Here he is. The shortsightedness of grown men is amazing. Below Sg notes that this is brilliant political move by Blago. I guess that's true--in the most cynical, and immediate sense of the word "political." But in any sort of higher sense--in terms of actually getting anything done, in terms of attaching your name to an issue, in terms of doing anything beyond keeping your job--Blago ceased to be political brilliant a long time ago.
Obama's campaign this year was brilliant, in the sense that he kept his adversaries on defense. But it was also brilliant because it was in service of something--an argument for universal health-care, for an exit from Iraq, for an end to liberal defensive crouch. Now, one can agree or disagree with those issues. But the point is that Obama was not merely fighting for his job, but for actual issues.
Which leads me to Bobby Rush. Look that "lynching" statement is exactly what it is--crass and silly. One good thing about having a Barack Obama around, is that that sort of tactic doesn't become the face of black politics. That said, can we kill the phrase "Race Card?" Is that statement by Bobby Rush actually going to scare anybody? All the black people who see a racial angle in this, please post here. I desperately want to hear from you...
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Yeah, I don't see how this works. I can't imagine that black people in ILLinois are gonna be up in arms if Burris goes down.
Unfortunately, a few lazy journalists at Slate.com, think this kind of stuff is the face of Black politics.
What are Burris' strengths? Besides his 16 years in office, he grew up downstate, in Centralia, Ill. He understands, more than most contenders for the seat, that there is an Illinois outside Chicago. And he's African-American. That helps Blagojevich at home. Blacks are the best friends he has left in Illinois, and they were expecting the governor to keep the Senate integrated.
Funny thing is, before I started reading this blog, I wouldn't have even noticed this statement. Now it jumps right out at me.
I guess I should thank you Ta-Nehisi for helping me see what was right in front of my nose.
Forgot the link to the full story:
http://www.slate.com/id/2207684/
Its not the people of Illinois that Bobby Rush was appealing to. It was the Congressional Black Caucus which at this very moment doesn't have a single member in the Senate. Which is probably why I saw a report on TPM that Danny Davis of CBC fame is backing the move too. The race card it seems is not exclusively used against white folks but some times against other black folks too.
Having said all that let me say this, the guy will be in the Senate two years with no committee chairmanships and probably without a seat on any committee. How much trouble could he create? As fucked up as it sounds the Dems would do well to let Blago win this one and focus on impeaching him and getting him convicted of all charges. Don't forget that Blago's lawyer is the same man who got R.Kelly off after every mofo in the world watched the video of him pissing on those little girls. This aint no easy win.
Probably Burris' only saving graces was that he refused to say Blago was innocent. But other than that he sold his soul and more than that he knows he did. Everything about all of his responses on MSNBC and just a minute ago on CNN show by his defensiveness that he knew he was dead ass wrong when he said yes. But I have to say I am not really all that upset anymore after thinking about it. The change in tone from me comes from asking whether or not this guy would have been controversial at all if Blago would have named him before he got arrested. From what I have found about the cat I would say no. In fact most people probably would have called it a good albeit boring pick. So while Blago is a slimeball for doing it, and Burris is weak for accepting in a practical sense I don't think it makes all that much of a difference.
Ooo! Me-me-me-me-me-me-me!
I see a racial angle in this. I see Bobby Rush trying desperately to not be irrelevant now that Obama is actually the Prez-elect, and his "former-black-pantherness" isn't aVISA check card anymore.
Wait... that's not what you meant?
QT
The Rush statement fits right in with Blago's standard tactics as revealed by the taped conversations: a form of extortion to get what he wants. He tried this with the Tribune-fire a columnist for Wrigley field help and with the various candidates for the Senate seat. Now he's trying to run a racial guilt trip, with willing accomplice Bobby Rush, into accepting this appointment. The conference basically came across as: If you reject this guy, you're hurting blacks. While I know next to nothing about Burris, his willingness to partake of this form of extortion makes him equally sleazy. And yes I'm Black. I would like to see African American representation increase, but this is not Affirmative Action by any means~it's Blackmail~or Blagomail.
My turn! My turn! as I raise my hand--Coates, do you really think that if Burris wasn't the kind of Black guy that Rush could get behind he would have gone to the mat for him like he did at the news conference? I don't know--maybe that was his normal behavior, but hearing him basically punk anybody who would dare go on record and oppose this appointment because it would be the only Black member of the Senate was tough for me to swallow.
This is the same Bobby Rush that pulled that "Obama is too elite/not down with the civil rights cause enough" card when they were running against each other in 2000. This is also the same Bobby Rush that today, bemoans the fact that there is a lack of Black representation in the Senate, but when Obama was running for the Senate in 2004--presumably as a Black man--Bobby Rush supported his white opponent, Blair Hull.
