Skip to comments.
White House Wants Burris To Go Bye-Bye
FinkelBlog ^
| Mark Finkelstein
Posted on 02/24/2009 6:05:26 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Barack Obama wants Roland Burris gone. That was the unmistakable implication of White House press secretary Robert Gibbs’ remarks to Matt Lauer on Today this morning.
MATT LAUER: The president has talked a lot about transparency in government and transparency with government officials. In your opinion, does Roland Burris meet the threshold for transparency that the president wants to see?
ROBERT GIBBS: Well Matt, what I talked about here just last week was, obviously many of the representations that Senator Burris made in order to get into office have now proved to be true [sic]. I think he has to spend some time thinking about his future and make a determination about what’s best for Illinois –
LAUER: Have proved to be true or untrue?
GIBBS: That the representations he made have proved to be untrue. I’m sorry if I said that wrong. That Senator Burris needs to take some time and think whether he can actually help this country, whether he can server the people of Illinois.
Gibbs proceeded to put in the dagger . . . .
View video.
(Excerpt) Read more at finkelblog.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: 111th; bho2009; burris; democrats; mattlauer; obama; robertgibbs; rolandburris; timgeithner; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: Behind Liberal Lines; Miss Marple; an amused spectator; netmilsmom; Diogenesis; MEG33; PGalt; ...
Obama wants Geithner to stay, Burris to go. Ping to Today show list.
2
posted on
02/24/2009 6:06:06 AM PST
by
governsleastgovernsbest
(http://finkelblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/2009-02-20msnbcmjiii.flv)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
3
posted on
02/24/2009 6:06:59 AM PST
by
AppyPappy
(If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
I hope Burris stays and defies the un-holy one.
4
posted on
02/24/2009 6:07:08 AM PST
by
stockpirate
(A people unwilling to use violent force to preserve liberty deserve the tyrants that rule them. SP-0)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
WH only wasted his vote on the Stimulus Bill.
5
posted on
02/24/2009 6:07:27 AM PST
by
duckman
(Jesus I trust in You. Mary take over)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Obama can't do a darn thing about it. Burris is going to do like Blago...he will stay until he is thrown out of the Senate.
Personally, I find it hilarious.
To: duckman
7
posted on
02/24/2009 6:07:49 AM PST
by
duckman
(Jesus I trust in You. Mary take over)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
What is the difference between Burris and Geitner? Or Eric Holder? Or any other of his scandal tainted appointees? Other than the fact that Burris wasn’t Zer0’s appointment, I can see none.
8
posted on
02/24/2009 6:08:01 AM PST
by
Vigilanteman
(Are there any men left in Washington? Or, are there only cowards? Ahmad Shah Massoud)
To: Miss Marple
The Dems raised hell because the executive branch searched a congressman's office during a criminal probe screaming Separation of Powers but say nothing when the one indicates he wants a congressman thrown out.
9
posted on
02/24/2009 6:11:08 AM PST
by
dblshot
To: governsleastgovernsbest
10
posted on
02/24/2009 6:12:13 AM PST
by
TSgt
(Extreme vitriol and rancorous replies served daily. - Mike W USAF)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Dumb and really f-—ing Dumber!
To: Dr. Ursus
What a collection of clowns...
To: governsleastgovernsbest
They didn’t need Geithner’s vote to pass Porkulus!
13
posted on
02/24/2009 6:22:30 AM PST
by
tiredoflaundry
(Sometimes, I guess there's just not enough bags of popcorn.)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Does Sen. Burris have a reelection fund to which we can donate?
14
posted on
02/24/2009 6:28:38 AM PST
by
pnh102
(Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
To: tiredoflaundry
Looking back it appears Burris’s purpose in being brought into the Senate was to have enough votes to break a filibuster of Porkulus, now he is expendable.
15
posted on
02/24/2009 6:29:31 AM PST
by
Nextrush
(Sarah Palin is the new Ronald Reagan.)
To: Nextrush
16
posted on
02/24/2009 6:32:14 AM PST
by
tiredoflaundry
(Sometimes, I guess there's just not enough bags of popcorn.)
To: tiredoflaundry; Nextrush
But that would be so cynical ;-)
17
posted on
02/24/2009 6:33:20 AM PST
by
governsleastgovernsbest
(http://finkelblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/2009-02-20msnbcmjiii.flv)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
does Roland Burris meet the threshold for transparency that the president wants to see? 
To: governsleastgovernsbest
19
posted on
02/24/2009 6:40:59 AM PST
by
tiredoflaundry
(Sometimes, I guess there's just not enough bags of popcorn.)
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Roland Burris will have to be dragged kicking and screaming from the senate. Because that position is one he's always coveted, even after losing an election for the senate years ago he still wanted it.
(1) (1) When God wrote the Ten Commandments he had Roland Burris in mind when stating it was a sin to covet.
20
posted on
02/24/2009 6:45:31 AM PST
by
Condor51
(The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
