what is he going to take him hunting?

tweek46420: what is he going to take him hunting?

or the classic:

D'OH......

linky:

SFW

ok I am failing so nevermind.


(it was a pic of cheney saying "Go f*ck yourself")

/sigh

...certification of appointment signed by Blagojevich and Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White.

You may recall from the controversy of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 that laws can be made by a conspiracy of a handful of people, should they wish to. (See blog on Enrolled Bill doctrine). This looks like the reverse situation -- the SoS has no "legal" authority to veto the appointment, but he has the power in reality.

...Burris planned to argue his case in the news media and threatened to sue Senate Democrats if they refuse to swear him in as the chamber's only black member... Race is a prominent force in the dispute.

I am so tired of this "race card" being brought up anytime a black person is involved in ANYTHING. Are you serious? Yeah, the whole problem is that the Senate doesn't want one of those blackies to be in their club - not that the person who appointed him is indicted for trying to sell the very seat he (Burris) is threatening to sue for. How unclean, but I guess it's just Illinois politics as usual.

/I'm really tired of the Democrats trying to keep a black man down...

A "cool reception"? Is there going to be a live band? That would be cool. I bet there's going to be party favors.

Maybe Palin could meet with him.

Cheney is going to give them a blowjob too?

I know he's got the fag gene and all. But really?

It's not corruption, it's Illinois.

Gumercules: It's not corruption, it's Illinois.

IS that where the Senate meets now?

Dupa
A "cool reception"? Is there going to be a live band? That would be cool. I bet there's going to be party favors.

A jazz band. That's cool.

Queen Dalek: A jazz band. That's cool.

How about cool Cool Jazz jazz band?

Barnacles!: ok I am failing so nevermind.

That's what you get for trying to be all fancypants with your posts at a quarter to two in the morning.

Ed Finnerty: Gumercules: It's not corruption, it's Illinois.

IS that where the Senate meets now?

Why yes, yes it is. Didn't you know?

Seriously though, FTFA Democrats have said that their opposition to Burris is not about Burris but the fact that anyone appointed by Blagojevich would be tainted by the corruption charges against the governor

It's how they roll in Illinois

steelpeg: /I'm really tired of the Democrats trying to keep a black man down...

I know, right? It's almost funny when you think about the full implications of what this particular race card would mean, if true. There would have to be a fairly large conspiracy of Senate Democrats who worked to send Obama to the White House for the sole purpose of clearing the Senate of black people.

I confess I don't really know anything about Burris, but I'm going to assume that, having been a Member of Congress for awhile, he's theoretically as qualified as anyone for the Senate seat. And I haven't heard anyone saying anything against the man personally. That being the case, I think the Democrats in the Senate are making a tactical mistake in dragging their feet. They shouldn't be punishing Burris (not to mention the people of Illinois) for the governor's screw-ups.

On the other hand, Burris's threat to sue the Senate Democrats for his seat suggests he's not as familiar with the Constitution as he should be. Constitutionally, the courts have no say in who gets seated in the Senate, if the Senate itself has already decided the issue.

On the third hand, the threat by certain Senate Republicans to refuse to cooperate in seating Franken if he wins the recount in Minnesota is equally obtuse. Again, constitutionally, the Senate can seat or not seat anyone it pleases -- but only technically. In real political terms, refusal by one party to seat a senator from the other party simply because he (eventually) won the election -- and without waiting for the final outcome of what could easily be many months of court challenges and counter-challenges -- is simply stupid and makes them even less likely to win future elections in Minnesota.

Burris should have never accepted Blago's offer. In doing that, he demonstrated a fatal lack of judgment which makes his suspect to me.

Additionally, there is this.

Burris sought death for innocent man

I do not want this man as my senator.

This has nothing to do with Buris. This has nothing to do with Buris being black. This has everything to do with Senate Democratic leaders saying that they would not seat ANYONE appointed by Blagojevich. Not to discredit Buris, who I am sure is an honorable man, Blago appointed a black man for the sole purpose of race. He knew exactly what he was doing. He tried to make it politically embarrasing for Senate leaders to stop him from appointing someone.