Race is definitely at play here--Blago knows it, and is more of a creep for exploiting it--and both Rush and Burris know it and have sold their souls just to keep the "Black seat."
This is really pathetic. Why Burris would sully his own (seemingly formidable) reputation by agreeing to be Blago's lackey is beyond comprehension. I don't see what Burris will ever get out of accepting Obama's seat. This move is certainly not a stepping stone to a better political position, besides, he's already 71 years old. What does Burris want? A congressional pension? Are the Senatorial perks that good that you throw yourself under the bus to get them?
What really pisses me off about situations like these is that they tr
It really pisses me off when people take advantage of genuine issues – in this case, Black representation in the Senate – and exploit them for cynical, self-serving ends.
It’s been the tactics of shysters and frauds for time immortal, but it’s no less infuriating.
The Right is going to get a lot of mileage out of this and a lazy media will be abetting them the entire ride.
You know what, after learning more about this guy I can't blame him.
It's obvious he's pined for statewide office, only to see time and perhaps skillset leave him wanting.
I'm 28, at 34 if I had a chance to sit the bench for 10 games with the T-Wolves, I would probably jump at it. I know there some disimilarities with the analogy, but you get my point. Sometimes you take opportunities anyway they come.
k1
ryanculver.blogspot.com
It is time, and past time, for Bobby Rush to go. Let us honor his service, his commitment and his courage and then say goodbye. He is not serving his State or his nation well today.
k1
I made the same point today at Swampland before it was announced the Burris accepted. At 71 what the hell else is he gonna run for in his life? He has lost when he tried to get elected to Gov, mayor and even senator before. He seems to be eminently qualified based on prior service. Hell Ida took it too. I wouldnta brought up Bobby Rush to up my street cred though whilst ruining his rep at the same time. But hell man like I said if the Illinois Dems woulda had some courage and pushed for the special election none of this shit would have or could have happened.
As a Chicagoan, I think most people will see a rejection of Burris for what it really is, which is a rejection of Blagojevich. Most Chicagoans and Illinoians see Blagojevich as illegitimate; thus, anyone he appoints will be seen as illegitimate by extention (regardless of that individual's merits). People's dismay at Burris' appointment has nothing to do with Burris himself. People are appalled and slackjawed that a man who was seemingly trying to sell a senate seat for his own personal profit just appointed someone to that seat despite the widespread opposition to him doing so. I am disappointed that Burris accepted the appointment. I never had any negative impressions of Burris before, but this makes me question his motives and judgment.
As for sgwhteinfla's comment about "how much trouble could he [burris]create," I want more from my senator that just not creating trouble for two years, especially considering the very serious problems our country is facing. Besides how many people said that about Bush eight years ago. Burris is now saying that he may run in 2010 - he seems to want to be more than a caretaker of the seat. I want the appointee to have a good chance of maintaining the seat, and I honestly don't know that he or anyone else would be able to hold the seat 2 years from now after having been appointed by Blagojevich. Frankly, I am in favor of a special election to fill the seat. It's the best way to seat a legitimate untainted senator.
I see the "race card" or whatever, besides it isn't like Rush hasn't used it b4 (against Obama). This is old guard vs. new guard, and at the very least you can tell that neither Burris or Rush respect PEBO's wishes. I guess he's still an upstart to them.
Let me just end on a personal note. In the 1930's my grandfather was run out of East TX, and almost lynched. My other Grandfather (in Indiana) was afraid he might be lynched when he found the body of a white woman while fishing. For Rush to throw out lynching, like that was just crash, classless, and nasty. I feel it demeans a lot of ppl who were lynched or threatened with it. Okay there's my 2 cents.
Yeah, a Senator Burris makes it very plausible Illinois will have a Republican Senator in 2010.
the "next generation' - Jesse Jackson Jr.-got caught with his pants down. He was IT.
You might not like Rush and what he said - he's MY Congressman, and I've NEVER voted for him in the Democratic Primary - but, I understand what he's attempting to do. Might not be pretty, but that Irish gang was trying to muscle in, and they're making a stand.
I see this through local eyes. Black folks haven't been feeling this entire process. The word on the street is that Blago was arrested the day that he was supposed to appoint Jesse Jackson, Jr. Sorry if the Black folk wear the tinfoil hat and believe it. It rubs folks the wrong way.
Lisa Madigan - Irish - got a job she wasn't remotely qualified because of her Daddy.
