Politico’s Comparison Of Roland Burris Situation To Caroline Kennedy Situation Is Ridiculous

You know, some days it just amazes me how people work hard to write controversial articles (nothing wrong with that) without thinking their argument through fully (something wrong with that). Politico has an article running on its Web site that is titled “In politics, does race trump gender?” As is the case with a number of people, the issue of race generally gets people fired up (as does gender … so imagine when you combine the two) and certainly creates a level of interest different and higher than most other topics. In other words, great headline. The first sentence, however, made my jaw drop and nearly bust a hole through the top of my desk, “How come Roland Burris has had such an easy time getting to the U.S. Senate while Caroline Kennedyhas had such a hard time?” I’m thinking it would be news to Roland Burris that he has had an “easy time” getting into the U.S. Senate. President-elect Barack Obama came out against him, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid came out against him, most Democrats were against him (and he is in their party), he was being unfairly linked to disgraced Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, he had people trying to dig up dirt on him, the Illinois Secretary of State did not want to certify him, he had to go to the courts and get a ruling, he was turned away from the U.S. Senate in the rain while being hounded by reporters and photographers … etc. You get the picture. Apparently, according to Politico, that was easy. Smooth sailing into the U.S. Senate for Roland Burris. Is Kennedy getting the harder time? Who knows? To my knowledge, she has not even officially been nominated (by New York Gov. David Paterson) to replace Hillary Clinton in the Senate. In fact, I believe she is still just one of many potential candidates (obviously, she is the most high profile of the individuals in the running to replace Hillary). And, Kennedy is probably the front runner in this race to fill that seat. Here is a strange statement from the Politico article, “Once supporters of Roland Burris made his appointment to the Senate all about race, the deal was done, though it took a few days for Senate leaders to wake up to the fact.” Not everyone made it about race. Rep. Bobby Rush did bring race into the issue, but not all Burris supporters linked this to race. In fact, I would argue that most supporters of Burris’ nomination supported him because they believed there was no legal reason to deny him. But, I understand it makes for a better and more controversial article to make the issue about race rather than the legalese of the appointment. I would not have a problem with Caroline Kennedy being appointed to replace Hillary Clinton … if that is what the governor chooses. Burris’ political credentials are strong while Caroline Kennedy must be asked questions since she has not been involved in politics. It does not mean she should be excluded due to a lack of experience, but it does mean that people have a right to ask some tough questions of her. So far, she has been pretty solid under the media spotlight. The article asks why Kennedy has been asked tough questions about foreign and domestic issues, but Burris has not been asked those same questions. I’m not sure he has not been asked those questions. And, if he has not been asked those questions, perhaps it’s because he has been asked more questions about the person appointing him (Blagojevich) in a bizarre and almost unbelievable scandal that has the media largely obsessed. Maybe Kennedy has had to deal with things that Burris has not had to deal with, but clearly Burris has had to deal with things that Kennedy has not had to deal with in trying to gain a seat in the U.S. Senate. But, I think it’s almost premature to talk much about Kennedy going to the U.S. Senate when I am not sure she has been formally nominated by Gov. Paterson.

Yahoo/Politico:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090113/pl_politico/17399

Dianne Feinstein Is To Be Commended

Sen. Dianne Feinstein has shown the kind of toughness and character that it’s a shame more Democrats are not showing these days. Feinstein has broken with her party in support of seating Roland Burris as the junior senator from Illinois to replace President-elect Barack Obama (once the paperwork is complete). Now, obstructionists in Illinois and in the U.S. Senate are trying to stop Burris, but I at least applaud Feinstein for having the character to stand up for what is right instead of trying to play politics and “look good” to the public and to try to avoid giving political ammunition to the Republicans.

Said Feinstein as quoted by Politico:

“I can’t imagine the secretary of state countermanding a gubernatorial appointment,” Feinstein said. “The question, really, is one in my view of law. And that is, does the governor have the power to make the appointment? And the answer is yes. Is the governor discredited? And the answer is yes.

“Does that affect his appointment power? And the answer is no until certain things happen.”

Later in the article, Feinstein alludes to a point I have made in that this could set a dangerous precedent for opposing appointments like this made by governors in the future. If renegade senators (like Harry Reid is appearing to be) and other politicians can decide not to seat someone because they don’t like that person, don’t like a governor or because a governor is in some sort of trouble (how much or how little is up for interpretation) then how far can this go and how widely can this be applied?

Politico:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17118.html

Bobby Rush Pushes The Race Issue With Rod Blagojevich Appointment To Replace Barack Obama

I would be less than honest if I did not say that the comments from U.S. Representative Bobby Rush didn’t make me feel more than a little uncomfortable at times. Rush, flanked by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and former state Attorney General Roland Burris (who Blagojevich is pushing to be Obama’s replacement in the United States Senate from the state of Illinois). I’m no Blagojevich fan, but unless or until proven guilty it’s still his right to make the appointment. And, I think people should respect and judge whoever Blagojevich appoints (if he is in fact allowed to do so) without prejudice and put an end to this ridiculous notion of guilt-by-association politics we saw far too often during the presidential campaign. Burris should be judged on his own merit and should not be treated with prejudice simply because he was appointed by Burris. For those who do treat him that way they should be ashamed of themselves. Judge the man on his own record. Now, that being said, I was a little dismayed by Rush pushing the race issue so hard during his press conference. I agree that it would be nice to see more blacks in the United States Senate, but I think Rush pushed the issue too hard. I think Rush would have been best served to perhaps mention it, but work more behind the scenes to make his point. That would have been more effective and less controversial. Invoking the word “lynch” was a bit much, but Rush’s underlying point was well taken about not prejudging. I have to admit, I had not thought about Obama being the only black official in the Senate prior to his resignation as president-elect. 

Here is a quote from Rush:

“This is a matter of national importance,” Rush said. “There are no African-Americans in the Senate, and I don’t think that anyone, any U.S. senator who’s sitting in the Senate right now wants to go on record to deny one African-American for being seated in the U.S. Senate. … And so I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus.” 

I do see his point, to a large extent, but Rush clearly could have and should have handled the situation better. Had he done that he would have been far less polarizing in this increasingly politically-correct world. Judge Burris on his own merits and how he can represent the people of Illinois.