Stand your ground!!

JB4Pres: This has nothing to do with Buris. This has nothing to do with Buris being black. This has everything to do with Senate Democratic leaders saying that they would not seat ANYONE appointed by Blagojevich. Not to discredit Buris, who I am sure is an honorable man, Blago appointed a black man for the sole purpose of race. He knew exactly what he was doing. He tried to make it politically embarrasing for Senate leaders to stop him from appointing someone.

Stand your ground!!

Yes, of course, the governor is appointing a black replacement for the senate -- for the same reason Hillary will almost certainly be replaced by a woman appointee in New York. That's Poltics 101 and it's no surprise to anyone.

Can anyone verify that Barack HUSSEIN Obama does not carry the fag gene?

I know Cheney was burdened with the fag gene.

Bush was a male cheerleader, which is autofagometry.

But is Obama a fag?

mksmith: I confess I don't really know anything about Burris, but I'm going to assume that, having been a Member of Congress for awhile, he's theoretically as qualified as anyone for the Senate seat. And I haven't heard anyone saying anything against the man personally. That being the case, I think the Democrats in the Senate are making a tactical mistake in dragging their feet. They shouldn't be punishing Burris (not to mention the people of Illinois) for the governor's screw-ups.

On the other hand, Burris's threat to sue the Senate Democrats for his seat suggests he's not as familiar with the Constitution as he should be. Constitutionally, the courts have no say in who gets seated in the Senate, if the Senate itself has already decided the issue.

On the third hand, the threat by certain Senate Republicans to refuse to cooperate in seating Franken if he wins the recount in Minnesota is equally obtuse. Again, constitutionally, the Senate can seat or not seat anyone it pleases -- but only technically. In real political terms, refusal by one party to seat a senator from the other party simply because he (eventually) won the election -- and without waiting for the final outcome of what could easily be many months of court challenges and counter-challenges -- is simply stupid and makes them even less likely to win future elections in Minnesota.

He's never served in Congress or anywhere at the federal level.
He was the comptroller and attorney general in Illinois at certain points in the past.
He was never able to win in a Democratic primary.

Barnacles!: tweek46420: what is he going to take him hunting?

or the classic:

The classic what?

Barnacles!: D'OH......

linky:

SFW

The classic what?

Ed Finnerty: Can anyone verify that Barack HUSSEIN Obama does not carry the fag gene?

I know Cheney was burdened with the fag gene.

Bush was a male cheerleader, which is autofagometry.

But is Obama a fag?

I'm sure Barry isn't light in the loafers.
But I bet Michelle ties him up every night and farks him in the ass.

FTFA -- "...even if Burris arrives on Capitol Hill with the proper credentials.

Senate officials involved in the tangle of legal and logistical planning said Friday that a Democrat will object to Burris being duly sworn with the rest of his class and will propose that his credentials be reviewed for a period of time by the Rules Committee."


Be sure and quadruple check this guy's credentials, but give Caroline Kennedy a free pass?

Ed Finnerty: Can anyone verify that Barack HUSSEIN Obama does not carry the fag gene?

I know Cheney was burdened with the fag gene.

Bush was a male cheerleader, which is autofagometry.

But is Obama a fag?

He's fabulous, I'm just sayin'.

On the other hand he could have just learned how to be a ninja from a youtube video.

/+1 cookie if you know which one I mean

michaeld5: I bet Michelle ties him up every night and farks him in the ass.

with a banana!

Well, Cheney is a member of the legislative branch, so he should be one of the first to welcome him to the Senate.

mksmith: Yes, of course, the governor is appointing a black replacement for the senate -- for the same reason Hillary will almost certainly be replaced by a woman appointee in New York. That's Poltics 101 and it's no surprise to anyone.

Mr. Smith ... My point is way over there I think you missed it. I was saying that it doesn't matter that Buris is black. Senate leaders weren't going to seat anyone appointed by the corrupt governor.

\Young working fart, South Louisiana Chapter.
\\Tuck Fexas

steelpeg: /I'm really tired of the Democrats trying to keep a black man down...



A point. Try having one that isn't retarded.

