Blago's Pick Tried to Execute an Innocent Man

almost everyone has a skeleton in their closet, especially politicians.......

The story fell a bit short...did they execute the man? Trying to execute someone isn't the same as executing someone. Again, tell us...did they execute Rolando Cruz for this crime? Stopping short of the ending taints this story now doesn't it?

The published article was incomplete. Why was the outcome of this execution? was it accomplished and carried out or was it finally dropped for lack of evidience?
Boy, writers are desperately needed by all current media. As a writer, I would never allow such an article to carry my name. Blog or no blog. Any and all articles published any place for the public to see and read, must be complete and accurate. This was a total failure !

This is one of those false issues the Right likes to create out of nothing. There was no reason to have an election - you guys really play it a bit 'thick', don't you!.

Way BEFORE Blagojevitch named his pick, the leadership of the DNC had announced that it would not consider ANY pick by Blagojevitch. Under such circumstances, Burris should have refused to 'accept' the position. The fact that he accepted shows that he was a willing party to what was sure to become an annoyance to the Democrats and that his character is to be questioned. The evidence provided here only seems to confirms this point.

However, the MAIN point is that, under the circumstances at hand, any decent politician would have refused Blagojevitch's offer.

The leadership of the DNC is fully justified in trying to get rid of him and this has absolutely nothing to do with racism, as the right wingers are trying to claim it.

At the moment, illinois state law says without doubt that the pick is made exclusively by Blagio. There isn't a loop-hole in their state constitution allowing for elections to fill the spot, special or otherwise. So Obama and national democrats are upholding the consitution of Illinois until the state legislature can either remove Blagio from office or amend their state law to remove the exclusive power from Blagio's hands. At this point, I'd be happy if a moderate republican like Hagel took the spot than a poison pill appointed by Blagio. Hopefully the democrat's stalling will pay off and get some one more appropriate in office, and Blagio out of office.

how this is good news is for Republicans...

the shield won't be able to take the hits...

*1st swing of the brick bat* *WHAM!*

*fixing Helmet*

ok ... go

(oh yea! ... the elephant in the room! i get it!)
non-consensual twittering? LOL

http://2005.themic921.com/cc-common/streaming_new/index.html?refreshed=yes

folks from illinois are talking... my-my

Blagojevich offered Obama senate seat to Danny Davis before tapping Burris
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/12/blagojevich_offered_obama_sena.html


it is not wise for a prosecutor to tip his hand...i think it just takes more time to expand an investigation...once you start pulling that string then...well...you know how it goes after that...
;-)

i think only one more swing of the bat and the shield will fall...let's see

Dave wrote:

>Remember, they could have called for a special election and
>removed the choice out of Blago's hands.

As Somber points out, current Illinois law says the choice is in Blago's hands. (What's this I've been hearing on here about conservative respect for the "rule of law"?) Blago would undoubtedly veto a law taking it out of his hands. So it would require a 2/3 majority in both houses of the legislature. (As opposed to taking *all* choices including the veto out of his hands via impeachment, which if it's like Federal impeachment requires only a simple majority in the House and 2/3 in the Senate.)

I agree that as a matter of tactical positioning, Dems would probably have "looked better" if they had called for a special election. But the practical results would have been no different, because it would have taken months to set up even if they had the legislative votes to pass it, and in the interim Blago could and would be doing exactly the same as he is now.

>Instead, they get to
>deal with two corrupt politicians for the price of one.

"Corrupt politician" in my book means one who sells his decisions or influence, e.g. Blago (apparently, no proof yet). An AG who wants to appear "tough on crime" for political purposes is just a shrewd politician, and possibly an amoral one if he knew the guy was innocent, but not a corrupt one. (How many innocent people did Dubya execute as governor? (Not counting, of course, the "collateral damage" of innocent deaths he's caused as President.) Nobody knows, because Texas was nowhere near as scrupulous about finding out as IL was.)


Somber wrote:

>At this point, I'd be happy if a moderate republican like
>Hagel took the spot than a poison pill appointed by Blagio.

Well, Hagel would have to move to IL first. Anyway, there's no such thing as a moderate Republican anymore, at least not outside the northeast. (And the ones in the northeast have been losing either Republican primaries or general elections in droves for decades, Chris Shays being just the latest in a long trend.) Hagel in particular is a solid conservative on almost everything, and opposing the Iraq madness is more a sign of intelligence than "moderation."

Don't blame me. I voted for McCain.

ha ha ha ......bend over democrats, you are right in posistion to accept what you dumb asses created.pass the popcorn, we voted for McCain too. gonna be fun to see this crap implode in their nasty little corrupt faces.