Blagojevich to name former Illinois Atty. General Roland Burris as Obama’s Senate successor.
By on Dec 30th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Blagojevich to name former Illinois Atty. General Roland Burris as Obama’s Senate successor.
The Chicago Tribune reports that Gov. Rod Blagojevich is expected today to name former Illinois Attorney Gen. Roland Burris, the first African-American to win statewide office in 1978, to replace President-elect Obama in the Senate. The move comes after Democratic leaders criticized the prospect of Blagojevich going ahead with the appointment process. “No appointment by this governor under these circumstances could produce a credible replacement,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) said this month. Burris reportedly “stepped up his efforts to win the governor’s support” in the days following Blagojevich’s arrest.
UpdateSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) views Burris as "unacceptable," an aide told Politico. Democratic leaders are reportedly planning to block the appointment.
UpdateProgress Illinois notes that when news broke of Blagojevich's improprieties, Burris condemned the governor's actions as "pretty appalling" and "just reprehensible."
UpdateSam Stein notes that Burris helped raise money for the governor on multiple occasions.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
44 Responses to “Blagojevich to name former Illinois Atty. General Roland Burris as Obama’s Senate successor.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Bush Legacy
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
DADT
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Franken
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Krauthammer
Kyl
LGBT
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Sanford
Sotomayor
Steele
Supreme Court
Terrorism
ThinkProgress
Tiller
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
No matter how upstanding this Burris guy is, the Republicans would be all over him. TAINT!
December 30th, 2008 at 1:33 pmGov. Rod Blagojevich is expected today to name former Illinois Attorney Gen. Roland Burris, the first African-American to win statewide office in 1978,
- - Blago went on to say, "Mr. Burris will continue the legacy of Negroes From Illinois in the US Senate."
(This message has been approved by Chip Saltsman.)
December 30th, 2008 at 1:42 pmTaint the reputation of potentially good man to ratchet your PR strategy, Blago. F UCK YOU.
December 30th, 2008 at 1:51 pmBlago is an "in your face" kind of guy. I expected nothing less.
December 30th, 2008 at 1:56 pmSen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) said this month. Burris reportedly “stepped up his efforts to win the governor’s support” in the days following Blagojevich’s arrest.
I take #3 back. He should be declining this appointment. Sounds like a man who wanted to win a U.S. Senate seat not by pay-to-play but giving Blago a shoulder to lean on when everyone else was distancing themselves.
He's seems well qualified (had a glance on Wikipedia) but should not be seated. He will never win election in 2010, to boot.
December 30th, 2008 at 1:57 pmBlago is making it challenging for the Senate not to seat his pick. Guilty or not, disgraceful or not, this is a shrewd political move by Blago.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:01 pmOn another blog, I noted that this strategy sounds like it could have been developed by that parragon of rat-phuquerz, Rover hiomself.
Somebody check and make sure Bushand the Pukes aren't handing Patrick ("Fitz-mas") Fitzgerald a medal of freedom for causing this up-roar...
Rod Blag may be sticking his thumb in the eye of the establishment, but it's going according to Rover's plan...
I mean, what is the Dim Senate gonna do: refuse to seat a (dare I mention, "black" man with a spotless record) replacement named by a governor who's n ot even under indictment?
This is magnificently machiavellian...
December 30th, 2008 at 2:03 pmBurris seems like an outstatnding guy.
I have a feeling that's part of Blago's twisted stratigy.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:07 pmG-Rod got paid to pick Burris because it's a positive win for the Republican Party on Election day. Look for G-Rod to do the same with Emanuel's seat. Money talks and G-Rod will accept the highest bidder.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:12 pmI wonder if Burris could gain some credibility and legitimacy by stating that he will only accept the position if he is approved by a vote of confidence from the whole Senate?
December 30th, 2008 at 2:15 pmYep, if they seat him that helps wash some of the pariah stink off of Blago. He can turn around and say "what's the big deal, I made a good Senate pick, nobody complained about it." That also plays into his lawyer's complaint that his monetary demands were "just talk."
