Skip to comments.Filling Sen. Robert C. Byrd's Senate seat (WV Law requires a special election)
Posted on 06/28/2010 7:19:02 AM PDT by Maelstorm
With the death early Monday of Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D), West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin III (D) must select an interim replacement for a legend who many in the state and elsewhere consider one of a kind.
A quirk in West Virginia's laws appears to state that the replacement will likely hold the seat for the remainder of the late senator's record ninth term, through 2012; therefore, Byrd's death would not impact the partisan makeup of the chamber, nor would it directly impact the pending 2010 elections. However, there is some ambiguity in the law that has left some election experts questioning the what should happen with the seat.
State law mandates that, if a Senate vacancy occurs more than 2 1/2 years before the term is up, a special election be held to fill the seat. There were exactly two years, six months and five days left in Byrd's term when he died.
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
Repentance, not mere remorse.
What do you believe the difference to be? The asking for forgiveness?
Repent means to turn. IOW, to turn from sin and turn to God.
Whatever man calls it, luckily God hears it and forgives.
Actually, that’s what God calls it.
If he appoints a Dem, then he has a primary challenge in 2012 unless he picks a seat filler who will step aside. But he takes the chance that his pick may decide after 2.5 years that he wants to stay a US Senator. Also, he will have to deal with voters angry that they didn't get to vote on the replacement, especially if his nominee votes for Cap n' Tax, etc.
His best chance to get the seat is to allow an election in November, since it is a Republican wave year, a pubbie will probably take the seat. This will set him up for 2012, when he finishes his term as a popular governor. So he doesn't have a primary challenge, and he might bet on the voters looking for a change again in 2012.
(Well first let me say, that was a typo on ambiguity. ..) and then add, that I was not saying what I thought the Gov would do; but only that; in fact' there was no ambiguity; despite their mutterings to the contrary. And of course, they will get away with it. Who will stop them?
Who will stop Obama from treason perped against America?
All too pathetic.
You don’t *know* what God calls it, or how He views it. You presume you know, because you have selected only one translation, out of the myriad ones available. You believe that your blue letter version is the infallible Word of God. Not one jot, not none tittle do you consider to be errant. It gives you great comfort, and apparently makes you believe that you can interpret God’s word to man.
I don’t presume such knowledge. Nor do I believe that any book created or compiled by men can ever comprehend His full glory or His wishes.
To me, repentance and remorse are synonyms. Ours is a discussion of semantics. I was raised on a different translation of the same Bible you have - but one that used the word “remorse” instead of “repentance.” Yet you cannot even acknowledge we are discussing the same thing, because you seem to believe that only *your* word can be the correct one. (Biblical scholars will cavil with that interpretation, just as they will with the translation.)
Thus, we will continue to disagree.
Sounds like I struck a nerve. OK, so be it.
this should be fun