Phil Herup: Be sure and quadruple check this guy's credentials, but give Caroline Kennedy a free pass?

Because those two situations are juuuuuust the same.

steelpeg: ...Burris planned to argue his case in the news media and threatened to sue Senate Democrats if they refuse to swear him in as the chamber's only black member... Race is a prominent force in the dispute.

Wait, the Senate Democrats, who elected the first American black President, are refusing Burris because he's black?

What?

No Mr. Burris, they're refusing you because you were appointed by Blowjobobiatch.

bartink: Because those two situations are juuuuuust the same.


Is that all you can muster?

The whole system of flexible standards that the Dems use is pathetic. I could care less who they finally pick in Illinois to be honest. They are all going to be retarded anyway. However,they will most likely be qualified and certified retards unlike Kennedy who is an unqualified retard.

Phil Herup: Be sure and quadruple check this guy's credentials, but give Caroline Kennedy a free pass?

Are you being serious?

bartink: steelpeg: /I'm really tired of the Democrats trying to keep a black man down...



A point. Try having one that isn't retarded.

Barrack is as black as I am.
Raised by white middle-class grand parents he has more in common with the average white, educated, middle class person than he does with the throngs of blacks who rushed out on election day.

/that qualifies as trolling yes?

eraser8: Phil Herup: Be sure and quadruple check this guy's credentials, but give Caroline Kennedy a free pass?

Are you being serious?


Shirley, I am serious.

What is your point?

Phil Herup: bartink: Because those two situations are juuuuuust the same.


Is that all you can muster?

The whole system of flexible standards that the Dems use is pathetic. I could care less who they finally pick in Illinois to be honest. They are all going to be retarded anyway. However,they will most likely be qualified and certified retards unlike Kennedy who is an unqualified retard.

I disagree. She's a reasonably bright and educated young woman, and is as qualified as most of the apes in the Senate. Indeed, the task of going to Washington to represent ones district in the senate is not one that requires the services of a genius or great statesman - it merely requires some basic intelligence, common sense, and good intention. Indeed, you or I could probably make reasonably decent senators, provided you could control your temper and I could stay sober.
No, the problem here is very simple: We all know that Ms. Kennedy is being offered the job for one reason, and one reason only - her name. And that's just not what I think of as the American way. We don't have royalty in this country, and we aren't supposed to. I'm truly befuddled that so many normally democratically inclined Farkers, who usually exhibit the most egalitarian of attitudes, can countenance it. While the word has been thrown around so much that it has almost lost it's meaning, this really IS elitism - and while I think Ms. Kennedy would make a perfectly good senator, I am steadfastly opposed to her appointment.

Phil Herup: What is your point?

The point is that -- if your comment is serious -- you don't understand what the hell is going on.

The Senate doesn't have the right to exclude a member based on his "merit" for the office. That's why there's no impediment to Kennedy's being seated. The Senate DOES have the right to exclude a prospective member if that candidate falls short of constitutional qualifications set forth in Article I, Section 3...OR if there exists a defect in the election/selection (Article I, Section 5).

There is a possible defect in the selection of Burris. Excluding him has nothing whatever to do with the question of whether he'd be a good senator. It has only to do with the integrity of the process by which he is trying to gain membership.

jso2897: Phil Herup: bartink: Because those two situations are juuuuuust the same.


Is that all you can muster?

The whole system of flexible standards that the Dems use is pathetic. I could care less who they finally pick in Illinois to be honest. They are all going to be retarded anyway. However,they will most likely be qualified and certified retards unlike Kennedy who is an unqualified retard.

I disagree. She's a reasonably bright and educated young woman, and is as qualified as most of the apes in the Senate. Indeed, the task of going to Washington to represent ones district in the senate is not one that requires the services of a genius or great statesman - it merely requires some basic intelligence, common sense, and good intention. Indeed, you or I could probably make reasonably decent senators, provided you could control your temper and I could stay sober.
No, the problem here is very simple: We all know that Ms. Kennedy is being offered the job for one reason, and one reason only - her name. And that's just not what I think of as the American way. We don't have royalty in this country, and we aren't supposed to. I'm truly befuddled that so many normally democratically inclined Farkers, who usually exhibit the most egalitarian of attitudes, can countenance it. While the word has been thrown around so much that it has almost lost it's meaning, this really IS elitism - and while I think Ms. Kennedy would make a perfectly good senator, I am steadfastly opposed to her appointment.