Michael Madigan - Irish - sensible Black folk hate his racist ass with a passion.
Pat Quinn - don't trust him because he's Irish too.
So, Black folk are saying - you wanted clean - Ain't no Negro cleaner than Roland Burris.
Of course, Black folk have serious problems with Blago's arrest....they wanna know....'what did he do?'
You have a hard time convincing Black folk who live under King Richard Daley II, that Blago is such a horrible guy.
Another local politics angle:
I forgot to add that another impetus for this is the LOSS of Emil Jones as the President of the Illinois Senate. Jones has been very good to the Black community, fighting for it, cause we know how we are NOT served by Massa Michael Madigan, Speaker of the Illinois House. That adds another level to this political drama
By invoking "lynching" and "integration," Bobby Hull underscored the cynicism of this racial pick. I am sick of people like Bobby Rush who think they can speak for all Blacks. I will not be the least bit offended if the Senate refuses to seat Mr. Burris. I am also sick of politicians and celebrities who get in trouble and then run to the Black community for cover. For the record, I'm a Black woman.
jackson93 says
1. Whomever gets that seat won't be changing the world and they definitely won't be the president.
2. Its good that Burris says he will run in 2010 but he will still get primaried and if the people don't like him he will lose, if he does a good job he will stay, what won't happen unless somehow Obama screws up royally is that a Republican will win Obama's old Senate seat. Especially if he blesses the Democratic nominee. Its silly talk to say any different.
3. What if Blago beats the rap? One name, R.Kelly
4. Special election was the right way to go but that ship has sailed. Thank you friendly Illinois State Democratic Senator for that.
And finally, the situation is fucked up no doubt, but it is a helluva long way from being the end of the world. I know its still fresh from just a few hours ago but going crazy over it won't help anything.
I was actually impressed by Burris. He held his own against some fairly withering attacks, stayed polite, and came across as smart and likeable. I don't blame him one bit for accepting Blago's offer - if the governor's intent on choosing someone, why pass it up? And does anyone see this scandal really sticking to Burris? Six months from now people will still be talking about Blago, but if Burris is mostly competent I think the taint will fade fast.
Was Rush's use of the word "lynch" crass and silly? Perhaps it was. But, look, the implication is that opposing the appointment of a Roland Burris to the United States Senate under a cloud of scandal is tantamount to racially-motivated murder. That's hardly a trivial thing, although we all understand that Rush doesn't really mean it.
I'm willing to dismiss Rush's comments, but only to the extent we agree that leveraging this country's tortured history for tactical gain is just harmless political mischief. I imagine Tom Delay and Lee Atwater would profess that position, but I don't think it's a standard view among Democrats.
I think I'm starting understand what's going on here or rather the motives behind Blago picking Burris. It looks like, despite some recent antagonistic remarks, Burris has been a long time fan of Blago so there's no surprise why Blago would pick Burris and if Burris actually gets the seat he'll probably scratch "G-Rod"'s back later. As for trying to bring race into it, it was bullshit. Obama won the senate seat because he wanted to put race aside, the Illinois people didn't say we (I'm from Chicago) desperately needed a black man to represent us but Rush implied that today.
From Blago/Burris, since anybody Blago picks is really "tainted" it makes sense that they need to distract from Blago's scandal to get the get Burris seated and what better than bring in race? A still volatile subject, especially in Chicago (I believe right now the Chicago Tribune is running an article series on how the city is racially divided).
rikyrah, you're in Chi, so you know things better than I do, but for the outside looking in, this looks like a bad spot to make a stand. The governor seems irreparably damaged, and I think anyone throwing in with him would tarnish their reputations.
Judging by Burris' steadfastness and reasonableness in the face of withering media scrutiny, I think he'll be a fine Senator.
MSNBC comes off very bad here. They are grilling Burris based on Blagovichs' frailties. He's right, MSNBC was trying to put words in his mouth at 7:30 in.
There's no racial angle here, TNC.
I'm sorry Burris comes off as an ego maniac and an ass. Oh and this monument doesn't help.
http://wonkette.com/405196/roland-burris-has-already-constructed-his-terrifying-death-chamber#comments
Seriously, Obama's gone in the Senate, but it is not like no AA can't get elected in any number of states in 2010. All this asshatery just makes it harder.
Rikyrah,
Another local politics angle to consider: Bobby Rush's support of Blago's appointment of Roland Burris is a way of saying "fuck you" to his old rival Obama. Rush never forgave Obama for running against him in 2000 for the congressional seat once held by Harold Washington. He vigorously supported Blair Hull against Obama in the 2004 Senate race, and wasn't exactly an enthusiatic supporter of Obama's presidential run.
