Posted on 08/20/2009 8:17:49 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
It’s not “bending over,” it’s setting things right. And won’t it be a hoot if there’s a Senate vacancy after a Republican or Independent is elected to the governorship in 2010?
My sole fear is that the Democrats will put in one of thoseappoint name someone from the same party as the Senator that caused the vacancy (so only a Democrat could replace Kennedy if he died or resigned).
Resigning now won't speed up the process. It would probably freeze out the choice he's asking for, because the special election process would automatically begin, making it too late for the legislature to change it once it has started.-PJKennedy doesn't want to give the people a chance to vote for a Republican -- he wants to ensure that the seat goes to a Democrat to preserve the 60-vote filibuster-proof Senate. In fact, with Kennedy immobilized, the Senate is not filibuster-proof now. Kennedy cannot vote absentee -- he must be present to vote.
He wants the legislature to change the law while he's still in the Senate, then he'll resign. Once he resigns, it's too late the change the rules regarding his replacement, as the Governor will be under pressure to set the date of the special election, if the law doesn't already specify it.
Somebody like Mitt Romney should come forward NOW and declare interest in running for the seat. This would be a pre-emptive strike against the legislature trying to change the law when a former-governor of the state has already declared his interest in running for it.
That would give Romney the leverage to rally support against the Democrats, declaring that they're trying to steal his opportunity to run for the seat from him, by changing back the very law that they took from him in the first place.
Believe it or not, that has been widely talked about. I thought I read somewhere (?) that Victoria Kennedy will definitely replace 'ol Chappaquiddick Ted when he's gone. Either her or some other Kennedy from that vast criminal clan...
Typical democrat...rushed to pass legislation so that a republican governor could not replace a resigning senator and NOW that they have a democratic governor want to repeal their own law so that the democratic governor can seat a democrat there. They know right now the people are not happy with their democratic government and governor and would most likely elect a republican for Kennedy’s seat.
I think that Romney left Massaschusetts. There are a few Republicans who would be feasible, but none that are well-known.
.
NEVER FORGET
.
At the very start of the Vietnam War, Sen. TED KENNEDY toured Allied military operations all over a then Free South Vietnam to see in person what the Vietnam War was really all about.
http://www.lzxray.com/guyer_set1.htm
(See 5th Photo down-Sen. TED KENNEDY touring 1st Air Cavalry Division Headquarters-Vietnam Central Highlands-1965)
So despite his knowing better, in the 1970’s Sen. TED KENNEDY went on to push a post-WATERGATE Democrat Congress into cutting off all U.S. funding for the then Free South Vietnamese people to fight for their own FREEDOM with. Following that, cutting off the funding for all Medical Humanitarian Aid as well used for the treatment of the South’s War casualties.
Leading directly to, for many poor S.E. Asian souls, a most horrid:
JOURNEY from the FALL
http://www.JourneyFromTheFall.com
http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1308949/posts
.
In the 1980’s Sen. TED KENNEDY colluded with the Communist Soviet Union in attempting to undermine then President RONALD REAGAN’s vow for American Capitalism to defeat the Communist Soviet Union and win the Cold War.
In the 21st Century a President OBAMA immediately declared war on American Capitalism, with Sen. TED KENNEDY’s imposed National Health Care goal being the last nail in a still FREE America’s coffin.
FREEDOM is always worth fighting for.
Especially if it’s your very own, and that of your Loved Ones, now on the line..?
.
Signed: “ALOHA RONNIE” Guyer
Veteran-”WE WERE SOLDIERS” Battle of IA DRANG-1965
http://www.lzxray.com/guyer_collection.htm
http://www.ArmchairGeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66978
http://www.ArmchairGeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55092
.
NEVER FORGET
.
Great points, Ronnie!
No wonder Teddy is so reluctant to meet his Maker!
I wonder if he'll remember?
Thanks for the ping, kiddo.
Hoping all's well with you & yours. :^)
Edward 'Ted' Kennedy has spent 47 years in the senate doing all he could to chop away at the freedoms and principles that this nation was founded upon. We all know his appalling record and have been repulsed by his glaringly obvious sense of entitlement, and, even though no one would wish brain cancer for anyone, when death finally comes for this alcoholic phony I won't celebrate the death of another human being but I won't spend a lot of time mourning his demise at age 77.
However, this transparent attempt to use raw political power to coerce a state legislature to rewrite the law to bring about the result desired by one man, albeit a formidable political figure, is outrageous. The only positive to this is that, once again, it demonstrates the real mindset behind most liberal politicians; they considered themselves privileged elites and the rest of us - voters - as mere peons in their world.
