February 03, 2010

Brown to Senate: Seat Me, Now
— Ace

The Senate wants to delay until next Thursday, despite the fact that Devall Patrick is certifying the election results tomorrow morning.

Brown wants the People's Seat, now.

Brown's legal counsel wrote Gov. Deval Patrick (D-Mass.) and Secretary of State William Galvin asking them to certify the election results immediately, which would allow him to be sworn into the U.S. Senate as early as Thursday.

"While Senator elect Brown had tentatively planned to be sworn into office February 11, he has been advised that there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date," his attorneys wrote. "For that reason, he wants certification to occur immediately."

Former and soon-to-be boxing referee Harry Reid says he has no plans to seat a duly elected Senator anytime soon.


Posted by: Ace at 10:39 AM | Comments (131)
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

1

Brown should have been seated immediately, and 10-days (for absentee ballots) at the latest. That was the 29th of January.

Had Brown been seated properly, they wouldnÂ’t have passed the debt increase. Or approved one of the crappy nominations Obama was forcing.

Dems are delaying trying to use KirkÂ’s vote to get as much done as possible, and Kirk shouldnÂ’t even be in the Senate since the 19th according to Massachusetts law that gave him the seat.

Posted by: enoxo at February 03, 2010 10:41 AM (EeTKF)

2 Maybe they're having a hard time getting all the Chivas stains out.

Posted by: Waterhouse at February 03, 2010 10:42 AM (RwPdb)

3 So are those votes made by the other guy invalid and challengeable by "the people" in court?

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 10:43 AM (p302b)

4 They are voting on a communist shitstain for some kind of labor secretary tommorow. The R's have protested so they need 60 votes. That is why the delay.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2010 10:44 AM (QrA9E)

5
They're making it out like Joe Clownfucker Biden has a busy schedule and is not available until the 11th.

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 10:44 AM (z37MR)

6  Wonder if anyone has thought to challenge Kirk still being there since they will make Brown's pay retroactive to the day after the election. That means MA had three Senators instead of the two stated in the Constitution.

Posted by: Waste93 at February 03, 2010 10:44 AM (KHM8y)

7 >>3 So are those votes made by the other guy invalid and challengeable by "the people" in court?


No one will have standing or it will be decided it's a political question, so nothing will be challengeable.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 03, 2010 10:45 AM (0FiCa)

8
Joe fucking Biden hasn't done a day's work since 1972.

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 10:45 AM (z37MR)

9 Either Harry Reid has concluded he will never win his re-election to the Senate this year, or he's a bigger fool than we all thought.

This is the spiteful, petty kind of thing that will piss off a whole lotta people.. I hope Nevadans are watching.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 03, 2010 10:46 AM (f9c2L)

10


I get a kick out of the Dems in Congress basically saying " We're not behind this, this is a state issue !", when we all no damn well who is exactly behind it, Harry Reid and the Obama Whitehouse. They're trying to delay his seating as long as possible to see what else they can cram down our throats while they still have Kirk's vote.

Posted by: Blazer at February 03, 2010 10:46 AM (t72+4)

11 IMPEACH!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 10:47 AM (IIHY9)

12 It is so refreshing and comforting to see our government in action.  To know that we can count on the rule of law and justice to prevail despite our bitter political divides. 

Posted by: California Red at February 03, 2010 10:47 AM (7uWb8)

13
August 25, 2009: Gov Patrick chooses Paul Kirk to replace Kennedy in the Senate.

August 26, 2009: Paul Kirk is sworn in to the United States Senate.

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 10:47 AM (z37MR)

14 It's the Chicago way.

Posted by: mama winger at February 03, 2010 10:47 AM (677gh)

15 This goes with the "in plain sight" mem of the administration.  They said they were going to delay his seating and look, they are.  I guess we need to apply the "in plain sight" modus operandi to everything now.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 10:48 AM (p302b)

16 Just lit my propane burner outside and heating up a huge vat of tar while shredding my truck load of pillows for the feathers, sharpening my pitchforks later.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 10:49 AM (IIHY9)

17

So are those votes made by the other guy invalid and challengeable by "the people" in court?