As for Burris, I don't really blame him for accepting this appointment by Blago. Burris always felt that he should have been Illinois's 1st African-American governor (and as a competent state comptroller and state attorney general he was more than qualified for the office), and it must have stung him to be beaten twice in the Democratic gubernatorial primary by white politicians he felt were far less experienced and capable than he was (in 1998 by Congressman Glenn Poshard, and in 2002 by then Congressman Blago).
Burris certainly would have been a much better governor than either George Ryan and Blago, and would have managed to leave office without scandal and corruption charges. If accepting an appointment to the US Senate by Blago gives Burris an office worthy of his self-perceived stature, it's a no-brainer for Burris to accept. He hasn't held political office in nearly 10 years, and a new generation of Democratic politicians have ascended to prominence in Illinois politics during that time (Lisa Madigan, Dan Hynes, Jesse Jackson, Jr., and of course Obama.) What better chance is there for an old lion like him to be a political player again, if only for a brief time?
Rather than playing the race card, Blago is deploying the Shield of Racial Defense. It deflects all attacks back to the attacker for +3 damage points.
It was pretty breathtaking to watch the press conference. Can't blame Blago for pulling this shit though---he really has nothing to lose. At this point he has to take the attention off of those damning tapes any way he can, and if it means making it about race, then so be it.
But it's a shame Bobby Rush and Roland Burris agreed to play into his hands. Burris has run several times for statewide office and the Senate and has never made it...so I guess from his perspective he has nothing to lose by accepting this appointment. I actually think he would be a good pick for the seat. He's 71 so he probably won't run for reelection, and if he does he will almost certainly be defeated in the primaries. The truth is that he's never been much of a campaigner, as evidenced by his long list of previous defeats.
And I definitely agree that Rush's hamfisted bullshit was a desperate plea to stay relevant. But I think it also may have been a subtle swipe at Obama and his "new politics". When Obama ran against Rush for his seat, Rush pummeled his ass in part because he asserted that Obama wasn't black enough. For him to get up there and talk this shit is his way of saying that brand of politics can still work. I'm willing to bet he will be proven wrong. If Burris is rejected, I'm pretty sure blacks in Chicago will know that it was Blago who was being repudiated and not Burris.
For the record I'm black and grew up in Chicago on the westside.
Here's the thing for me about what Bobby Rush said: The problem here isn't Roland Burris, or his race. If Blagojevich gets impeached and Pat Quinn gets to make an appointment, he can pick whoever he wants. He can pick an African-American to keep black representation in the Senate; he can even pick Burris for all anybody cares. All that matters is that Blagojevich keeps his stinking hands out of the process.
Legally speaking can they not seat him? Blagojevich's power to appoint I don't think was taken away and there's no crime on this guy yet. The whole thing is bizarre, but is there anything they can do?
Thomas R,
Legally, the Senate can refuse to seat Burris for the time being, until the US Supreme Court rules that Burris has a right to be seated. This will require a lawsuit on Burris's part, and will delay him from actually taking office. In the time it would take Burris to prevail in such a lawsuit, a special election will probably have been held for Obama's former Senate seat, so even if Burris does win the right to be seated, he will actually be seated for a very short period of time (unless he wins the special election).
Say there's someone in the wings who wants the seat in 2010. Say that someone understands that being appointed by Blagojevich would be a net loss.
What would that someone want to happen? I think that someone would want Blagojevich to choose someone over 70 who'd had trouble in several previous past statewide races.
I don't know Illinois anywhere close to well enough to say if this is or isn't happening. I know games people play well enough to ask about it, though.
Folks, this is all about the jury pool. Don't be fooled. The guy got three prominent African-American Chicago politicians to back him today as sticking up for an African American to replace our first African American President in the Senate. You don't think Eddie Genson can find at least one African-American in the jury pool who's sympathetic to that argument, particularly when it's made by those three character witnesses? I pretty much loathe the Gov, but it's genius.
The oft-mentioned ' special election' was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. They'd literally have to change the State of Illinois Constitution - and that wasn't going to happen.
I'm telling you, this has been utterly hilarious today.
chitown is correct about the jury pool angle.
Man hired R.Kelly's attorney. You should know we're going to have to watch a long, drawn out process.
Rikyrah,
A special election in of itself would not be unconstitutional. The General Assembly has a right to determine if a special election needs to be held in 2009 or even early 2010 for Obama's former Senate seat.
What would have been unconstitutional is a special election held in lieu of an appointment by the sitting governor, as long as the governor did not consent.
