Welcome to PatsFans.com

Why am I not surprised

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DaBruinz, Aug 20, 2009.

  1. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,207
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +288 / 18 / -43

    #50 Jersey

    Back in 2004, the Democrats of Massachusetts, afraid of losing their power in the Senate, changed the law on succession. This was to prevent Mitt Romney from nominating a Republican to take Sen. Kerry's seat.

    Now, Senator Kennedy, because he knows he's dying and doesn't have much longer to live, wants the Democrats in Massachusetts to change the law on succession again... So that Democratic Governor Deval Patrick can nominate Senator Kennedy's replacement and have him in the senate, bascially, before Kennedy's body is cold...

    Sen. Ted Kennedy's Replacement in Congress
  2. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,316
    Likes Received:
    131
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -26

    Who do you expect Patrick to pick, some Republican????
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,682
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +495 / 2 / -9

    Uncle Teddy sent a note over to the Pope, Jug Ears delivered it for him, I wonder what was in it.......:confused: :singing:
  4. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,207
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +288 / 18 / -43

    #50 Jersey

    According to the law the way it is now, its supposed to be a special election.... Kennedy wants it changed back.. to the Gov. being able to appoint the person..
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,316
    Likes Received:
    131
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -26

    Always thought that if someone resigned or died in office the Governor appointed someone new...
  6. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,207
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +288 / 18 / -43

    #50 Jersey

    In Massachusetts, that's how it was until 2004. In 2004, the Democrats in the Massachusetts house and Senate passed a new law that changed it to a special election. They did this to prevent Mitt Romney from appointing a Republican to take John Kerry's place in the even that Kerry got into the White House..

    Did you not read the article posted?
  7. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Last edited: Aug 20, 2009
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,517
    Likes Received:
    172
    Ratings:
    +398 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    Forget the article, your original post made it clear. Darryl should be blasting the source any moment now . . .
  9. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Here's the old law:

    M.G.L - Chapter 54, Section 139
    Here's the US Constitution's only reference to how election should be carried out as redone in the 17th Amendment:

    In other words, the legislature took away the power of appointment as allowed in the 17th Amendment...
  10. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,316
    Likes Received:
    131
    Ratings:
    +242 / 8 / -26

    Good comment, adds value to the conversation.. well thought out,
  11. STFarmy

    STFarmy Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    No, DaBruinz, it's not surprising. This is how politics in America today goes. It's not about what's best for the people, it's about what's best for the party. The Republicans would likely do the same thing in a reverse situation. It would get a lot more negative press in the media though.
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,774
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +170 / 4 / -4

    That's politics for you, but it's certainly not wrong for a Democratic-leaning state like MA to ensure that it has continued representation in the US Senate at a critical time. Maybe if Vitter, Ensign, or Craig step down for violating the sort of family values that they felt was worthy of impeachment, the Republicans might be able to take the moral high ground.

    The other thing, I'm thinking that maybe Kennedy is so ill that he wants to step down, but does not feel it would be responsible of him to do so at this critical juncture, especially given that health care has been one of his pet projects since the 1970s.
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2009
  13. efin98

    efin98 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It has nothing to do about "continued succession", if that were the case they would have never revoked the initial law in the first place :rolleyes:
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    171
    Ratings:
    +388 / 5 / -2

    IRRRAAAAAQQQQQQQ!!!!!! :rolleyes:
  15. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,945
    Likes Received:
    171
    Ratings:
    +388 / 5 / -2

    Gotta love politicians.
  16. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,682
    Likes Received:
    157
    Ratings:
    +495 / 2 / -9

    Last edited: Aug 21, 2009

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>