---------------------

No one will have standing or it will be decided it's a political question, so nothing will be challengeable.

-------------------

Then how about the Senate Rules Committee?

Anyway, don't the people of Massachusetts have standing?

Posted by: arhooley at February 03, 2010 10:50 AM (ElI+6)

18 Of course everyone knows this, but what if the roles were reversed and the Republicans were dicking around seating a Senator?

Posted by: kansas at February 03, 2010 10:50 AM (mka2b)

19 Just lit my propane burner outside and heating up a huge vat of tar while shredding my truck load of pillows for the feathers, sharpening my pitchforks later.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 02:49 PM (IIHY9)

Grill some ribs while you're at it...I eat vicariously through you.

Posted by: Tami at February 03, 2010 10:51 AM (VuLos)

20 They just made another million enemies in the private sector, these guys really are schtooooopid!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 10:51 AM (IIHY9)

21 >>17 Anyway, don't the people of Massachusetts have standing?


Who has standing in the Obama birth certificate issue? Not us, the voters.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at February 03, 2010 10:52 AM (0FiCa)

22
Tell me again how many unelected Democrat Senators we have?

Franken
Burris
Kirk
the asshole from Colorado
the asswipe from Delaware

who else?

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 10:52 AM (z37MR)

23 And the moonbats thought Bush was going to seize power for life instead of turning it over to Obama.

can you say "PROJECTION"?

Posted by: Mord at February 03, 2010 10:52 AM (tTj19)

24 19 Tami,

So sorry no ribs today I have three huge racks for the game Sunday tho', today it's homemade fajitas w/all the fixin's.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 10:53 AM (IIHY9)

25

Nice to see Mitch "Cabbage Patch Kid Face" McConnell on top of this.

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 10:53 AM (z37MR)

26

Hey dems, Brown was elected because you friggin idiots are too stupid to realize you're digging a hole for your own graves. By not seating him, it proves you're just still digging.

Dem strategy session:  "lets piss off the electorate even more, that'll help us".  

Posted by: dogcatcher at February 03, 2010 10:54 AM (YbPjr)

27 Brown's problem is that:
1. He's Republican
2. He's WHITE

You'll note that Burris was on the express lane to being sworn in/seated, but then:
1. He's a Democrat
2. He's BLACK

Nuance.

Posted by: GarandFan at February 03, 2010 10:54 AM (ZQBnQ)

28 So now let's see, they're fixin to put tiiimmmaaay and err ick under that bus....is ray the hood goin to?

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 10:55 AM (p302b)

29 check out the breaking news at NY post.

Posted by: quite googleable at February 03, 2010 10:55 AM (EiH7n)

30 If I were Scott Brown I'd be down in DC with a battering ram at the door of the senate. Enough of this bullshit.

Posted by: Mord at February 03, 2010 10:55 AM (tTj19)

31 If the Rs had any balls they would have been in court the day after the elction to force the issue.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2010 10:55 AM (QrA9E)

32 So sorry no ribs today I have three huge racks for the game Sunday tho', today it's homemade fajitas w/all the fixin's.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 02:53 PM (IIHY9)

Daa-amn! 

Posted by: Tami at February 03, 2010 10:55 AM (VuLos)

33 On Megyn Kelly's show they said he would be seated tomorrow.

Posted by: t-bone at February 03, 2010 10:56 AM (Xpxvu)

34
C'mon, we knew the rat-bastards would be pulling this shit.  The RNC should have been agitating for this for 4 days, why is Brown having to do this himself?

Posted by: Dang Straights at February 03, 2010 10:56 AM (fx8sm)

35 Well, they told us they were going to do it.  This is exactly why the repubs should never make deals with the dems, they will do everything to manipulate the situation. There is no such thing as ethical political behavior to a dem.

Can't watch the tube, is at least Fox all over this?

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at February 03, 2010 10:56 AM (DIYmd)

36

Brown to Senate: Seat Me, Now on laceyunderalls a/k/a grouchyunderalls.

I'm pretty sure that's what he actually said.

I just wanted to get the record straight.