If they don't seat him, they don't seem to be moving fast enough to do anything else (hello, IL legislature, anyone home?) which leaves the Dem Senate down 1 when it can least afford to be.
I'm mainly concerned about this guy's age. Is he really going to make a convincing case in 2010 that he should be given another six years? Of course, as we've seen this year, a vigorous Dem primary fight doesn't necessarily mean a general election loss - especially in South Side Chicago. This guy could be an acceptable "caretaker" until then.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:17 pmJackie Says:
G-Rod got paid to pick Burris...
I'd like to see anybody even try to pass money to Blago now, even through a third-party/employment deal. Fitz would be on 'em like stupid on a wingnut.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:17 pmThis whole thing smacks of malicious shenanigans...
Blag's not even under indictment.
There is no reason to prohibit him from making the appointment.
Other than to sew discord and spread vexation.
Did Blag baulk at naming Obama's pick, and then find the cops at his door?
There's definitely something rotten in the state of Denmark, alrighteee!
December 30th, 2008 at 2:23 pmAnd putting Burris in Obama's vacate Senate seat is the GOP's wet dream. And of course, this is Blago's payback to the Democrats and the Illinois impeachment panel for screwing him. So, Blago puts in stooge for the Senate seat. Also this from Capitol Fax Blog:
12:59 pm - Secretary of State Jesse White’s office says they will not certify the appointment. Certification is required to be seated in the Senate.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:34 pmhttp://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2008/12/30/this-just-in-179/
Guido the Loving OBGYN Says:
Between Reid and Blago it’s a race to the bottom, huh?
If only Reid had Blago's balls, we would be sitting pretty as the Democratic party!
December 30th, 2008 at 2:37 pmtokin librul Says:
This whole thing smacks of malicious shenanigans…
Blag’s not even under indictment.
There is no reason to prohibit him from making the appointment.
Sure there is. Part of what Blago is being accused of is soliciting bribes for the seat. So prohibiting him from making the appointment makes perfect sense.
Other than to sew discord and spread vexation.
Did Blag baulk at naming Obama’s pick, and then find the cops at his door?
There’s definitely something rotten in the state of Denmark, alrighteee!
Give me a break. Just can't let go of Obama not being involved can you?
I think that Fitzgerald's timing of the arrest was because he wanted to stop Blago from appointing anyone to the seat. If Fitzgerald had waited until after Blago appointed someone, and then arrested him for soliciting a bribe, the person he appointed would be tainted. It made more sense to stop that process and not have someone who could be innocent of wrong doing be tainted.
December 30th, 2008 at 2:47 pmIts not that Gov. Blago made this pick that should surprise us, hell he's a desperate man doing desperate things, its that Mr. Burris is allowing himself to be USED like this by the Gov. that should make us scratch our heads. He HAS to know how this looks, and if he doesn't then he really shouldn't be allowed to hold any office.
This is a ploy to make it look like the Dem's are rejecting a Black Candidate, a Repuppetcan move if there ever was one. But by standing by the Gov. Mr. Burris is making himself look like a buffoon, or one of them magic n's. Noone should want to get into office under these circumstances, and Mr. Burris should not be lending himself to this B.S. appointment.
Stevie Wonder can see thru this ruse.
IDIOTS
RIP
December 30th, 2008 at 3:00 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
This is fantastic, you Dems spent 8 years bashing Bush now I can jusr sit back and watch you idiots implode.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:16 pm"I mean, what is the Dim Senate gonna do: refuse to seat a (dare I mention, “black” man with a spotless record) replacement named by a governor who’s n ot even under indictment?"
Yes?
That's exactly what they should do.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:17 pmIt made more sense to stop that process and not have someone who could be innocent of wrong doing be tainted.
Alert, Ben Robinson!@! Logical disconnect. Logical disconnect.
