U.S. Senate: Burning Down the House

Here's the roundup:

The Coleman/Franken deathmatch appears to be falling to the coke-addled comedian rather than the suspicious present-taking former Democrat who celebrated his 20th birthday tripping on acid at Woodstock. Anyway ... looks like some Republicans plan to block Franken from being seated. That should be worth making popcorn for:

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) threatened Friday to filibuster any attempt to seat Democratic Minnesota Senate candidate Al Franken next week. The new National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) chairman said he had not whipped votes in the GOP caucus, but added that he could not imagine any members defecting and seating Franken without a certificate of election. Franken will not have that certificate as long as the election is challenged in the courts — a likely scenario, with Sen. Norm Coleman’s (R-Minn.) legal team already attacking the credibility of the recount process.

Meanwhile, the governor of Colorado is tapping the Denver Superintendent of Schools for a Senate vacancy. Hey, why not, right? At least the guy knows how to work a mimeograph machine without turning his shirt purple. We hope.

Gov. Bill Ritter is shattering conventional wisdom in tapping the popular but politically untested Michael Bennet, superintendent of Denver Public Schools, as the U.S. Senate replacement for Interior Secretary nominee Ken Salazar. The surprising move, expected at a state Capitol news conference Saturday, perplexed many political insiders, most of whom considered Bennet the darkhorse candidate in a field crowded with big name, political veterans like Bennet's old boss, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.

To some, the reaction wasn't head-scratching. It was jaw-dropping.

"I'm very surprised. He's improbable. He's risky," said pollster Floyd Ciruli, who figured the little-known Bennet would barely be a blip in the polls because he's so unknown. . "He's qualified, and he could be a really, very special and sensational senator. But at least initially, from the political side of it, you are puzzled."

Then we hear solid confirmation that Caroline Kennedy has been crowned anointed exalted enshrined appointed to her Uncle's Senate Seat. Except then we hear she hasn't. Except maybe she has. Oh, who knows, really. This dynastic stuff makes my teeth ache.

Last, and certainly not least, we have Blago and Burris and that whole slow-motion train wreck. Latest news bits: Harry Reid is going to try to do something and fail at it. 'Cause that's how he rolls, yo. Apparently the Illinois Secretary of State's threat to not certify Burris is all hot air, which is too bad.

A spokesman for Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White (D) confirmed to Election Central that White knows he does not truly have the authority to stop the appointment of Roland Burris to the Senate, but he withheld his signature from it earlier today in order to make a statement. But the door does appear to be open to some legal ramifications.

"His feeling is we studied the constitution of Illinois, we looked at the statutes, and there was nothing there that said he had to sign the paperwork," said David Druker, White's press secretary.

"We don't believe he has the authority to hold up the appointment or veto it, to put it that way," Druker added

I'm getting tired just listing all of these mini-dramas. Am I missing any?

Franken stinks. I hope he misses a few months.

Quote:

---

"I'm very surprised. He's improbable. He's risky,"

---

...he was the highest bidder. ~:idea:
You know there had to be some serious quid pro quo going on there. The only difference with Blago is how blatantly ham-handed he was about it.

As for Burris, I'm really looking forward to watching the fireworks. :yes:

Glad to see Big Bad John back on the political scene.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Franken stinks. I hope he misses a few months.

---

Actually, looks like things are breaking his way.

The state Canvassing Board will reconvene Monday to declare which candidate received the most overall votes in the election. Barring court intervention, it will be Franken.

Franken's lead now stands at 225 votes after gaining 176 votes more than Coleman in Saturday's review of the formerly sealed absentee ballots. Franken started the day with a 49-vote advantage.

The 933 absentee ballots were among those rejected by poll workers but later found to be excluded in error. The campaigns eventually agreed they should be added to the recount.

Unless Coleman wins a pending court petition that seeks to add hundreds more ballots to the recount, the counting is done and the Canvassing Board can sign off on the result on Monday or Tuesday. The result cannot be certified for at least one more week under state law.

