of acquaintances?




One must realize how hopelessly wrong they are when you and I thank each other in agreement....
 
I really wish Blago didn't do this. Even if this guy is qualified and might be a good pick, he will never be looked that way because he was picked by Blago.

I was watching Norah O'Donnell moderate a discussion on the nomination of Burris and was thinking that anyone who would oppose his nomination is as petty-minded and childish and vindictive as can be.

I think they are as shamefully small minded and juvenile as can be.

(And that certainly reinforces EVERYTHING I've ever known of Harry Reid.)

If you look at every professional act and deed performed by Blago since the "Pay for Play" offer, if you would disqualify Burris you'd have to nullify every one of his acts as Governor since he was accused.

And UNTIL he is accused he is still afforded the rights of citizenship.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Otherwise it is nothing more than mob rule.

A perfect new sobriquet for liberals.

A mob.
 
If the Illinois House is unable to write any articles of Impeachment, why should he resign?

There is a great set of Articles of Impeachment for Bush, all of them actually true. But why hasn't Bush resigned? Becuase Cheney is in charge anyway?

I still don't see anyone posting their most apparently incriminating snippetts of ranting phone conversations.

..

Right.

.....
 
One must realize how hopelessly wrong they are when you and I thank each other in agreement....
Ain't that the truth!

Hell_freezing_over.jpg
 
He's only fearless because he knows we aren't going to hang him.

An ironic comment when viewed as overshadowing your signature. Don't you think? :)
 
An ironic comment when viewed as overshadowing your signature. Don't you think? :)

Not really. I don't really suggest we hang him, I just think the government needs to fear the People.

“When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” –Thomas Jefferson

Thus the difference is clear. The comment in this thread is one commenting on the fear of the People by the government. My sig is the opposite, it's the fear of the government by the People.
 
Last edited:
you can change "hoplessly wrong" to any of a number of common vernacular that would earn oneself points up here. :rofl

If the US has such a strong case against Blagojevich, how come they need three months to get an indictment?

"The U.S. attorney's office today asked a federal judge for an extra three months to formally indict Gov. Rod Blagojevich and his former chief of staff."

U.S. seeks more time to indict Blagojevich - Chicago Breaking News

:rofl:spin:


..
 
Last edited:
I really wish Blago didn't do this. Even if this guy is qualified and might be a good pick, he will never be looked that way because he was picked by Blago.
Yep, exactly right. I do hope though in all fairness to Mr. Burress that he will get some consideration based on merit after Blogo goes down, even though I don't think the congress has the stones to put thier name with a Blogo candidate.
 
Only in D.C., Chicago, and Baton Rouge.
Oh yeah B.R. has some of the slickest politicians I have ever seen, they can take a leak on your head and convince you it's for your greatest benefit.
 
I think Blago made the right move. (for him)
Carrying on his duties as Governor is the best way to deflect his critics.
I was thoroughly pissed after listening to the Lt. Gov's remarks. He has Blago convicted an sentenced before the impeachment. If IL didn't want Blago to appoint someone they should have acted quicker to impeach him and get him removed from office.
Currently, he is still Gov and it is still his job to appoint someone.

I have a question.
How can current Senators "refuse to seat" his appointment?
I didn't know they had a say in the matter.
 
I think Blago made the right move. (for him)
Carrying on his duties as Governor is the best way to deflect his critics.
I was thoroughly pissed after listening to the Lt. Gov's remarks. He has Blago convicted an sentenced before the impeachment. If IL didn't want Blago to appoint someone they should have acted quicker to impeach him and get him removed from office.
Currently, he is still Gov and it is still his job to appoint someone.

I have a question.
How can current Senators "refuse to seat" his appointment?
I didn't know they had a say in the matter.

The Senate can vote a Senator out of office, 66% Vote, as I recall. So the US Senate can kick out any Senator, and the state has to come up with another Senator, according to the rules of that State, usually appointment by the Governor.

The House refused to seat a US Congressman, in the 50's and it took 21/2 years to go through the courts, and the courts ruled the House had to seat the Congressman.

So the Senate can refuse to sit a Senator, just not count his votes, and don't give him office space, or phone service. Burris sidestepped the question of how much money he had raised to spend on Legal fees to actaully get seated in the Senate. I would say the Senate has the power, but not the right to refuse to sit Burris.

The signature of the Secretary of State is not required by the Illinois constitution. That is just past practice.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah B.R. has some of the slickest politicians I have ever seen, they can take a leak on your head and convince you it's for your greatest benefit.

No offense meant to you, but LA politics are pretty dodgy. Is Jindal helping to clean things up, is he part of the problem, or is the problem just too big for him to deal with?
 
I have a question.
How can current Senators "refuse to seat" his appointment?
I didn't know they had a say in the matter.

Article I Section 5 of the Constitution

Section 5. Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner, and under such penalties as each House may provide.

It has been used before to refuse to seat members - sometimes for purely political reasons. This same clause would likely have been used against Ted Stephens had he won re-election.
 
Looks like a game of quienes mas macho is brewing in IL..... Blago is some kinda nut to appoint ANYONE.........




I would like to add, It would be to Obama's benefit to stay the hell away from these shenanigans.....

Why doesn't Blagojevich just flip everyone off; same thing isn't it? :rofl
 
CNN is reporting that Burris is asking the IL Supreme Court to FORCE the Secretary of State in IL to certify Blago's appointment of him as Jr. Senator from IL.

This gets curiouser and curiouser.
 
I am fully in support of the Senate refusing to seat any appointment. Burris seems like a good guy, but the situation is tainted.
 
No offense meant to you, but LA politics are pretty dodgy. Is Jindal helping to clean things up, is he part of the problem, or is the problem just too big for him to deal with?
No offense taken, it's the truth. Jindal is doing some good things, he is going after budget problems, the new ethics laws are tougher than most if not all of the 50 states currently, but the problem is they don't have enough teeth in the enforcement category(yet). Our governer has his work cut out for him, but I think overall he is doing pretty well so far.
 
I am fully in support of the Senate refusing to seat any appointment. Burris seems like a good guy, but the situation is tainted.
I completely agree. I think a special election is the current best scenario and Buress should be given consideration in said election, but the situation as it stands is definitely suspect no matter what is done by the current Il governer.
 
I am fully in support of the Senate refusing to seat any appointment. Burris seems like a good guy, but the situation is tainted.

I completely agree. I think a special election is the current best scenario and Buress should be given consideration in said election, but the situation as it stands is definitely suspect no matter what is done by the current Il governer.

Then everything the Governor has done since he's been in office is tainted.

Cancel and rescind everything.
 
Last edited:
Then everything the Governor has done since he's been in office is tainted.

Cancel and rescind everything.
Anything that is provably illicit, yep.
 
Where does the rule of law play into your rationale?

If politicians are posturing for popular approval by opportunisitic stone throwing, why should laws be any hinderance?



..
 
Back
Top Bottom