.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Monday, August 31, 2009

Changing The Rules Again; Libs Desperate To Hold Onto Kennedy Senate Seat

The Liberals will do anything to hold onto power. Anything.

So desperate are they, they once again are trying to change the rules in Massachusetts, so that Dead Ted Tumor Head Kennedy's vacant U.S. Senate Seat remains in the hands of a Liberal. From the WSJ, prior to Fat Ted's death:

    Senator Ted Kennedy, who is gravely ill with brain cancer, has sent a letter to Massachusetts lawmakers requesting a change in the state law that determines how his Senate seat would be filled if it became vacant before his eighth full term ends in 2012. Current law mandates that a special election be held at least 145 days after the seat becomes available. Mr. Kennedy is concerned that such a delay could leave his fellow Democrats in the Senate one vote short of a filibuster-proof majority for months while a special election takes place.


    What Mr. Kennedy doesn't volunteer is that he orchestrated the 2004 succession law revision that now requires a special election, and for similarly partisan reasons. John Kerry, the other Senator from the state, was running for President in 2004, and Mr. Kennedy wanted the law changed so the Republican Governor at the time, Mitt Romney, could not name Mr. Kerry's replacement. "Prodded by a personal appeal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy," reported the Boston Globe in 2004, "Democratic legislative leaders have agreed to take up a stalled bill creating a special election process to replace U.S. Senator John F. Kerry if he wins the presidency." Now that the state has a Democratic Governor, Mr. Kennedy wants to revert to gubernatorial appointments.

    Beacon Hill has long sported heavy Democratic majorities, so the state legislature has the votes to grant Mr. Kennedy's wish. But does it have the chutzpah? An election is the more democratic option. After witnessing recent attempts by incompetent Governors in Illinois and New York to fill Senate vacancies, Massachusetts voters may have soured on such appointments. Especially when Mr. Kennedy's motivation for changing the law is so obviously born of partisan interest, not principle.

At least he can't kill anyone, or leave them to die, anymore.

Yes, an election would be the more democratic option, but don't kid yourselves; the last thing Democrats are for or support is real democracy.

No...no Liberal Elitism or Agenda here. Move along. Move along.


Labels: , , ,

No, its Massachusetts. A republican has no chance of retaking the seat. But it's important that the seat not be empty so that a state isn't denied a second voice in the senate. A temporary caretaker to fill until the election is the best choice. Although I do agree that it is a political calculation.
Leftard playbook. If you can't lie... steal. If you can't steal... cheat. If you can't cheat... use fraud to change the rules. Leftards suck. Leftards suck always.
Well Darren, no one really knows who has a chance of winning the Kennedy seat. You are right, the odds are against a Repub, but no one really knows. Mass did elect Repub Gov Mitt Romney, so anything is possible. But the grieving Kennedy Cultists will vote for their favorite Socialist, of that there is no doubt.

Glad you agree it is a political calc on the part of the Dems. That aspect couldn't be more obvious.
Change the rules whenever the Libs feel they can't have their way, that is indeed their mantra, Molson. Liberals suck. They suck suck suck.

We all owe the glioma tumor a debt of gratitude.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker

Web Site Traffic Counters
Alabama Internet

Listed on BlogShares

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

This site uses photographs and material from other sources in strict
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.

Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.