I know very little about Coleman and Franken, beyond a few public factoids I can toss at either. Both Jews, both spent the majority of their lives as Democrats, both were countercultural hippies back in the day, etc. What's your basis for despising Franken, TuffStuff, beyond him being a Dem? Surely Coleman would qualify as a RINO in your book, yes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Actually, looks like things are breaking his way.

The state Canvassing Board will reconvene Monday to declare which candidate received the most overall votes in the election. Barring court intervention, it will be Franken.

Franken's lead now stands at 225 votes after gaining 176 votes more than Coleman in Saturday's review of the formerly sealed absentee ballots. Franken started the day with a 49-vote advantage.

The 933 absentee ballots were among those rejected by poll workers but later found to be excluded in error. The campaigns eventually agreed they should be added to the recount.

Unless Coleman wins a pending court petition that seeks to add hundreds more ballots to the recount, the counting is done and the Canvassing Board can sign off on the result on Monday or Tuesday. The result cannot be certified for at least one more week under state law.

I know very little about Coleman and Franken, beyond a few public factoids I can toss at either. Both Jews, both spent the majority of their lives as Democrats, both were countercultural hippies back in the day, etc. What's your basis for despising Franken, TuffStuff, beyond him being a Dem? Surely Coleman would qualify as a RINO in your book, yes?

---

Coleman is no RINO. He's pro-life, pro war in Iraq, pro-gun, etc. I can't even really think of a single position that would put him at odds with the party platform, which is weird. Pro-life jews in higher US politics are the most rare thing imaginable. Until Cantor, Coleman was THE ONLY one and around 45 of our Senators and Representatives are Jewish (around 9%). I'm not so sure that I trust Coleman, he seems like an opportunist, but Franken stands agaisnt everything I beleive in AND I hate his personality.

The only consolation is that Minnesotans elected a total lunatic to the Governorship in Ventura. Nobody expects much more than some novelty from that State, so I wouldn't be suprised to see a B comedian and a B WWF wrestler run the state. Maybe they could elect a bunch of actual clowns and mimes to the House? They could all carpool to DC in a tiny car.

I read Frankens book, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right a couple of years back. It started off well enough but then it just got tedious basically re-telling the same things. A good few laughs in it though.

Looks like he might have upset a few folks on the right. Not entirely a bad thing. :laugh4:

Pardon me for being cynical, but I am cynical.

So far as I am concerned every race in every election is subject to serious tampering.

Now I don’t really expect a Republican to win in Minnesota, regardless of the vote.

Maybe it is a bit like the previous Governor’s Election in Washington, count the votes till the Dems win. This time they avoided the recount by frontloading the fraud.

I believe people deserve the government they elect, but the Parties are choosing for us and the whole system need an overhaul.

Remember that saying…No matter how you vote today, when you die, you’re a Democrat…

It doesn’t matter which party or if both parties do it, it needs to be fixed or just forget about elections.

I wouldn’t trust a dogcatchers election these days.
:oops:
:focus:
:gah2:

someone voted for that guy?:smash::inquisitive:

Wow, that wiki RINO article sickens me. I've never seen a bigger example of partisan MaCarthyism and everything else that is wrong with our system.

We deserve Senator Franken.

There are few more ardent and vocal supporters of the left-fringe of the Democrat party to be found. This one, at least, had the courage to run for office. Puts him ahead of Soros and others in my estimate.

Politics is a tough game, especially at the national level -- and this time Franken and company came out on top. Happens.

you know when i read the title to this thread i thought that the senate actually burned down the place. o well. better luck next time.

Sorry hooahguy, it was just a lame reference to an old song.

-edit-

And now this from Reuters ...

Democrat Al Franken will be declared the winner of the tight U.S. Senate contest in Minnesota, emerging from a ballot recount with a slim margin over Republican Norm Coleman, state officials said on Sunday. But Coleman, the incumbent, has asked Minnesota's supreme court to require that a few hundred additional absentee ballots be included in the recount -- and he could then ask the court to investigate the contest all over again.

"At the moment, Franken has a 225-vote lead," after the weekend counting of what were deemed the last uncounted absentee ballots, said Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, a Democrat who oversaw the process.