Therefore, it is constitutional for Blago to appoint a replacement for Obama, and that replacment can hold onto the seat until the end of Obama's term in January 2011, unless a special election is scheduled by the General Assembly in the interim. If a special election is held sometime in 2009 or early 2010, the winner of that special election can take office in either 2009 or early 2010. The winner of that special election would then leave office in January 2011, unless that special election winner managed to win the general election for the US Senate seat in November 2010.
What is not constitutional is for the General Assembly to declare that Blago cannot appoint anybody to the seat, and that Obama's replacement can only be determined by a special election.
(The Illinois General Assembly needs to get its act together then. It needs to quickly impeach and remove Blago from office, and schedule a special election in 2009 for Obama's former seat).
Sporcupine,
The only statewide office that Burris had trouble winning was the governor's office. He had no trouble winning the state comptroller's office 3 times and the state attorney general's office twice. Had he not run for governor in 1998, he would have easily been elected to the attorney general's office for a 3rd term.
Moreover, Burris lost the governor's race both times in a crowded Democratic primary, not in the general election. In both cases, it was a narrow loss. He came in a close 2nd to Glenn Poshard in the 1998 four man race, and Burris came in a close 3rd to Blago and Paul Vallas in 2002. Had Burris won the Democratic nomination for governor in either 1998 or 2002, he could have beaten Republican nominees George Ryan and Jim Ryan.
So Burris can be a formidable contender for statewide office.
Sporcupine,
Look's like my memory failed me a little bit.
Burris only served one term as attorney general, because he also ran in 1994 for governor. Again, he lost in a crowded Democratic primary, this time to state Senator Dawn Clark Netsch. Had Burris not run for governor in 1994, he would easily have been re-elected as attorney general. In addition, while he probably would have lost to incumbent governor Jim Edgar in 1994, he certainly would have done a lot better than Netsch, who was crushed by Edgar in the general election.
The awful thing for someone like Burris is that under normal circumstances, his appointment would make perfect sense. He is a lifelong pol who fills the role of interim Senator until some new blood comes along. Instead, he ends up like an interim coach of a shitty football team that is going to be placed on probation.
No matter how clean the guy has been, he ends up getting his job because he is the preferred candidate of America's most corrupt Governor.
i like this pick. i just wish blago was gone, and quinn had made it.
roland burris is good peoples who, as others have noted, repeatedly won statewide offices as comptroller and attorney general. when he ran for governor, he was screwed repeatedly in close democratic primaries by glenn poshard and dawn clark netsch, who each went on to defeat in the general election.
i think illinois should get a referendum on whether or not to have a special election. (but we don't do those non-election years, right? damn.) i bet if there was a referendum on keeping burris, he'd keep his seat. folks around here remember the man as honest, ethical and intelligent, if a bit boring on the stump. yes please! (lifelong rogers park/chicago resident, by the way. of the caucasian persuasion, if anyone cares.)
Burris would not keep the Senate seat if there was a referendum. By taking it from Blago he has tainted himself beyond belief. He has no idea of what is going to happen to him. The press and public are going to eat this egomaniac for breakfast, brunch, lunch, dinner and a late night snack.
I was born in Chicago and yesterday I witnessed perhaps the only politician in Illinois more narcissistic than Blago step to the podium
Then Bobby Rush was the third clown to exit the clown car at this circus we call Blagoworld.
Impeach the man, TODAY.
If you doubt Burris is a nutjob take a look at some of the links to his "tombstone" in Oakwoods Cemetery.
http://wonkette.com/405196/roland-burris-has-already-constructed-his-terrifying-death-chamber#comments
Playing the race card in this issue is despicable. Burris and Rush should know better. Then again Burris is an egomaniac and Rush is sick with cancer and was never the brightest bulb in the Chicago political world.
I'm a Chicago Democrat. Born and bred. The only time I supported Republicans was when the democratic candidates were so corrupt and incompetent that I had no other choice. Don't blame me. I voted for Vallas in 2002 and Judy Topinka in 2006.
I hope Obama "bigfoots" Burris into retirement very quickly. Of course Burris has done quite well off state contracts recently.
I hope Jesse White, our black Secretary of State, holds his ground and refuses to certify Burris.
Me next!
I see a narrow race angle in this. Burris will be the sixth black senator in the history of the United States. And that number really is pathetically low. It's the sort of number that guys like Bobby Rush will...uh...rush up to defend. They love the "head count" concept.
I don't. I hate the idea of the sixth black senator in US history being appointed by a corrupt governor, to help him in his inevitable trial. Everyone needs to do better than this.
