Just a thought.... n/c

Help Support Steer Planet:

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
kimbaljd said:
Why is it that when the Republicans want to put in place a replacement for a position the Democrats change the law but then a few years later the Democrats want to put in place a replacement its ok for them to change the laws back????? Seems hypocritical....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090820/ap_on_re_us/us_kennedy_massachusetts_senate

it's not hypocritical.  both sides do it to give the party an advantage.  nothing more, nothing less.  the voters refuse to vote against this because the unknown entity is always weaker than the known entity.  voters refuse to vote for someone who doesn't have name recognition and the politicians know it.

it's the voter's fault, not the D or R's.
 

the angus111

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
385
knabe,you are exactly right.did i not read they need to have a special election? if so its the peoples decision who replaces the old drunk,true?are they worried the people will vote for a republican.i think the people in that state would elect a democrat anyways,look who else represents that state,old big mouth barney. rusty
 

kimbaljd

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Alvin
I think in this case it is hypocritical. Teddy had the law changed a few years ago when there was concern that Mit Romney(Rep) was going to replace someone quickly with presumably another Rep, and now it has to go to a public vote within five months. Now that he is concerned that when his seat is vacated from the illnes he is suffering it will take up to five months to go to a special vote. Well if that happens they will not have his seat to vote FOR the new Healthcare Overhaul. So now it appears he wants to hurry and appoint someone that (he approves of) that will vote the way he wants for his replacement(albeit temporary) but still not the choice of the people to vote on the issue. How is that not hypocracy?
 

kimbaljd

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
476
Location
Alvin
This I am adding below is a follow up to the above article.




Kennedy penned a poignant letter last week urging the leaders to change the law requiring a special election. In a joint statement last week to The Boston Globe, which first reported news of Kennedy's letter, both Murray and DeLeo were noncommittal.

A legislative committee co-chairman overseeing a bill that would enact the change admitted to the Boston Herald Monday that the move is aimed at keeping a Democrat in the seat.

"I want to make sure that as a Democrat we have a Democratic voice in there for the five months that it might be vacant," said Rep. Michael J. Moran, who chairs the legislative Election Laws Committee, told the newspaper.

Asked whether he would support the change if Republican Mitt Romney were still governor, Moran laughed and said, "Of course there's a political side to this."

Deliberation over the plan comes as Congress considers an overhaul of the nation's health care system, a life cause of Kennedy's. While Democrats hold a potentially filibuster-proof margin in Congress, the outcome of a health care reform bill could hinge on a single vote and some moderate Democrats have been wavering.

 

Latest posts

Top