Ritchie said unless the supreme court acts on Coleman's request and orders more ballots to be counted, he will reconvene the state's Canvassing Board at 2:30 p.m. CST (2030 GMT) on Monday to certify Franken as the winner of the November 4 contest.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v.../Alfranken.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

Glad to see Big Bad John back on the political scene.

---

That's hysterical! :laugh4:

Looks like Burris intends to storm the doors of the Senate Chamber. He's gonna need ninjas. Lots and lots of ninjas.

Roland Burris touches down in Washington Monday afternoon, setting up a high-stakes showdown with Senate Democrats later this week.

Burris – traveling frugally — leaves Chicago's Midway Airport at 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on Southwest Airlines and is scheduled to arrive at Baltimore-Washington International Airport at 4:45 p.m., according to details released by his aides.

A defiant Burris told reporters in Chicago before his flight that he plans to tell Reid that "I'm here to take my seat."

It seems that Pelosi is busy buying matches

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to re-write House rules today to ensure that the Republican minority is unable to have any influence on legislation. Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian, and will so polarize the Capitol, that any thought President-elect Obama has of bipartisan cooperation will be rendered impossible before he even takes office.

MM, that article is hilarious. I think it's gone past hyperventilating and passed out on the sidewalk. Note that any article which cannot used "Democrat" versus "Democratic" correctly instantly loses credibility points, since the whole linguistic tic of never using "Democratic" is a holdout of the die-hard wingnuts.

Samples from the article: "Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian ... exposes a tyrannical Democrat leadership ..." And all this over a rule change? Do we have any notion of how the Republicans changed the rules when they had their 2000-2006 joyride? But note that the author of that article doesn't mention the current President or the recent Congresses, just goes back to the glory days of Gingrich.

For crikey's sake, don't reprint news releases from partisan mouthpieces. Find a semi-respectable source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

For crikey's sake, don't reprint news releases from partisan mouthpieces. Find a semi-respectable source.

---

:laugh4: Pot, please welcome kettle to the Backroom. :medievalcheers:

Vladimir, please feel free to please feel free to point out where I have cited leftwing mouthpieces, etc., etc., etc. And no, CNN, The Economist and Politico don't count toward your final score.

MM was posting from a purely partisan source that makes no pretension of being anything else. But by pointing this out, and asking him to cite a mainstream source, I'm a leftist shill? You need to have a long, manly hug with TuffStuff.

I find it fascinating that whenever I offer even the mildest corrective on the subject, I have rightwing nutjobs leaping up and screaming bias as though that were some sort of argument.

Do you have anything of substance to add to this subject, Vladimir, or did you just drop by to declare victory before scuttling away?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Vladimir, please feel free to please feel free to point out where I have cited leftwing mouthpieces, etc., etc., etc. And no, CNN, The Economist and Politico don't count toward your final score.

MM was posting from a purely partisan source that makes no pretension of being anything else. But by pointing this out, and asking him to cite a mainstream source, I'm a leftist shill? You need to have a long, manly hug with TuffStuff.

I find it fascinating that whenever I offer even the mildest corrective on the subject, I have rightwing nutjobs leaping up and screaming bias as though that were some sort of argument.

Do you have anything of substance to add to this subject, Vladimir, or did you just drop by to declare victory before scuttling away?

---

It is possible to be a leftist shill and still attempt fairness in your posts. I'm a conservative shill who tends to support the G.O.P. in pretty much everything, but I won't cheat and don't support conservatives who cheat... often.

Example. The Giants and the Patriots are playing a game. Some players would cheat on both teams in order for their own team to win. Other players desperately want their team to win, but would not compromise their own factual legitimacy to make it happen. Nobody on either team has business making the play calls.

You're like the relatively objective cornerback for the Giants wearing pinstripes to the game and hoping people confuse you with the ref.

I don't beleive that you are a bad or unfair guy, but your credibility as a mediator has been shot to hell regarding the Election of 2008. That is all we are saying. But so is mine, really.

By definition of supporting a "party" whether political or otherwise we are partisan. THere is nothing wrong with it. Everyone is partisan in some things.