I feel a certain sympathy for anyone who constructs what he obviously wants to be an imposing mausoleum, but ends up creating a rather clunky stone bus-shelter instead. "Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair".... But then, I come to bury Burris, not to praise him.
"Burris would not keep the Senate seat if there was a referendum. By taking it from Blago he has tainted himself beyond belief. He has no idea of what is going to happen to him. The press and public are going to eat this egomaniac for breakfast, brunch, lunch, dinner and a late night snack."
Irish Pirate,
I think Burris knows very well what is going to happen to him and doesn't care. In fact, because he has such an ego, he will enjoy even the negative attention that that the local and national media will bring his way. Burris hasn't had this level of attention paid to him in six years, and the egomaniac in him will enjoy every minute of it.
Despite Blago's taint, I think a bare majority of Illinois voters will give Burris the benefit of the doubt because of his decent record of public service. Burris, however, will actually have to perform well in office once he is actually seated, if he has any ambitions to stay in the office past the next election, special or general.
Why is this man so 'undesirable' to the Democratic party? Wouldn't the 'graceful' thing to be to find out his views on (a) the war (b) UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE (c) economy (d) transportation?
The 'biggies' are that this guy made more than one contribution to Blago...however, many 'contributions' were made to all other candidates as well.
Also, as this man is a lobbyist...scrutiny should be paid to specific issues he lobbied for.
I would like to know: HOW COME HE HAD A $300,000 'GRANT' FROM THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT (STATE OF ILLINOIS)?
If I lived in Illinois, I would certainly wonder about this---espcially since a Republicon dignitary from Illinois has been appointed Secretary of TRANSPORTATION.
$300,000 would purchase a lot of transportation rides for the poor---those who are still employed, that is!
Certainly, this would be a more 'grass' roots use of ILLINOIS funds--than giving it to a billionaire lobbyist. (YES, this is a VERY rich man...having made a fortune in commercial mid-west Real Estate!
NOT (so NOT) to hijack the thread? But, your initial statement re: "the shortsightedness of grown men" pulled me in.
Uh, Mr. Coates??!
DON'T.GET.ME.STARTED.ON.THAT.TOPIC.
Burris is the Alan Keyes of the Dems. Totally without credibility.
TNC,
But if we get rid of the race card what will the children exchange during Post-racial appreciation day at school?? ;)
Okay---I have come back to comment with evidence to prove my point about the absurdity of this whole thing. As I said in my previous post, I highly doubt (but could be wrong) if Rush would have stepped up to the plate for this appointment if the dude being appointed wasn't his kind of Black man. Case in point: On December 9th, Rush said this about an appointment "Any person appointed by Mr. Blagojevich would be 'as tainted as can be' and would be in danger of losing the seat in 2010."
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/09/rush-opposes-durbins-call-special-election/
So, now, not only has Rush changed his tune, but he has the audacity to say that anybody who raises the same concerns about this appointment that he did just a couple of weeks ago, is basically a racist that wants to block a Black man from serving in the Senate. Give me a freakin' break. This guy has NO credibility, NONE. And neither does Burris. In my mind, the fact that Burris is so power hungry that he would willingly let himself be used by Blago to gain power in the Senate makes him suspect to me. I don't care how clean his background is.
-K1
"I know there some disimilarities with the analogy, but you get my point. Sometimes you take opportunities anyway they come."
You're admitting that you have a lack of moral values with that statement. Or, if you do, you have no reflex to follow them.
-sgwhteinfla
"But hell man like I said if the Illinois Dems woulda had some courage and pushed for the special election none of this shit would have or could have happened."
That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? Hell, even Helmet-Head (Blogo) pointed that out and he was 100% correct.
-rikyrah
"That adds another level to this political drama"
...and adds another level to the undisputable fact that you are, yourself, a bigot. That's a pretty awful post and I'm suprised TNC hasn't given you the blog version of a smackdown by now.
-southpaw
"I'm willing to dismiss Rush's comments, but only to the extent we agree that leveraging this country's tortured history for tactical gain is just harmless political mischief."
We'll remember that the next time some idiot white politician, or, God forbid, a nationally syndicated morning show host, makes a "harmless" racially-themed statement and then looses his job over it. While I respect your opinion on the matter, calling it harmless seems less than naive a not a little condescending.
-mumbles
*APPLAUSE* That should be overarching way of looking at this.
"I know its still fresh from just a few hours ago but going crazy over it won't help anything."
sgwhiteinfla,
I don't think objecting to Blagojevich appointing *anyone* to the senate seat is "going crazy." I don't think it's crazy to want your senator to be viewed as legitimate by other senators. I am not expecting anyone senator to change the world or become president (although I would note that Illinois' most recent junior senator is doing just that). I just want someone who will be respected and be able to fully represent me and my state in the senate. And I feel I must restate that my objection is not to Burris specifically but to the fact that Blagojevich appointed anyone at all. It feels like a giant screw you to the state and the democrats.