The "innocence" of someone who bribed their way into a seat could be not be in any meaningful way tainted by the revelation that they had done so.
I think this all smacks of a gop rat-phuque, sorta like siegelman in alabama. no doubt Blag's not a loved figure, but that just makes the shit flung stick better...
December 30th, 2008 at 3:18 pmYour party is a flaming wreck, burning faster with every "magic negro" and "obamabucks" and "Joe the Plumber".
Thanks for the concern, friend :)
December 30th, 2008 at 3:20 pmtokin librul Says:
Blag’s not even under indictment.
There is no reason to prohibit him from making the appointment.
If you had wiretaps of someone planning to commit murder, would you let them commit the murder first? If they were then indicted and out on bail, would you still try to prevent them from committing that murder, or would you let them do it?
Actively planning to commit a crime is a crime. That's how crimes are prevented before the fact.
You're basically saying Blago should be allowed to go through with a criminal activity due to the fact that he hasn't committed the criminal activity yet.
tokin librul Says:
Did Blag baulk at naming Obama’s pick, and then find the cops at his door?
Yes. If you saw any of the released transcripts, Blago was disinclined to name Obama's preferred replacement due to the fact that the transition team wasn't offering anything but appreciation. When Fitz realized that dealmaking on a Senate seat was in the works and that Blago could close a deal at any time, he indicted Blago and went public with what he knew.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:20 pmToo bad about those seats in Congress, and the total failure of your representatives
OH SNAP.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:21 pmPut down the crack pipe, Lush.
One thing the Cons are definitely better at than Dems -- corruption and bizarre sex scandals. You win!
December 30th, 2008 at 3:22 pmProud Says:
This is fantastic, you Dems spent 8 years bashing Bush now I can jusr sit back and watch you idiots implode.
Once the Senate pick is resolved, Blago is going to go down as a minor local scandal. Nobody's imploding here. Sorry to dissapoint.
LushInterior Says:
I just love Democrats! They are so much fun, especially when the elephant has left the tent...
Ring #1: That was how many years ago? Do you really want to have a R vs. D scandal contest? Really?
Ring #2: Maddow and Olbermann are bad things because you don't like them. I can list many, many more right-wing media blowhards, and many better reasons to dislike them. Oh wait, you didn't list any reasons, so we're even.
Ring #3: Obama is pretty cool, I agree.
I just fail to see what you're criticizing here. I mean, it looks like criticism in its tone, but you actually haven't scored any points at all. You just sounded snarky and mentioned things. But you actually failed to say anything negative whatsoever.
Is this what passes for discourse over on the other side of Blogistan?
December 30th, 2008 at 3:25 pmLush.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:27 pmWhat did I tell you about hairspray and isopropyl?
"blahblahblah...MSDNC with Rackel Madcow and Quief Olberdousche... blahblahblah..."
someone's pri-ty scared...
and going waaay outta the way to TRY to be clever...
imagine that...
December 30th, 2008 at 3:34 pmHow can they block this appointment? How? Any legal means?
The Illinois Legislature has been stunningly ineffective in offering us an alternative remedy. Unless someone has indication Burris paid off Blago to get the seat (very unlikely), let's move on with this. Seat Burris.
And, yeah, Burris gave contributions to the Gov nominee for his party. Duh.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:44 pmLushInterior Says:
You actually expected me to say something hateful……..? Mock, yes…hate, no. Political banter has been a pastime for many for countless eons.
I didn't say "hate," you did.
I just found it remarkable that you seemed to be attempting to be criticizing the Democratic party, while simultaneously failing to actually critize anything at all. It's like a kung-fu guy spinning a bunch of swords around very impressively before a fight and then just cutting off his own head.
OK, let's try this again: if you weren't trying to criticize Dems, then just what were you trying to say? I can't seem to extract any other meaning from your "banter" haiku/mashup.
So, what was your point?