So by your thinking, TuffStuff, it's entirely immaterial whether I try to post reliable information or not, correct? 'Cause I picked a side in the '08 election cycle, and that means that anything I say, by definition, is on a par with the most insane mouthings from Daily Kos or MoveOn.org.

This is what I don't understand. Seamus, for example, tilts to the right, but he goes out of his way to find good information and post worthwhile stuff. But I don't see any Dems or lefties on this board jumping down his throat because he's got a viewpoint. Now, I may not live up to the exceptional level of posting quality that Seamus demonstrates, but I'm probably funnier, and I make an effort to link/source good, credible information.

That makes me a football player attempting to fool you into thinking I'm the ref? Really?

I think, rather, that you and Vladimir are attempting to create a false equivalence where everyone is a partisan shill, and therefore there's no functional difference between a post in the comments section of Michelle Malkin and a published article in the Christian Science Monitor. It's a way to not only level the playing field but destroy the very concept of a "playing field," since games with rules have a well-established liberal bias.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Vladimir, please feel free to please feel free to point out where I have cited leftwing mouthpieces, etc., etc., etc. And no, CNN, The Economist and Politico don't count toward your final score.

MM was posting from a purely partisan source that makes no pretension of being anything else. But by pointing this out, and asking him to cite a mainstream source, I'm a leftist shill? You need to have a long, manly hug with TuffStuff.

I find it fascinating that whenever I offer even the mildest corrective on the subject, I have rightwing nutjobs leaping up and screaming bias as though that were some sort of argument.

Do you have anything of substance to add to this subject, Vladimir, or did you just drop by to declare victory before scuttling away?

---

Victory is mine!

Blast!

Another drive-by impailing.

Despite how much you would like to believe it, I don't have a cuddly little Lemur folder where I document all your .org contributions. But if I did, I'm sure there would *never* eeever, be anything that could be perceived as partisan.

Hell, your post in itself is reactionary and generally speaking are some of the most subjective and reactionary here (but never dull)! But that's cool, because like I indicated, this is the Backroom. :duel:

Roland Burris gets body-blocked at the U.S. Senate door. I guess it had to happen.

Burris made his way to the office of Nancy Erickson, the secretary of the Senate, to whom he presented his credentials, only to have her reject them. Afterward, the aspiring legislator stood in the rain outside and declared, “Members of the media, my name is Roland Burris, the junior senator from the State of Illinois.”

Not yet, he isn’t. The problem for Mr. Burris, of course, is that he was named to the seat by the embattled Illinois governor, Rod R. Blagojevich. Ms. Erickson had already said that the appointment letter forwarded by the governor’s office did not comply with Rule II of the Senate’s standing rules, which requires signatures of both the governor and the secretary of state.

Looks like DevDave got his wish. ~D

Blagojevich truly has been the best Christmas present ever. Hopefully he sticks it out and we get to see an impeachment. I'm sure he can leak lots of goodies on members of the state legislature. That would be high comedy. :yes:

... aaaaand now the Dems say Burris can join the Senate. What a complete waste of time this has been.

Is it just me, or does Harry Reid strike you as one of the most ineffective political leaders in the last 500 years? This dude does not understand arm-twisting, backroom threatening, pol bribing or just generally getting-his-way-ing. Reid lacks the spine and persistence of former Senate Majority Leaders such as Bill Frist, Tom Daschle or Trent Lott. The descriptors that come to mind for Reid are "limp," "flaccid," "empty" and "impotent."

After a private 45-minute meeting with the former Illinois state attorney general, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said that they were open to recognizing Mr. Burris’s appointment as long as he met several conditions.

They said that Mr. Burris, whose appointment was challenged because of the federal corruption inquiry surrounding Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, has to win the signature of the Illinois secretary of state and persuade a state legislative committee considering Mr. Blagojevich’s impeachment that there was nothing untoward about his selection.

Blago ran rings around the Washington Dems. You have to kind of admire his moxie, as well as the dead opossum on his head.