Rikyrah - is every person of Irish descent evil in your eyes regardless of anything else? Pat Quinn has very little to do with the Irish machine - he is very much on the fringes of the democratic party. But I guess just because his last name is irish he must be bad? That sounds striking close to racism - judging a group of people based not on the content of their character but by their last name.
Rikyrah - is every person of Irish descent evil in your eyes regardless of anything else? Pat Quinn has very little to do with the Irish machine - he is very much on the fringes of the democratic party. But I guess just because his last name is irish he must be bad? That sounds striking close to racism - judging a group of people based not on the content of their character but by their last name.
Actually, no. But, Quinn is guilty by association. You don't have to like the raw ethnic politics, but to sit and deny it, maybe you have that kind of ability. I live here. I see it. I have to live under the results of it everyday. I don't live in post-racial fantasy land. I live in the ethnic political jungle of Illinois, where folks get over everyday because of their last name and connections....:Lisa Madigan:...cough..cough...
rikyrah
"That adds another level to this political drama"
...and adds another level to the undisputable fact that you are, yourself, a bigot. That's a pretty awful post and I'm suprised TNC hasn't given you the blog version of a smackdown by now.
Please explain to me how my explaining the ethnic political jungle of Illinois makes ME a bigot. Explaining the background of the players, and how this is seen from the Black community, makes ME a bigot.
I don't live in some 'post-racial' fantasy land.
I live in the ethnic political jungle that is Chicago - born and raised in it my entire life.
Telling the truth about the ethnic politics that underly all of this, doesn't make ME a bigot.
Maybe where you live is ethnic Shangri-La.
But, I was born and raised in what has been called ' the most segregated city in America'.
With all the 'blacks versus Irish' stuff I feel like I'm in a Prohibition speakeasy or something. Oh, Chicago. Never change.
Burris was on Rachel Maddow last night, sounding remarkably clueless and tone deaf.
Does Bobby Rush have health problems? He seemed really...unwell in the clips of the press conference I saw.
Persia
You are like the 10th person I have seen say that Burris came off bad last night on Maddow. I didn't catch the show the first time it came on but around 2 am last night I finally caught it. I don't think Burris came off bad at all except for the fact that most people were going to view him coming off bad unless he changed his mind on air and said he was wrong to say yes to begin with. Nothing that he said was wrong. Tone deaf maybe but I wouldn't even say that. He never said that he had wide spread support. In fact he alluded to the obstacles he is facing. He said he had already reached out to Obama but didn't get through. He said he would try to work on Dick Durbin to get his support. He talked about gettting the CBC on board and he kept referring to his 20 years of public service. Not only that he continually brought up the fact that Blago's problems are not his problems. Setting aside for a moment that he himself called for Blago to resign he also pointed out that he backed his removal BUT the Supreme Court dismissed that action when it was before them. You might want to check out the clip again. Dude might be an opportunist but he isn't dumb at least he doesn't appear to be from his Tee Vee appearances yesterday.
rikyrah,
I was born, raised, and still live in Chicago. I don't live in post-racial fantasy land. I am not denying racial and ethnic politics and coalitions.At the same time I don't think that judging people by their last name or ethnicity is productive. Replace the word Irish in your diatribe with the words Jews, Blacks, Asian, or Hispanic, and maybe you'll see what I mean.
I don't see how Pat Quinn is guilty by association - what association? Pat Quinn has often fought against the machine in Illinois. He created things like the Citizens Utility Board so regular people could fight the utilities. He has fought to stop Illinois legislators from inflating their salaries. Just this year he supported a constitutional convention for Illinois. What you are saying is no different than saying "well, he's black so he's just like all the other black politicians." I believe we can address racial and ethnic aspects of politics without condemning entire races or ethnicities.
As for Lisa Madigan, her name and connections definitely helped her get elected, but Jesse jackson Jr. benefited from his name and connection, as did Hillary Clinton (Bill) and Blagojevich (Dick Mell). Connections and recognizable names are nothing new in politics and they sure aren't limited to the Irish. Lisa Madigan was elected though and has done a good job in office as far as I can tell.
sgwhite, I don't know. Maybe he just rubbed me the wrong way. But he didn't seem well-prepared and I didn't like his answers generally-- the thing that sticks out to me is when Rachel asked him if he was going to fight the Congress if they refused to seat him and he refused to give a straight answer. He had to have known he was going to be asked this-- and really, he could've cooked up a pretty good answer. "As a former Attorney General, I feel the law should be followed, etc." But instead he waffled.
