THE BRONX, USA

Important Announcement

The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More

Some are saying the refusal by the Democrats to the appointment of this guy Burris as replacement for Obama as the Illinois Senator is racism. Other have said that it has to be an American African who fills the seat bevcause the seat somehow "belongs" to an "African American"....This too sound like racism in my opinion.

From the NY Post....

Roland Burris - scandal-scarred Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's appointee to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat - said yesterday Democrats will be accused of racism if they refuse to seat him.

"It is a fact, there are no African-Americans in the United States Senate," Burris, a former Illinois attorney general, told NBC's "Today."

Obama, who had been the only black senator, resigned Nov. 16.

Burris said if Democrats reject his appointment, they'll send the wrong signal on race relations.

"It could give the appearance . . . Is it racism that's taking place? That's a question someone may raise," Burris said.

Obama and Senate Democrats oppose Blagojevich's appointment of Burris as tainted given the severity of the accusations against the governor. They say the issue has nothing to do with race.

The feds busted Blagojevich on Dec. 9 after wiretapped conversations allegedly showed him trying to sell Obama's Senate seat to the highest bidder.

The Illinois secretary of state has refused to certify Burris' appointment.

"I am not tainted. I have absolutely nothing to do with [Blagojevich's] problems," Burris said.

Meanwhile, federal prosecutors yesterday requested a delay in filing a corruption indictment against Blagojevich - injecting more uncertainty into the fight over the Senate appointment.

"This guy Burris" is a former Illinois State Attorney General and the first African-American elected to office in Illinois. He is widely acknowledged to be a decent and honorable man.

That being said I'll restate what I've said in other similar discussions--I feel that the Senate vacancy should be filled through an election and not through an appointment, especially given the circumstances in Illinois.

For the sake of representation, it would be nice to have at least 1 African-American in the Senate. But Obama wasn't appointed to that seat, he was elected, and that had nothing to do with his race. If the people of Illinois are presented with a superior African-American candidate, they--or should I say we--can vote for him or her if we so choose.

I agree with you 200%!

I don't believe that anyone should be appointed to fill any position vacated by someone who was elected by the citizens. Further, I don't believe that the position is the property of any "race" or "political party".

I agree with you 98.7%

Is it the governor who makes the pick in all states? I didn't know that. So if he belongs to the other party, he has a chance to change the balance of power in the senate?

Does that sound right to you? No, boys and girls, that seat belongs to the party for six years and should be filled by a caucus of that party's representatives in congress or a primary-type election among registered voters of that party. Otherwise, the president's preference for a cabinet position might not be considered, in order to avoid changing the balance of power in the senate. And we certainly would not want that to happen would we?

What you seem to forget is that the people vote for a specific person, not the party. The seat no more belongs to the party than it belongs to an ethnic group. The seat be;longs to the people of the state and if the people decide to vote in anotrher member of another party, so be it. The people will have spoken.

an election is the only fair way , let the people decide the issue

I don't like it when people disagree with me.

Important Announcement The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
THE BRONX, USA	[email protected]