George Bush, low approval ratings, lame duck status, and all, has run rings around Reid and the Washington Dems. Completely spineless. So don't be giving Blago too much credit. ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

...Is it just me, or does Harry Reid strike you as one of the most ineffective political leaders in the last 500 years? This dude does not understand arm-twisting, backroom threatening, pol bribing or just generally getting-his-way-ing. Reid lacks the spine and persistence of former Senate Majority Leaders such as Bill Frist, Tom Daschle or Trent Lott. The descriptors that come to mind for Reid are "limp," "flaccid," "empty" and "impotent."

---

They left out 'arrogant' and 'immature'. Reid may look like an elder statesman but he acts like a histrionic brat who throws a tantrum when he doesn't get his way.

Quote:

---

Blago ran rings around the Washington Dems. You have to kind of admire his moxie, as well as the dead opossum on his head.

---

I suppose, but that would imply he's schooled in the Machivellan Method and thus in possession of more than a modicum of gray matter. Given that his current political woes were caused by similarly ballsy and cavalier decisions I'm inclined to think he's a mediocre minded egomaniac who blindly follows his id. Then again maybe I'm wrong, maybe a modicum of gray matter isn't required to run circles around the pack of proverbial rocket scientists currently running Washington.

I think modern science has yet to determine exactly what that thing is on the top of his head. It looks like a mutagenic manifestation of some follicular horror you'd find in a high school yearbook from the mid-70s...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

It seems that Pelosi is busy buying matches

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to re-write House rules today to ensure that the Republican minority is unable to have any influence on legislation. Pelosi’s proposals are so draconian, and will so polarize the Capitol, that any thought President-elect Obama has of bipartisan cooperation will be rendered impossible before he even takes office.

---

For a less "florid" discussion of the changes, consider this.

These changes will, at the discretion of the House leadership, limit GOP ability to offer competing leglislation and will prevent the forced shuffling of committee chairs that would have occurred at/neaer the end of Obama's first term. This is a solidification of the power of the majority to control legislation in the HofR.

It is reflective of the fact that the Dems WON. When you win a larger majority, you win the right to promote/enforce your agenda -- within Constitutional constraints -- on the minority. The GOP changed rules when it had power, and the Dems didn't like some of those changes. Its a part of the game.

Wonkette has a typically amusing summary of the Burris saga:

Burris’s brief but successful campaign was a colorful circus of race-baiting, publicity stunts, and general knavery that embarrassed everyone. But! The one thing is was not was illegal, so in the end everybody who had so firmly been against bowing to the Blagojevich Taint had to relent.

Alas, all of Roland Burris’s new Senate colleagues think he is a pathetic clown who stooped to an appointment that no decent Democrat would accept, and he is just a junior senator anyway so it’s not like he’ll be in line for any tasty committee chairmanships or anything. Basically he is now the most powerless senator in America, and the most reviled.

Meanwhile, the Minority Whip is warning Dems that they won't seat Franken for at least another month.

In an unusual move, Kyl went to the Senate floor this morning to lay out all the reasons why the Minnesota Senate election remains unresolved, and he listed Sen. Norm Coleman’s arguments before the Minnesota courts. Coleman’s election lawsuit contends there are newly discovered ballots, missing ballots, wrongly rejected absentee ballots and double counting of votes.

“Clearly there’s something wrong here and it has to be resolved by court,” Kyl said. “There are no stipulations for when proceedings must be completed. Estimations are that it could take a month or more.”

Lastly, there's a whole string of Republican Senators announcing retirement, opening up seats that were thought to be safe. Three official retirements so far.

Quote:

---

4) Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), 67
Hutchison recently announced the formation of a gubernatorial campaign exploratory committee. If Hutchison is to seriously challenge sitting Republican Governor Rick Perry, she would ostensibly have to resign her Senate seat so that she could campaign full time (and not be attacked by her gubernatorial opposition for leaving Texas with only one Senator - and, with that Senator being John Cornyn, she could be attacked for leaving Texas without any real Senate representation). With Texas having a relatively early filing period, we could expect a Hutchison resignation before the end of 2009 if she is truly serious about a 2010 gubernatorial bid, and all indications are that she is.

---

LOL:laugh4: But it's Big Bad john.

Strike, you may tower over other men the way a great redwood tree looms over mere oaks, but even you don't have Blagojevich Balls.

Contains some bad language, but is very funny.