December 30th, 2008 at 3:47 pmAlphaLiberal Says:
How can they block this appointment? How? Any legal means
The U.S. Senate can actually send back anyone Blago appoints. Reid previously said he'd push for that, and got all currently sitting Dems to sign a letter saying they'd support it. Presumably Republicans would be glad to vote a Dem back out.
December 30th, 2008 at 3:50 pmThose who say there is little difference between the political parties should observe the way liberals and progressives talk about Blagojevich in this thread.
Writer after writer heaps scorn on the embattled Democratic pol. It's plain to see--liberals hate it when their people go bad. We are angry and indignant when one of our own goes bad.
Contrast with the Lunar Right. If Blagojevich were a corrupt right-winger, would they be dissing him at Free Republic?
Give me a break! They'd be defending their guy from start to finish and saying it was all a political hitjob. Wingers are as predictable as ants.
Those who say the right and left are interchangeable are simply not paying attention. As the left's reaction to Blagojevich shows, Democrats and Republicans are as different as night and day.
Happy New Year, y'all!
December 30th, 2008 at 3:56 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_Ocbt6l5NE
LushInterior Says:
You actually expected me to say something hateful……..?
Personally, I expect you to say something stupid.
December 30th, 2008 at 4:12 pmAnd you never disappoint......
Proud Says:
This is fantastic, you Dems spent 8 years bashing Bush now I can jusr sit back and watch you idiots implode.
I didn't hear a bomb go off - Illinois isn't the entire United States, dimwit. And I think the democratic party would have a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long,
December 30th, 2008 at 4:19 pmway to go before measuring up to the corruption of you GOOPERS. And it sure as hell wouldn't take as little as eight years and we wouldn't do while ignoring the challenges facing the country. Gov. Blagojevich is not President-elect. Cut the crap out, failed neocon. Did you read it correctly? That's right -- you suck as a human being, as a citizen, as a voter, and as an American.
And "Proud" if you think criticism of Bush has been limited to dems, look around you. Your party is thinned out -- the extremists in the GOP have alienated the moderates. You're now the party of the nation's most regressive states and only the most regressive states.
December 30th, 2008 at 4:23 pmLushInterior Says:
point? I don’t have one.
Yeah, I'll just put that on a little pedestal right here and shine a light on it for all to enjoy.
LushInterior Says:
I still find it hard to believe that there are people who actually think, actually believe, that one party or the other will bring prosperity to them, through government.
When one party consistently brings us 100% incorrect decisions across the board, causing global economic and foreign policy catastrophe, then insists that the policies that brought us there are the solution to the problems they created, yeah, I'm going to go 100% with the other party.
If Republicans were ever right about anything, then maybe I wouldn't be so completely partisan on the other side. In fact, before Bush, I considered myself a slightly-left-of-center independent. We've all learned some harsh lessons though, and the one I've learned is that all Republicans must be stopped at all costs in order for humanity to survive.
LushInterior Says:
The ONLY governmental entity that has been extremely successful is the US military and their ability to kill people and break things.
Except "kill people and break things" isn't the stated goal of their missions. They've failed at those too.
However, lots of government entities are successful. The U.S. Postal Service does huge business and turns a profit, for instance. As long as Republicans don't get enough power to appoint people who subvert the mission of their own agencies, most agencies are usually successful at acheiving their goals. Your "government can do no right" meme doesn't stand up to the barest level of scrutiny.
I did get a check for $1200.00 from GW…….nothing from Obama, yet, I will be waiting.
Yeah, I think stimulus checks are a dumb idea. But times are tough, so I did take mine, but I felt bad about it. Does that make me a bad liberal?
LushInterior Says:
Oh, and I am not looking forward to April in which I will be sending, say, $20,000.00 to the Democrats in Washington to spend as they please either.
I would think that you must be doing very well, but invariably wingnuts who claim to be paying impressive sums in taxes barely even make the tax burden they claim as net income. See Joe Wurzelbacher for a prime example.
More likely you're either lying or you don't know how to work a tax form.
