Officers could bar Burris from Senate

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

WASHINGTON - Should Roland Burris show up Tuesday for duty in the Senate, armed police officers stand ready to bar him from the floor.

This cinematic showdown is among an elaborate set of contingencies that Democratic leaders are planning if, as expected, the Illinoisan shows up with newly elected senators pressing his claim that he is the legitimate replacement for President-elect Barack Obama after the disputed appointment of Burris by Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich.

Democratic leaders hope to avert such a standoff. And Burris, in an interview yesterday with the Chicago Tribune, said he hoped to claim the Senate seat without added drama.

"We're not going to create a scene in Washington," Burris said. "We hope it's negotiated out prior to my going to Washington."

Still, the Senate leaders' planning, detailed by a Democratic official briefed on their deliberations, even covers scenarios such as Blagojevich appearing in person to escort Burris.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.senate01jan01,0,4062148.story more

[Mojambo]

1. That's going to be a very unfortunate image if it happens.

Unfair or not, it's going to scream "White Boys Club."

Here's hoping it's somehow avoided.

[amandabeech]

2. There will be side-by-side photos of this with George Wallace and armed guards standing a

the entrance to the U. of Alabama in order to keep African American students out. Really ugly.

The repigs will have a field day with this if it happens, and Bobby Rush will look like a prophet.

For the life of me, I cannot understand why Reid and Obama did not leave some wiggle room so that they could counter Blago's well known unpredictability, egotism and cunning. They really boxed themselves in.

[FrenchieCat]

3. This ain't an issue of race, so Burris showing himself up there

won't be misinterpreted by most folks.

And if anyone wants to believe this is about race,
I'm not sure how that would be. Can someone explain it to me?

Thanks.

[Cash_thatswhatiwant]

12. Well, from what I hear African Americans in Chicago are not happy that he's not

being seated.

I agree, that it shouldn't be about race, but Bobby Rush pretty much interjected it by saying anyone opposition to Burris = lynching.

[Rockholm]

13. Burris is making this about race..and himself.

This whole mess is about Blogo. Burris was a fool and showed poor judgment in accepting a bogus appointment. Greed, plain and simple.

[kickysnana]

4. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. The enemy is the GOP not other Dems. n/t

[dcindian]

5. And the senate Democrats start their march to 1994

Follow the law as it is written. The state sent you a senator who has done nothing wrong it is an abuse of power.

[mucifer]

6. They won't block him from entering. But, they won't swear him in.

They will put the question to a committee and hope IL can deal with it before they need to.

[Vinca]

7. IMHO, Burris is a less than ideal candidate given the death penalty case and

Blago hanging over his head, but I think the Democrats would be foolish to make this a giant spectacle. The bottom line is Blago is still the official governor of the state and Burris meets the Constitutional requirements for the seat. They can seat him now, quietly, or wait until after the lawsuits and a huge brouhaha. Meanwhile, the public is wondering about the economy, jobs, healthcare and wars.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

8. GEEZ!!!!

:banghead:

Is THIS really how they want to start the year off? As long as Burris meets the technical qualifications for the job and is not alleged to be involved in Blago's "pay for play" scandal (or otherwise legally or ethically compromised) in any way, then there should be no reason for the Senate NOT to seat him.
Any other move would just be boneheaded in the long term IMHO and physically blocking access (with the attendant media coverage) to a DULY appointed Senator is just even more bad publicity that Obama, Reid, et. al simply don't need. They've already embarrassed themselves somewhat by suggesting that Burris (or anybody appointed by Blago) should NOT be seated despite any apparent legal justification for their position but they will only be compounding their embarrassment by taking such an aggressive approach. They either need to provide some legal justification for their decision or they should seat Burris and let him serve until he has run for re-election on his own merits in 2010. There is nothing to be gained and a LOT to be lost in terms of time, votes, and bad publicity by so aggressively fighting against this appointment regardless of who's making it.

Our party leaders may be on the right side of the things (most of the time, anyway) but their political instincts on things like this leave MUCH more to be desired. It's really too bad they never felt this strongly about enforcing their subpoenas of Rove, et. al.

[Blarch]

9. big mistake.

BIG BIG mistake.

[SuperTrouper]

11. I hope Burris does not make a scene in the floor of the Senate. How embarrassing

for our Party

[S_E_Fudd]

10. They should...

Show they won't countenance the type of corruption that helped cause the Republican downfall in 2006...

[PurityOfEssence]

14. Of all the stupid incidents for this bunch to FINALLY make some kind of stand on

THIS is what finally makes them turn and fight? After all the nebulous waffling of being on many sides of most issues and nimble to the momentary need, THIS is something important? This, the sheer outrage that a Governor doesn't heed their bombastic dictate to NOT perform his job and replace a voting legislator? Jesus Christ almighty, STOP IT ALREADY.

They can still drop it and let it run its course without too much damage. They're getting vindictive and retaliatory because they're not being allowed to do something that they're not supposed to be allowed to do in the first place. States have some sovereignty under a federal system, dammit. This is usurpation. Obama's a constitutional scholar, so it's not like this is news.

It makes them look MUCH worse than they looked before. Before, they just looked like they were embarrassed by a boorish clod opportunist trying to profit from a lucky opening, now they look like strong-arming, smoky back room hustlers who fly into a rage at the last-ditch conniving of a doomed associate. How DARE he duck when they throw things at him. Sure the guy's a skunk, but didn't their mommies ever warn 'em about one of the fundamental truths about humanity, namely: NEVER KICK A SKUNK. Wounded animals charge. Let sleeping dogs lie. Don't mess with crazy people. There are more, and they should be part of politics 1, not some esoteric upper-division course.

Somebody grab Rahm Emmanuel by the lapels and rattle his addled, ruthless, fixer brain back into some kind of civil decency. I don't want our guys to be like this. What's it going to hurt to allow the system to work as it legally should? Who the hell is Harry Reid to flat-out dare a wounded narcissist to make a move? It's not his call to make. Is this what the future holds? Haven't we had enough of the no-prisoners, macho, scorched-earth retaliation of the last few years of Republican legislating?

I thought we were going to have some "new" politics. Please honey, not in front of the kids...

Just back off; it can still be a mere blip.