When John Kerry was running for President, Ted Kennedy was so sure he would win that he made sure that the governor, Mitt Romney, would be unable to appoint a Republican in his place. In 2004, he proposed the law that required an election rather than allowing the governor to appoint a replacement. Just before his death, he asked that this be reversed so that the governor (now a Democrat) could appoint another Democrat so that the senate would maintain their 60 votes.
?
How is this fair? Can you tell me that this ISN'T changing the laws to benefit the Democratic Party?
Personally, I think that every position needs to be filled with as little delay as possible; it is never fair for a state to have less representation than they are allowed. I also don't care how it is done. However, I don't think there could be anything more blatantly unfair than this.
It's like buying an umbrella during a thunderstorm and returning it when it clears up. But it will end up costing a whole lot more.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
somehow i knew you would bring this up.... i thought of it this morning after listening to the news and thought about you, m'dear...
Why? Because it sounds like something I would do, to change the rules to suit me, then get slapped in the face when my situation changed? It did to me. That's why we shouldn't let the voice of one person speak for or influence so many, because we are flawed.
Sorry to sound preachy.
Post a Comment