LushInterior Says:
Hummm…..I may have a point after all……….
Cool. Let me know when you're ready to share it.
December 30th, 2008 at 4:48 pmIn case this confuses anybody, this is what's happening:
Blagojevich has made the best move he can make in a dance composed almost entirely of bad moves.
Roland Burris is an exemplary civil servant, honest and competent--and an frican American. I've been living in Illinois since the 70's, and Burris has been one of those politicians that nobody can say anything but good about. My first reaction when I saw Burris's name was 'Great! He'll make a terrifc senator!" before I thought of the PR stuff.
Blagojevich has made an appointment that, purely on its merits, nobody could argue with. For the first time that gives him some leverage, the first he has: Do Illinois Democrats, who know how good Burris is, want to trash him and his appointment, just to eviscerate ol' Rod?
Blagojevich is doomed, but he's fighting, and this shows it.
And why should we worry about what the Republicans have to say about this?
December 30th, 2008 at 4:58 pmThey're about to douse themselves with gasoline by trying to block Obama's recovery proposal.
Ignorance is bliss.
December 30th, 2008 at 4:59 pmBurris is an OK guy.
December 30th, 2008 at 5:02 pmI don't know why he accepted this appointment -- but if Burris is accepted by the Senate, I hope the nation will have a respite from the past weeks of scandalous news.
LushInterior Says:
That last bong hit must have been a good one………..
http://www.cbo.gov/ ftpdocs/ 95xx/ doc9533/ 07-2008-MBR.pdf
Please….you are embarrassing yourself. Your youth and inexperience is breath taking.
Particularly in light of the fact that I can't even find where your link actually breaks down the budget for the Post Office. But we were talking about whether federal agencies meet their goals. The goals of most federal agencies don't involve making a profit, and therefore can't be criticized merely by pointing out that government isn't a profitable enterprise.
December 30th, 2008 at 8:38 pmI'd like to know how. First off, the Feds arrest a sitting governor of a sovereign state that should have been the one doing the arresting and prosecuting. The Feds don't really have jurisdiction like that and it's a violation of the principle of state sovereignty. Second, the state is the one who decides who their senator is. If state law says that the governor appoints a senator in case of the seat being vacated, then the other senators from the other states can't do a damned thing about it, legally or constitutionally.
This whole damned thing is a mess.
December 30th, 2008 at 9:44 pmCan you show me where in the constitution this is? Senators from other states can't just evict a senator from another state. Not legally anyway.
December 30th, 2008 at 9:52 pmLushInterior Says:
Well I guess you didn’t know that the Post Office is “off budget” as it is called in DC…so…you can start doing some homework and learn how guberment works before posting silly stuff here.
So they're faced with the aftermath of skyrocketing fuel costs and decreased mail volume. I don't think that takes away from the point that USPS is a highly trusted carrier. I don't want private overlords running day-to-day mail service -- anything endorsed by a slimy troll like yourself is bound to be inefficient. Get with the program or go f uck yourself.
December 30th, 2008 at 10:11 pmLushInterior Says:
Well I guess you didn’t know that the Post Office is “off budget” as it is called in DC…so…you can start doing some homework and learn how guberment works before posting silly stuff here.
I was just following the link you provided. The only mention of the term "postal" produces the following:
So the numbers you cited include the Postal Service budget. They may be off budget, but they're not outside of the scope of your own citation. I was just pointing out that the citation you provided doesn't support the conclusion that you're presumably supporting.
You did read the link you posted, right...?
Alejandro Says:
Can you show me where in the constitution this is? Senators from other states can’t just evict a senator from another state. Not legally anyway.
I pass this task on to the inestimable Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com, who breaks it down much better than I ever could.
December 30th, 2008 at 11:04 pmI agree that McWars was completely out of line there.
Supporting eugenics based on the offspring's opinion of the utility USPS? That's... that's just funny is what it is.
I point, I laugh.
December 31st, 2008 at 3:09 am