Posted by: grouchyunderalls at February 03, 2010 10:56 AM (pLTLS)

37 Brown should put out a commercial in MA showing how fast all these other Senators were seated and asking them to contact the White House, the Senate, the governor of MA, the secretary of state of MA to ask why he isn't being seated, why he is somehow considered a second class senator.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 10:57 AM (p302b)

38 I just love underalls.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 10:58 AM (IIHY9)

39
Harry "this war is lost" Reid    (oh wait...  - this war is NOT lost!  we won!  Iraqis won!  - no thanks to rat-fucks like Harry Reid)

ahem - Harry "this war is lost" Reid is just jealous because his days as a US Senator are fucking numbered.  heh.


Posted by: Lemon Kitten at February 03, 2010 10:59 AM (0fzsA)

40

Damn good idea.  Wish'd the RNC woulda thought of it....

37 Brown should put out a commercial in MA showing how fast all these other Senators were seated and asking them to contact the White House, the Senate, the governor of MA, the secretary of state of MA to ask why he isn't being seated, why he is somehow considered a second class senator.

Posted by: skye at February 03, 2010 11:00 AM (HwMXR)

41 I would like to seat Scott Brown, among other things.

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:01 AM (lEkVh)

42 41,

I was in the Army too! hahaha

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:03 AM (IIHY9)

43 It's because he is a sex symbol, isn't it?

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:03 AM (p302b)

44 I don't care about symbolism. It's more of a "gut" feeling.

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:04 AM (lEkVh)

45 When I first saw the headline Ace, I had to do a double take, I missed the "s".

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:05 AM (p302b)

46 What if Brown just shows up in Washington first things tomorrow AM and starts voting?

Nobody will have the stones to stop him.

Posted by: looking closely at February 03, 2010 11:05 AM (6Q9g2)

47
What if Brown just shows up in Washington first things tomorrow AM and starts voting?

Love to see that.  See if dingy reid has the stones to bar the duly elected Senator from the chamber.

Posted by: Dang Straights at February 03, 2010 11:06 AM (fx8sm)

48 Rush talked a little about this.  He said that essentially Kirk's votes are illegal.  Unfortunately, our ball-less Republicans haven't challenged this at all--not a peep.  Could you imagine if Marcia Coakley would have won, GWB was pres., and the Repubs were the majority party?  This would be an endless loop on the alphabet networks.  The MSm would be screaming bloody murder.  People would be rioting in the streets.

Posted by: runningrn at February 03, 2010 11:06 AM (CfmlF)

49 Posted by: looking closely at February 03, 2010 03:05 PM (6Q9g2)

He doesn't have that little card that identifies him as a senator, his credentials and you know what happens when you just show up at a government office and if you don't, ask that O'Keefe guy.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:07 AM (p302b)

50

I would like to seat Scott Brown, among other things.

This morning we declared today Tell Someone/Something To Go To Hell Day. I'm willing to bump that if we can instead declare it Seat Scott Brown in an Upright Position so the Moronettes Can Take Care of Him Day.

Look at how well I share!

Posted by: grouchyunderalls at February 03, 2010 11:07 AM (pLTLS)

51 I would like to see Col Brown drive up in his pickup with aaaaooogah horns blasting.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:07 AM (IIHY9)

52 Former and soon-to-be boxing referee Harry Reid says he has no plans to seat a duly elected Senator anytime soon.

I don't think so.

The world of professional boxing does have standards to maintain.

Posted by: shibumi at February 03, 2010 11:08 AM (OKZrE)

53

This could be fun. I know, I know that we indulge in this picture a lot but Can you imagine if the republicans with a republican president refused to seat a duely elected senator for political reasons? Wow!

Why does crazy Joe have to be there anyway?

If the president can be sworn in on a plane by some judge why do we need avatar Joe to be there for Brown?

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:09 AM (lEkVh)

54 #49

Lets see Senate security throw him out (ie with ten other Republican Senators vouching for him in person).

Better yet, lets also see the Democrats refuse to let him on the floor to vote.


Posted by: looking closely at February 03, 2010 11:09 AM (6Q9g2)

55

What if Brown just shows up in Washington first things tomorrow AM and starts voting?

Nobody will have the stones to stop him.