She is a Kennedy, the seat is hers by birthright. Chelsea in 2012.

eraser8: you don't understand what the hell is going on.


Yes, I do, and also I see your point entirely.

Well stated too BTW.

jso2897: the problem here is very simple: We all know that Ms. Kennedy is being offered the job for one reason, and one reason only - her name. And that's just not what I think of as the American way. We don't have royalty in this country, and we aren't supposed to. I'm truly befuddled that so many normally democratically inclined Farkers, who usually exhibit the most egalitarian of attitudes, can countenance it. While the word has been thrown around so much that it has almost lost it's meaning, this really IS elitism - and while I think Ms. Kennedy would make a perfectly good senator, I am steadfastly opposed to her appointment.


Wow.. THIS QFT. The whole statement about the liberal leaning Farkers who should by principle shun the whole concept of pseudo-royalty, seem to have no problem with the Kennedys at all. The lack of surprise to me is that they trend to have selective standards anyway.


jso2897: I could probably make reasonably decent senators, provided you could control your temper and I could stay sober.


Controlling my temper?...yeah right. When hell freezes over. Senator Phil Herup I like it. Can I be seated next to Senator Blutarsky?

globalwarmingpraiser: Chelsea in 2012.

Hmmm ...how about Barbara instead.

Phil Herup: Hmmm ...how about Barbara instead.

You forgot Palin!

Trig'12!

Honestly, I'll be straight up - I probably wouldn't have had a problem with Burris if he'd been appointed by Quinn. Or ANY of the 49 current sitting governors of other states, including my own (Corzine, who's about as popular as herpes right now) and Alaska's (and...well, you betcha). On a personal level, though the entire "I shot a man in Springfield just to watch him die" situation with Cruz back in '92 troubles me...I think that he's strictly qualified and has nothing that should immediately disqualify him, from what I've heard. (Donating money to Blague doesn't count.)

That said, Blago's maneuvering before giving Burris the farking golden thing does cast doubts on the entire process, including Burris' appointment. The only saving grace if Burris does eventually end up being seated is that he's out in two years anyway because...well...it's (as Governor Football would say) Roland farking Burris. He couldn't win a primary if Chairman Mao rose from the grave and ran against him.
(To be fair, at this point - and from my uneducated perspective - Zombie Mao is looking pretty good to me now vs. Burris.)

Looking at Caroline Kennedy - Patterson's nomination, so far, has been clean as far as I can see. Though in my view, her qualifications are debatable, I don't see any reason why she's immediately unqualified or qualified. She's old enough, she's a citizen of the US, she qualifies as much as you or I do. The whinging about dynasties by the left AND the right is retarded - it's just like Jeb's not immediately DQed because he's related to the chimpmander in chief, nor was Hillary immediately DQed because her husband liked playing with cigars in the Oval Office. (Though politics-wise, I disagree with Jeb and agree with Hillary more.)

I'll reserve judgment on her merits, though I've heard good things about her community organizing public work.

In the end, the entire argument about how we can put down Burris while being up Caroline's butthole is moot - they're two different situations entirely and the mitigating circumstances have to be looked at as such.

I imagine, only for the sake of imagining, what the reaction would be if a Republican Senator tried to do the same thing as Blagojevich (namely: trying to sell the seat and then appointing someone in spite of public disapproval). I recognize that Republican Senators are often corrupt and shameless (perhaps more obviously than Democratic Senators).

Go fark yourself, Mr. cheney.

Phil Herup: globalwarmingpraiser: Chelsea in 2012.

Hmmm ...how about Barbara instead.

YUMMO

LewDux: Phil Herup: Hmmm ...how about Barbara instead.

You forgot Palin!

If only Michael Palin could run for president.

/monty python would do a lot better than the Bush Administration did.