Sadly, Senator Ted will probably get the result he wants (or wanted, if he is now unable to communicate, which could be the case). The Massachusetts election/selection law will be re-written and the desired result will occur - another liberal Democrat will take Teddy's seat in the U.S. senate, upon his demise.
I suspect Caroline Kennedy's brief and disastrous foray into politics last year might have been a trail balloon to see if she could assume Ted's office, but she bombed so badly even Massachusetts voters were unimpressed. This time, there won't be a 'campaign'. The person the Kennedy family wants will be appointed to the seat and too bad if voters don't like it. The castle has issued it's decree! Thus it has ever been in Massachusetts whenever a Kennedy is involved. Besides, I'm sure most Massachusetts voters still worship at the Kennedy shrine so they won't care. Besides, what's another chip in the pillar of democracy when a Kennedy is involved?
.
Books about to be reconciled in Eternity =
CLARITY
CLARITY =
Reminding our fellow Americans about the selfishness of a man who is all about using a nation’s sympathy over his coming passing...
...as reason enough for it impose upon itself the dark FREEDOMless future he has always invisioned for us.
Just ask the once FREE South Vietnamse people how that feels..?
Hope all is well with you and yours also, Mr. Landru.
I know that you are doing all in your power to make it so.
.
“I wonder if he may get a visit or two from Mister Conscience.”
I’d say his conscience has been dead at least 40 years.
I like the idea of a snap special election (like with house vacancies) but allowing the Governor to name a replacement that serves until that election. Letting Jean Carnahan sit there in MO unelected for almost 2 years I didn’t like.
For Ted’s seat my wish is that it remains vacant as long as possible. Senator Nobody will be the best Senator MA has had since I don’t know when, Fred Gillet probably.
He should have stepped down months ago. But of course he doesn’t want to risk losing his job should a medical miracle take place.
I think that is true. You can’t vote by proxy on the floor.
Is Vicki as articulate as Caroline?;)
“I like the idea of a snap special election (like with house vacancies) but allowing the Governor to name a replacement that serves until that election. Letting Jean Carnahan sit there in MO unelected for almost 2 years I didn’t like.”
But I don’t like how they try to make the special election so “snappy” that they forego a regular primary (and run-off) and then the general. Even state sthat wouldn’t dream of having blanket primaries (where all the candidates appear on one ballot and the top vote-getters from each party go on to the general) or jungle primaries (where every candidate is on the same ballot and then the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, go on to a run-off unless someone manages to get 50%+1) use them for special elections to fill vacancies.
When Hutchison resigns, her seat will be temporarily filled by the Governor (which I think is the right way to go—although I’ll be pissed if Perry doesn’t name Michael Williams), but the “snap election” will be a jungle primary in which in the first round, which won’t happen with so many candidates running). That could lead to two Democrats going on to the run-off, or to the Republican that goes on to the run-off beating out the other Republicans based on votes from Democrats. In any event, I think that jungle primaries and blanket primaries violate the First Amendment, even when used for special elections. Blanket primaries for regular elections (which were used for decades in have already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, since they force parties to have as their standard-bearer in the general election someone who may not have been the choice of the voters from the party.
I would posit that, although blanket primaries in special elections differ from blanket primaries in regular elections in that there is usually only one race on the ballot (so you don’t have voters vote in the “Republican primary” in some races and the “Democrat primary” in other races), the First Amendment rights of members of political parties are violated in both instances, since members of the party would not be able to choose their standard-bearer for the general election.
I also think that the jungle primary violates the First Amendment, but the Supreme Court has recently upheld jungle primaries under the rationale that the two candidates in the run-off (both of which could be from the same party) are not listed on the ballot as being members of a particular party, so the party isn’t being forced to accept a standard-bearer selected by voters from other parties. I think that it’s a ridiculous distinction, since citizens that freely assemble to form a political party should have an affirmative right to select who they want as their standard-bearer in the general election, not just have the negative right not to have someone else select their standard-bearer.
“You can’t vote by proxy on the floor.”
Certainly they should take the time to have a regular primary. The lack of that in NY gave us a lousy campaigner and now a super RINO.
I support primary runoffs as well (or instant runoff voting) as RINO plurality victory prevention.
I’m 100% against jungle primaries in all instances and variations. I agree it a first amendment violation. I don’t recall if they ever resolved the situation in Washington state. They aren’t gonna go Louisiana style on us are they? Just when Louisiana finally ditches that system for the federal races.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.