Well that's nice in theory. But the votes aren't worth squat until they certify him.

Posted by: grouchyunderalls at February 03, 2010 11:09 AM (pLTLS)

56 We need Glenn Beck to incite us to violence so we will use force them to seat Brown.

Arianna?  If you're reading this?  I'm kidding.

Posted by: Crusty at February 03, 2010 11:09 AM (GvSpB)

57
Why does crazy Joe have to be there anyway?

Comedy relief.

Posted by: Dang Straights at February 03, 2010 11:10 AM (fx8sm)

58 Seat Scott Brown in an Upright Position so the Moronettes Can Take Care of Him Day.

Look at how well I share!

Me first

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:10 AM (lEkVh)

59 I am the Senator.  And I didn't even get more than one vote.

Posted by: Senator Burris at February 03, 2010 11:11 AM (+zo63)

60

Why does crazy Joe have to be there anyway?

Remember when the dncmedia gave Gov Palin shit for saying the VP's duties include presiding over the Senate chamber?


Yeah, well, SHE WAS RIGHT.

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 11:11 AM (z37MR)

61

Hey, call Harry Reid's office at 202-224-3542 and demand this. I've called and a lot of friends have called. You should too.

Oh, it won't help. But it will be fun!

Posted by: pronotcon at February 03, 2010 11:11 AM (nF4Jh)

62
and Fuck You, Italics

Posted by: This is boner at February 03, 2010 11:12 AM (z37MR)

63 I picked a bad week to go on the wagon, but it's slipping fast!!

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:12 AM (IIHY9)

64

I would still like to see Joe take over from Obama for the rest of his term. It would be dangerous in a crazy way but funny as shit. Have you seen his avatar review? Almost laughed myself sick. Stand up Chuck!

Sit DOWN BROWN!

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:12 AM (lEkVh)

65 I'm thinking if all these hot republicans get in we can have a calendar of hot congressmen and senators issued with the profits going towards the national debt or something of that ilk.  You know like the FDNY calendar that you can't find the day after it comes out.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:13 AM (p302b)

66 I want Schumer GONE in the fall.

Posted by: ParisParamus at February 03, 2010 11:13 AM (bN5ZU)

67 #55 Says who?

In theory "Senator" Kirk isn't one, and shouldn't be voting right now.

If his votes count, why should Brown's not count?


Posted by: looking closely at February 03, 2010 11:13 AM (6Q9g2)

68 Someone should throw Schumer off the Brooklyn Bridge and be done with the imbecile.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:14 AM (IIHY9)

69 How did Schumer get elected in the first place? Did no one hear him talk? I find his voice more annoying than Barney Frank's--is that possible?

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:15 AM (lEkVh)

70 69,

Bet he and Barney pull taffy together.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:15 AM (IIHY9)

71 Posted by: ParisParamus at February 03, 2010 03:13 PM (bN5ZU)

how?  The NY Post si saying this: "Schumer's approval rating at 58 percent: poll"
Unless you plan to talk them into voting for term limits, he is such a lock, it's scary.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:16 AM (p302b)

72 9 Either Harry Reid has concluded he will never win his re-election to the Senate this year, or he's a bigger fool than we all thought.

This is the spiteful, petty kind of thing that will piss off a whole lotta people.. I hope Nevadans are watching.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 03, 2010 02:46 PM (f9c2L)

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? We are soooo watching this that we are DONE watching and he is toast! But make no mistake, he has NOT concluded he is going to lose his seat. He is FAAAAAR to deluded and arrogant for that. This guy has been NOTHING good for Nevadans....right down to FORCING financing for City Center that will result in default. Just like all the forced mortgages for unqualified buyers. He called in favors to keep City Center financed and it is a boondogal....Now we will all look at that failed project...OH No we won't! Obama told everyone not to spend money here agian....so crickets in a ghost town!

Posted by: rightzilla at February 03, 2010 11:16 AM (rVJH4)

73

To be fair to Harry, Brown isn't black and he isn't from Illinois and he didn't pay for his Senate seat so there's no reason to rush this.

Posted by: andycanuck at February 03, 2010 11:18 AM (2qU2d)

74

It would be dangerous in a crazy way but funny as shit.

