My current event is about now former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich appointing Roland Burris to the vacant Senate left by President Barack Obama. This clip is from the press conference where Blagojevich officially appoints Roland Burris. Before this appointment, Governor Blagojevich was under suspicion of and arrested for selling Obama's Senate seat to the highest bidder. Because of this, the Democrats in the Senate (the Senate approves Governor's selections to vacant Senate seats) openly said they will not take anyone Blagojevich appoints, if he does. Blago went ahead and appointed Roland Burris. Burris is a respectable and experienced politician who had no ties to the Blago scandal and is extremely qualified for the job. So what should the Senate do? Should they appoint a man that probably deserves the job or should they hold to their word no matter who is the appointee?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The democratic senators who said they wouldn't approve anyone that Blagojevich appointed made a bad political move. They should have just said that anyone he appointed would have a cloud of suspicion around the nominee. Furthermore, they should have strongly suggested that no one accept Blagojevich's nomination. That would have made a strong enough statement, while still giving some wiggle room to back off later. At the end of the day they will have to approve of any qualified appointee.
ReplyDeleteHere is an article which speaks of Blago's released wire taps
ReplyDeletehttp://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1874234,00.html
I believe the democratic senators who said they wouldnt approve anyone that Blagojevich appointed made a good and bad political move. I think it makes sense to be suspicious about the situation but I think they should at least try to look more into the situation before they make a final decision. Honestly, I believe no one can be trusted entirely in this situation...it makes me wonder what type of values we have as a country...how sad!
ReplyDeleteThis current event has a special meaning to me, because I have met Roland Burris. He works in the same building as my dad and I have talked to him a few times while waiting for the elevator. He really is a very nice guy and a respectable politician to my knowledge. I would love to say that you should believe me by an argument of authority, but I don't really have that many qualifications.
ReplyDeleteI don't really know much about Burris as a person but I do remember reading this article by Richard Roeper back home about the topic over break. In it he calls out Burris by saying he never could have won this seat legitimately. Obviously, if your life long dream is to be a US Senator and someone offers you a seat, it is going to be tough to turn down. But I think the respectable thing would have been to do just that. If Burris thinks he truly is the right candidate for the job, then he could have gone about obtaining the position differently.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.suntimes.com/news/roeper/1365265,CST-NWS-roep07.article
This disappoints me all around.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, the senate should have stuck with their original decision to not place in Burris. He may be the best man for the job, and the Lt. Governor when he was sworn in could have brought him up again as a possible candidate.
However, when you have an official accused of lying, selling a senate seat, and lying some more on Larry King... you cannot trust him. Even if Burris did not buy the seat and wasn't involved, the fact is the senate should have stood up and not let an impeached governor make a decision.
While I was at the Gym today, I was watching the late governor on David Letterman. Blagojevich is now boycotting his own impeachment trial and he doesn't think he has done anything wrong!
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1411807,blagojevich-letterman-late-show-020309.article
I think that the Senate should have stuck to their original plan and not approved anyone that Blagojevich appointed. There was too much scandal surrounding him. I am not doubting that Burris is qualified for the job, I just think the Senate should have waited for the impeachment trial to take place.
ReplyDeleteThis is a good article that addresses the issue: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/06/the-blagojevich-blight-co_n_155470.html
I am ultimately pleased with the senate's choice to confirm Blagovich's choice for the vacant senate seat. The idea of holding a state wide election seemed like an unecessary solution to the problem. It would only cost money the state does not have and I am not sure that Illinois residents would have made an informed decision. The fact that Roland Burris has been doing civic duties for the past four decades without any taint to his name speaks volumes about his character. I am fairly confifent that he will do a very good job. Here is an article talking about Burris' growing support.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/us/politics/07burris.html
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TlJlFT-kzws&feature=related
ReplyDeleteBlago talks about one of the wire taps with a race track owner in Chicago. He speaks of what could be accepting money in these wire taps. He still maintains his innocence after a very sketchy wire tapes.