There was going to be a huge cloud over anyone Blago appointed. I don't think this guy's the right person to handle the level of scrutiny and pressure. I mean, those campaign donations are pretty mild compared to what Fitzgerald says Blago was asking for-- but he didn't, for whatever reason, come close to making this point and no one else has tried to on his behalf, at least as far as I can tell.
You need to be Superman to get through this, and so far Burris is looking more like Jimmy Olsen.
For those who are jumping on Rikyrah, if you've got a little free time today, listen to this. Harold's story can be a pretty good primer on Chicago politics. The black/Irish Chicago Dem party divide is huge and real. It's not bigotry to note that this shit is still very much at play.
In Rik's defense, I'm pretty certain she was explaining, not defending. I read her post again, after Scott's point. You can disagree with her analysis, but I don't think it's fair to say that her analysis reflects what she--herself--believes.
nina s,
I have lived through this. I grew up in Morgan Park, which happens to be neighborhood that is part Black and part Irish Catholic. I know about the Black/Irish divide in Chicago politics, and I don't deny it exists or is at play in general. I was at the south side irish parade holding my Obama sign when he ran for the senate against Dan Hynes and getting harassed by Hynes' supporters. Obama was not allowed to march in the parade, because it was Hynes' neighborhood essentially.
I do not however think that this tension explains peoples' objections to Blagojevich appointing anyone to that seat. This isn't about Burris - this is about a guy who allegedly tried to sell the senate seat and who has abysmal approval ratings choosing our next senator.
Ta-Nehisi,
I take your point about rikyrah explaining what others believe, and I apologize if I was overly harsh. I still would like an explanation of why Quinn is guilty by association though. It still seems like his Irish name is the only connection to the so-called "Irish gang" she keeps referring to.
Jackson93,
Nobody is saying that it is logical or fair to view Quinn as being just another Irish machine pol like the Daleys, the Hyneses, the Madigans, the Cullertons, etc. It's just that when you notice how predominant the Irish are in Cook County politics, you tend to be reflexively suspicious of any politician with Irish surnames, if you are not Irish.
I agree with you though that Pat Quinn is clearly not of the same ilk as politicians like Mayor Daley and House Speaker Mike Madigan. He definitely belongs to the non-Machine wing of Chicago politics associated with neighborhoods like Hyde Park (it is of course the wing that Obama hails from). He's the type of politician that Mike Royko would have referred to as a "goo-goo" (i.e. a good government type).
BTW, there is also a divide between the Irish and the white ethnic non-Irish. My former alderman Eddie Vrdolyak once commented that in the minds of Irish pols like Richard Daley, non-Irish pols were all "just Polacks". While Fast Eddie's comment has to be taken with a truckload of salt (he was after all the guy who led the opposition to Harold Washington), there has been the feeling among the Poles, the Germans, the Jews, the Croatians, et cetera, that the Irish always made sure that they got the lion's share of political spoils, even though the non-Irish always greatly outnunbered the Irish. So this resentment toward Irish pols isn't just limited to African-Americans or even Latinos for that matter.
(Of course, the reason why the Irish have dominated machine poltics for so long is that Poles, the Germans, the Croatians, Latinos, and African-Americans distrusted each other so much that they were never able to form political alliances against the Irish. Instead, the Irish often served as the mediator between these groups, and became leaders of the Machine by default.)
I'm black and even i was thoroughly appalled by the Burris appointment. Both he and Rush should be ashamed of themselves for allowing themselves to be used as political pawns in Blago's scheme.
Its obvious they both had the racial card thing planned right from the word go. If not why was Bobby Rush at the press conference and why was he invited to speak?
Burris pls bury your head in shame. You're a disgrace to every black man or woman out there. Being a US senator is a lot more than the color of your skin.
Roland Burris is an idiot listen to him talk. He would have never gotten elected on his own. The reason Roland will be state senator is because the democrats tried to be sneaky and underhanded, they refused to have a special election to replace Obama. The special election is what the majority of people in Illinois wanted. The democrats held a special session and refused the special election. Governor Blagoevich in a sneaky but brillant move appointed Burris as the senator, which he was legally able to do.This is the same democratic party that did little or nothing for the last 4 years and did nothing in regards to the appointment and got scre#####.
Roland Burris is do nothing , bootlicking,pompous weasel, egomanaical midget.( no disrespect to weasels or egomaniacal midgets any where in the world)