It would be a lot more safe than now with the jugeared jackass in there actively trying to destroy the country.

Posted by: Vic at February 03, 2010 11:18 AM (QrA9E)

75 Let the Dems keep pulling crap like this, it's only going to help in November

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2010 11:18 AM (ekqTc)

76 The people of Nassau County voted out their democratic supervisor, Tom Suozzi, who now has a nice cushy, no pressure job with cablevision, in favor of the little known republican who promised to lower taxes.  So, guess it can happen.  The people there never would have believed Suozzi would have been voted out, some admitted to voting for him when they wanted to vote for the other guy because they assumed he would win anyway.  Which I found crazy but plausible.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:19 AM (p302b)

77 Rightzilla, Reid was the gaming commissioner right? He got where he is because he knew too much? Is this the right take? Otherwise, why him in the first place?

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:19 AM (lEkVh)

78 69 How did Schumer get elected in the first place? Did no one hear him talk? I find his voice more annoying than Barney Frank's--is that possible?

No, sorry, this is not possible.  Please have your ears checked and try again.  Barney "Gums" Frank has been certified by global warming scientists as having the Most Irritating Voice in the World.

As for Brown vs, the bored Senate, this is being done on purpose.  Everything these crap-bags is done on purpose.  That's one thing, but the Other Thing is that their purpose is to ruin this country and turn us all  into Welfare Morons.

all of us, as opposed to the 40 percent or so they've already de-brained 


Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 11:20 AM (JrRME)

79 73 andy,

I beg to differ with you my friend, he served in the Armed Forces, he more than paid for that seat.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 11:20 AM (IIHY9)

80

Mr. Brown will be seated on February 4, 2011; not to worry!

Posted by: Harry Reid at February 03, 2010 11:21 AM (8g9qq)

81 I beg to differ with you my friend, he served in the Armed Forces, he more than paid for that seat. Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 03, 2010 03:20 PM (IIHY9) Well said

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2010 11:21 AM (ekqTc)

82 Wait.  Are Schumer's and Gillibrand's seats both up this year?  How does that work with candidates running?  The top two opponents get the seats?  OK, am I being stupid?

Posted by: ParisParamus at February 03, 2010 11:22 AM (bN5ZU)

83 78 73 andy,

I beg to differ with you my friend, he served in the Armed Forces, he more than paid for that seat.

Hmmm.  So, I get a Senate seat, too?

( II Corps,  7 September 1972-30 March 1973 )

How many interns do I get?

Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 11:23 AM (JrRME)

84

# 22,

Add NY Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand to the unelected list (she was appointed to Hillary's seat when Hillary became the useless Secretary of State).

Posted by: RickZ at February 03, 2010 11:24 AM (Kqw0g)

85

79 I think that there may be a touch of comedy in Barney but none in Schumer. Schumer makes my skin crawl. Barney does too but in a less scary more ridiculous way, e.g. when I see Barney it's more of a "are you friggin kidding me that those assholes keep electing this pathetic creep" and Schumer is more of a "grab your wallets and your guns, this guy is dangerous."

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:24 AM (lEkVh)

86 US Rep. Niki Tsongas (Dingbat, MA-5) was sworn-in and voting on legislation within 48-hours of the polls closing in her special election a couple of years ago - a special election that was decided by roughly the same margin as was this special election for the US Senate seat from the same State. Yeah, I'm sure Marcia Croakley would be cooling her heals until 2/11 as well. Right?

Posted by: docj at February 03, 2010 11:24 AM (dt6br)

87 I beg to differ with you my friend, he served in the Armed Forces, he more than paid for that seat. Hmmm. So, I get a Senate seat, too? ( II Corps, 7 September 1972-30 March 1973 ) How many interns do I get? Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 03:23 PM (JrRME) Just put in a request and we'll channel it up the chain of command

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2010 11:24 AM (ekqTc)

88 Someone needs to come out with a "Hotties of the GOP" calendar.  We've got more than our fair share.

And there might actually be a market for "Bat-Shit Crazies of the DNC" with Joey Plugs Biden as Mr. April--as in Fool.

