So this is how democracy dies.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

[I'm still looking for a link to a story. Will post when I find one, but I did see the PC live].

Gov. Deval Patrick just gave his long-awaited press conference moments ago regarding his decision whether to appoint a temporary replacement for Kennedy's seat in the Senate, or wait until a special election can be done, as the law requires. His decision (as expected) is that yes, he will appoint a replacement. The law still must be quickly changed because such an appointment is currently forbidden by law, but with Patrick on board now that's a certainty.

It's being called hypocrisy, but that's so utterly inadequate to explain what this is. This is corruption that you'd expect to find only in 3rd world banana republics.

Remember that the law in Mass used to allow the Governor to appoint a replacement upon the death of a senator. Many states do that. But when Kerry was running for President and it appeared that he would win, the democrat-controlled legislature changed the law to forbid the Governor from doing so. This of course was because the Governor at the time was Mitt Romney, a Republican. They didn't want a Republican to be able to appoint a replacement. So they changed the law. Now they have a Democrat Governor, and they're going to change the law back.

The only thing this is: is a misuse-- a corruption of the law for the sole protection of one political party, to ensure that effective one-party rule continues in Massachussetts. It's hard to justify this as "rule of law" at all anymore. It is the rule of men. Democrat men.

Tyrants have been deposed for less.

[Tatesgram]

Wasn't this Kennedy's law/bill? And didn't he write a deathbed request to the legislature to change it back when he knew he was dying?

[Tiz]

I think so.

[WashingtonBay]

It's this shallow:

http://www.cynical-c.com/archives/bloggraphics/todaycanoe.jpg

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Wasn't this Kennedy's law/bill? And didn't he write a deathbed request to the legislature to change it back when he knew he was dying?

Yes, he did.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

It's this shallow:



That's pretty shallow. That has to be about the funniest moments in TV journalism I've ever seen.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Here's a link to a story about the Presser:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/31/massachusetts-governor/

I don't know when I've seen a more naked attempt to bend the law to protect the power of a single party. We should start a pool on who the replacement will be, and which Kennedy will be gifted the seat in the special election.

There's two contenders, I suppose. There Joseph Patrick II, and Caroline. Joe 2 is certainly corrupt enough to take a Kennedy's place, and Caroline is dimwitted enough to be controlled by somebody that knows what to do. It must be a tough choice for them.

[JackieB]

Democracy is frequently abused this way. It's unfortunate, but relatively common. I wouldn't say it represents how "democracy dies", but more an example of a party abusing its power. Semantics aside, it's bad.

Whenever these things happen, the people involved are convinced that the end justifies the means. It's really for the best overall. But, of course, they are absolutely wrong.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

No, I still don't quite agree Jackie. When the law is used for nothing more than to bend to the whims of those in power, instead of being a check on their power, then it is no law at all. Democracy becomes a false curtain that hides what would otherwise be called a Dictatorship.

I would use as a recent example, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. He would claim that Venezuela is still a democracy. But everybody else knows that this nothing but a joke. The law is rigged to keep him and his party in power indefinitely. To say that "democracy" as it is classically understood still exists in Massachussetts is a similar sort of joke.

[Tiz]

And abuse of power kills democracy.

[JackieB]

The law is rigged to keep him and his party in power indefinitely. To say that "democracy" as it is classically understood still exists in Massachussetts is a similar sort of joke.

Well, there are a bit of semantics here and I understand your position. But to suggest that Massachusetts is comparable to Venezuela and Chavez is definitely a mistake. The example you provided represents an abuse of power, in my opinion, but there will be fair elections in Massachusetts during the next gubernatorial race. That's what I look for in a democracy when power is abused - do we have an opportunity to rectify the problem when elections occur if we can't prove legally that the abuse is unconstitutional before then?

Tom Delay created house districts in Texas that represented a despicable example of gerrymandering (interestingly, gerrymandering began in Massachusetts), but I wouldn't go so far as to say that democracy is dead in Texas.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Well, there are a bit of semantics here and I understand your position. But to suggest that Massachusetts is comparable to Venezuela and Chavez is definitely a mistake. The example you provided represents an abuse of power, in my opinion, but there will be fair elections in Massachusetts during the next gubernatorial race. [...]

No, it's not a mistake.

Do you mean perhaps like the "fair" elections that were held in Washington last time around? Those "fair" elections where the democrats were allowed to just keep "finding" new ballots during the recounts until they "found" enough to win the third time around? Is that the sort of real democratic process you think of?

Or perhaps it is the "fair" Chicago Daley Machine you are thinking of. That machine known worldwide for it's fairness and accuracy in vote tabulation. Perhaps that is what you meant. :)

Tell me again how I should assume that elections in Massachussetts will be "fair".

[JackieB]

Tell me again how I should assume that elections in Massachussetts will be "fair".

I think you should expect a fair counting of votes in the next MA governor's race for the same reason why I think you should accept that the outcome of the 2000 president's race was fair - we value democracy in the USA, and respect the rule of law.

It's always possible to find corruption, unfortunately. But that's a far cry from indicting the entirety of democracy in the US.

And if you think for one minute that either of the two major parties is more culpable/capable of corruption than the other, then I am sure you are being quite naive. The intoxicating lure of power, and its ability to cause humans who crave it to rationalize virtually any action, does not care about political affiliation.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Yes, I'm stretching a bit to compare MA and WA to places like Venezuela. Admitted. But I also think it is true that the stretch is requiring less elasticity every time I turn around. We are headed in that direction, and when you look real close it's actually pretty hard to tell the difference. Yes, in most of the country the Rule of Law still matters, but there are places where it is all but dead and now is about serving Party over people.

[JackieB]

That's fair enough. Democracy is a hard system to work in for those who want the power. It's apparently nearly irresistible for such politicians to avoid the temptation to circumvent democracy.

Our job, of course, is to fight and denounce anything that even smells of such behavior. I commend you for your position and hopefully I will always have the courage to do so myself, even when it would benefit my position to go along with the wrongdoing.

[HoustonFarrier]

[...]The intoxicating lure of power, and its ability to cause humans who crave it to rationalize virtually any action, does not care about political affiliation.

So true! Ever more reason for term limits on ALL in Congress/Senate

Steve

[WashingtonBay]

That's fair enough. Democracy is a hard system to work in for those who want the power. It's apparently nearly irresistible for such politicians to avoid the temptation to circumvent democracy.

Our job, of course, is to fight and denounce anything that even smells of such behavior. I commend you for your position and hopefully I will always have the courage to do so myself, even when it would benefit my position to go along with the wrongdoing.

Heh... there's a quote I almost remember that said something like "anyone who wants elected office enough to run should be immediately disqualified" ;)