This is about a month old, but I wanted to make sure that big bag of Chivas Teddy Kennedy didn't go tits up and render the discussion morbid. Call me Mr. Sensitivity.
Is there any doubt whatsoever (even from you honest-ish leftists here) that the national media would be screaming bloody murder if what I am about to describe took place within a GOP-controlled state?
Check it out...
Remember 2004 when Kerry looked like he might get elected? State of Massachusetts had a policy at the time that if a sitting U.S. Senator left office - as Kerry would have had to do if elected POTUS - the sitting governor was to appoint a replacement for the duration of the Senator's term.
That's right, F. John Kerry gets the POTUS, Governor Mitt Romney (Republican) would get to appoint his replacement.
The Taxachusetts State Legislature (leftist, of course) threw a fucking hissy fit and quickly changed the rules such that a "special election" would have to be held.
Fine. Whatever. Make a case about putting the decision in the hands of the people.
Flash forward to now[-ish]:
Speaker would back gubernatorial appointment of interim senator
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Article
The leader of the Massachusetts House says he will support giving Gov. Deval Patrick the power to appoint an interim successor to U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy if that becomes necessary.
The Democratic-controlled Legislature stripped Republican Gov. Mitt Romney of that authority in 2004 because of fears he would name a Republican to replace U.S. Sen. John Kerry if he had been elected president. . . .
But House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi said yesterday if Kennedy should step aside or have to be replaced because of his brain tumor diagnosis, he'd be in favor of a gubernatorial appointment.
"That was a good political reason (then)," DiMasi said of taking the power away from Romney. "It's a good political reason to change it back."
|
Well, give the motherfucker credit for being honest (final quotes).
Katherine Harris follows the letter of the law and gets crucified. This here jackass champions flipping laws back and forth like a light switch and...[cricket noises]...
nothing!(?)
I really don't mind this behavior, per se. If its legal, go for it. My hope is that the GOP begins to take the gloves off. But this was completely ignored by the national media. Look at all the national attention the media gave, for example, the redistricting of Texas (which was legal). The faggot Texas Democrats who ran away to Oklahoma were painted as some sort of goofball heroes, for Pete's sake.
Meanwhile, the GOP tolerates some crazy ass shit...and I don't know why. All rule-of-law type stuff that they take the higher road about at their own peril. They need to get nasty and crank up their own scream machines. All sorts of things shouldn't have gone down they way they did... Frank Lautenberg being placed on the ballot after the LEGAL deadline had passed - just because the guy who was on the ballot turned out to be a criminal. Joe Negron having to run under Mark Foley's name on the ballots (almost won, anyway). Jean Carnahan's dead husband allowed to "run" with her being "appointed" to fill the seat (one of the most "contestable" elections in history, but, as was his wont, Ashcroft had too much class to dispute it). The Tim Johnson and Paul Wellstone bullshit. Hell, the Nixon-Kennedy election, FFS...why isn't the fraud aspect of that election more "common knowledge"?
One of two things has to happen - and both of them begin with the GOP getting serious: Put the clamps down on Dem horseshit or do whatever it takes to beat them at their own game. What we're doing now ain't working. We'll know it is working when Democrat screams for more "civility" in politics hits a fever pitch.