Posted by: Jane D'oh! at February 03, 2010 11:24 AM (UOM48)

Posted by: Dang Straights at February 03, 2010 11:25 AM (fx8sm)

90 ahh this just reassures my faith in the US Govern- Oh wait no it doesn't. Jackasses.

Posted by: vai2112 at February 03, 2010 11:25 AM (TcILN)

91

"The announced Republican challengers - Lazio for Governor and Blakeman for Senator - don't show much oomph at this stage. Are they the best the GOP has to offer?"

President Obama, Sen. Schumer Approval

New York State voters approve 57 percent to 38 percent of the job President Obama is doing, compared to 59 percent to 36 percent Dec. 15.

U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer deserves to be reelected this year, voters say 54 percent to 33 percent. Voters approve 58 percent to 30 percent of the job he is doing, down from 62 percent to 27 percent in December."

From the NY Post article I linked above.  I can see Paris why you said that.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:25 AM (p302b)

92 Just lit my propane burner outside and heating up a huge vat of tar while shredding my truck load of pillows for the feathers, sharpening my pitchforks later.

Can I hitch a ride?

Posted by: alexthechick at February 03, 2010 11:28 AM (8WZWv)

93 85 Miss Dagny, you're dead on regarding the Nature of Chuck.  It's more than the ambulance-chasing aspect of his early days and the bitter partisanship.  There is Something About Schumer which makes jokes about him fall flat

Watch his eyes:  Like a deranged ferret, always looking for something to bite / eat /  gnaw on

Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 11:28 AM (JrRME)

94 My friends in NY say that Schumer likes to fly under the radar, that you hardly know he is up for reelection until you see his name on the ballot.  So how do we find out if he is up for reelection.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:28 AM (p302b)

95 The top two opponents get the seats?

Candidates have to file for a specific senate seat.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at February 03, 2010 11:28 AM (DIYmd)

96 So how do we find out if he is up for reelection. Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 03:28 PM (p302b) He tends to show up at sporting events during election cycles to prove he is macho

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2010 11:30 AM (ekqTc)

97

Me first

I'm sharing but I'm not that generous. Get in line, toots!

Posted by: grouchyunderalls at February 03, 2010 11:31 AM (pLTLS)

98 77 Rightzilla, Reid was the gaming commissioner right? He got where he is because he knew too much? Is this the right take? Otherwise, why him in the first place?

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 03:19 PM (lEkVh)

He was a gaming commish. I am sure he is in possession of certain information. Fun to read commision meeting transcripts from back in the day too. And the WHY may be just as you assert because I can think of no other reason for it to be him.....especially given teh republican nature of the state back in his early years. AND since he is an artificial Mormon (convert), he does not enjoy the committment of the church body a cradle Mormon would.

Posted by: rightzilla at February 03, 2010 11:32 AM (rVJH4)

99
Just put in a request and we'll channel it up the chain of command

Thanks.  No Monica-esque gals, though:  Not that there's anything wrong with That, but I like a lean & hungry look with a slightly bent personna:  Kate Moss  meets Amy Winehouse meets  Gwen Stefani on a Bad Day

Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 11:32 AM (JrRME)

100 Keep it up Reid, the Republicans need another few million votes this November. The more you guys try to screw over the American public, the more the American public will decide to pay you and your Leftard friends back with interest at the voting booths.

Posted by: exdem13 at February 03, 2010 11:33 AM (lYKj1)

101  I said it first. So after me...

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 11:34 AM (lEkVh)

102

Seat Scott Brown in an Upright Position so the Moronettes Can Take Care of Him Day.


I fully support this position.

Posted by: Laura Castellano at February 03, 2010 11:34 AM (fuw6p)

103 Sounds like Dumb and Dummerer want to take another crack at jamming Obamacare through in the middle of the night.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 03, 2010 11:34 AM (PcRSS)

104 you know, I do like this "people's seat" thing - remember when Clinton, during the impeachment, kept talking about his not being able to do "the people's business"? This is the kind of phrase that (I think, anyway) tends to make lefties crazy when we get away with using it.

Posted by: Ira at February 03, 2010 11:34 AM (bJm7W)

105

I don't see how this is a smart move by the Dems.  They're just giving their opponants something to tee of at them over for a week. 

Off topic, but I just have to mention this somewhere:   I know it's probably best to link to Andrew Sullivan as little as possible, but he had another deranged outburst over Palin and Trig today.  This time he's claiming the name "Trig" was chosen by Sarah Palin in order to mock the baby! 

Get a load of this quote from is blog today:   "The medical term for Down Syndrome is Trisomy-21 or Trisomy-g. It is often shortened in medical slang to Tri-g.

Is it not perfectly possible that the very name given to this poor child, being reared by Bristol, is another form of mockery of his condition, along with the "retarded baby" tag?"

He really needs to get socked around for this one, IMO.  The man is truly disturbed. 

Posted by: franticflintstone at February 03, 2010 11:34 AM (VGbp5)

106 So how do we find out if he is up for reelection.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 03:28 PM (p302b)

According to a page on his website he was re-elected in 2004...so he's up this year.

"After New Yorkers re-elected him in 2004, Chuck was awarded two powerful posts by his colleagues."


Posted by: Tami at February 03, 2010 11:35 AM (VuLos)

107 "It's from Wiki, but:  "In 2004, Schumer handily won re-election against Republican assemblyman Howard Mills of Middletown and Conservative Marilyn O'Grady.  Many New York Republicans were dismayed by the selection of Mills over the conservative Michael Benjamin who held significant advantages over Mills in both fundraising and organization.Benjamin publicly accused GOP Chairman Sandy Tredwell and Governor George Pataki of trying to muscle him out of the senate race and undermine the democratic process. Schumer defeated Mills, the second-place finisher, by 2.8 million votes and won reelection with 71 percent of the vote, the most lopsided margin ever for a statewide election in New York. Schumer won every county in the state except one, Hamilton County in the Adirondacks, the least populated and most Republican county in the state.Mills conceded defeat minutes after the polls closed, before returns had come in."

Haven't we heard this song before, recently even.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:35 AM (p302b)

108 Thanks. No Monica-esque gals, though: Not that there's anything wrong with That, but I like a lean & hungry look with a slightly bent personna: Kate Moss meets Amy Winehouse meets Gwen Stefani on a Bad Day Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 03:32 PM (JrRME) I think that should go on a "DD 1348"

Posted by: Nevergiveup at February 03, 2010 11:38 AM (ekqTc)

Posted by: The Chicken at February 03, 2010 11:40 AM (5I0Yr)

110 Seating Senator-elect Brown tomorrow would be wrong. It exemplifies the fascist and Nazi-like policies of the last eight years of Bush/Cheney. Brown will be seated when he's seated next week, not a second sooner

Posted by: Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi at February 03, 2010 11:41 AM (6uiF7)

111 That's it. I'm never trying a stupid smilie again.

Posted by: The Chicken at February 03, 2010 11:41 AM (5I0Yr)

112 Wonder what Wiki is trying to pull cause it says hillary was re elected in 2006 so that would mean gillibrand stays till 2012 and chuckie might be up.  They can't both be up for re election at the same time, that doesn't make sense.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:42 AM (p302b)

113 Saw a couple of articles saying that the health bill was done a while ago and paid no attention but, this could be true, believe the congressman who owes taxes from NY made one of the comments.  If it is true, a stealth vote, in the dead of night, keeping it real quiet, might be occurring. 

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:45 AM (p302b)

114

# 116 curious,

Bride of Chucky Schumer is up for re-election this year, not Gillibrand.

Posted by: RickZ at February 03, 2010 11:49 AM (Kqw0g)

115 This is me, puking all over the monitor......I have a case of Reid1-Obama1 Flu!

Posted by: rightzilla at February 03, 2010 11:51 AM (rVJH4)

116 If Paris Paramus is around.  I checked, Chuckie is up for re election and so is Kristin for a special election to fill out the rest of ol hill's term.  So that means that NYer's will be choosing both of their senate seats.  This is unusual to say the least.  But that explains why chuckie suddenly is not around much and jumped on the "no trial in NY band wagon".

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 11:52 AM (p302b)

117 They seated Roland Burris faster.

Posted by: jeff at February 03, 2010 11:55 AM (i0/N7)

118 Thanks for sharing lacey/grouchyunderalls.

Posted by: Sweetsrender at February 03, 2010 12:00 PM (rVDlM)

119 105 Sounds like Dumb and Dummerer want to take another crack at jamming Obamacare through in the middle of the night.

 

Rush said that today too.


Posted by: runningrn at February 03, 2010 12:00 PM (CfmlF)

120 Curious at 116 - NY might be like MO, where an appointed senator only serves until the next election cycle. We had two senators up in 2002, because we elected the dead guy and his wife could only serve until there could be another election, which is when Talent beat her. It can, and does happen, but I don't know if NY law requires it like MO law does.

Posted by: Catherine at February 03, 2010 12:03 PM (dc4hq)

121 124, it looks like both are up this year, but both are considered sufficiently safe that no one is really talking much about the election, and certainly not about unseating Schumer.  My guess is that they will both win.

But my question is now really about how you run against one or both of them?  This seems like a VERY bizarre thing, and more difficult for a challenger.

Posted by: ParisParamus at February 03, 2010 12:16 PM (bN5ZU)

122 119 This is me, puking all over the monitor......I have a case of Reid1-Obama1 Flu!   Oh, that new strain of swine flu--H1O1!!!!!

Posted by: runningrn at February 03, 2010 12:22 PM (CfmlF)

123 Posted by: ParisParamus at February 03, 2010 04:16 PM (bN5ZU)

How does Schumer manage that?  To have a lock on his office and not even have to worry about re election one little bit?   I heard she is not so popular.  Someone said that ol hill might come back to get her seat back.  Apparently she has so many minders she's kinda lost her power and the idea of being back in the Senate again is very tantalizing to her.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 12:29 PM (p302b)

124 The Hill says it's confirmed that he will be sworn in tomorrow.

Posted by: dagny at February 03, 2010 12:31 PM (lEkVh)

125 127   How does Schumer manage that?

In 2010, Luck:  Republicans will concentrate on Gillibrand, who has less name recog and looks like a hapless campaigner.  The big cats always look for the weakest zebra...

Posted by: SantaRosaStan at February 03, 2010 12:40 PM (JrRME)

126 "There is a certain virtue to being able to tell the absolute truth and stick it to people without repercussions"

This video made me wonder if elliot will challenge her in the primary.  Colbert's last line was hysterical and so apros pos.

Posted by: curious at February 03, 2010 12:46 PM (p302b)

127

he isn't from Illinois and he didn't pay for his Senate seat so there's no reason to rush this

I beg to differ with you my friend, he served in the Armed Forces, he more than paid for that seat.

I was (sarc.) referencing Roland Burris's corrupt appointment and his expedited seating, gentlemen, and not Senator Brown. (Who, Ace writes, is going to be seated tomorrow.)

Posted by: andycanuck at February 03, 2010 01:20 PM (2qU2d)

128 Curious about the Wikipedia entry for Trisomy 21 listing "Trisomy G" as an alternative name, I see that it was added recently, (AUG 2009) with no citation. http://tiny.cc/tpEzQ THe note attached with his contribution is simply "The added alternative name shouldn't be missing from a featured article." He doesn't explain why this should be so, and again, provides no citation other than his own declaration. Since I have never used or seen used "Tri-g" or even Trisomy g as a descriptor for Trisomy 21 in genetics literature or in medical practice in the states, I would like to cure my ignorance and find a reference besides "medman". The contributer is "Medman" who by his ID, description mostly makes edits to foreign language entries.

Posted by: SarahW at February 03, 2010 01:23 PM (CSrvi)

129

I don't trust any politician from a state north of the Mason-Dixon Line or west of the Rockies.

Posted by: Guest at February 03, 2010 06:10 PM (ITzbJ)

Posted by: asellASFLlfl at June 10, 2010 11:20 AM (HfkEF)

Posted by: kOHHllslgaEga at June 19, 2010 01:04 PM (EVGqL)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
132kb generated in CPU 0.0993, elapsed 0.2885 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.2495 seconds, 259 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.