Posted on 11/05/2008 10:00:35 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
We have a fascinating situation in Alaska. Convicted felon Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) is clinging to a 2 point lead over his Democratic challenger, Mark Begich.
If this lead holds and Stevens, 84, wins reelection, his race will be the biggest shocker of Election Day. And he'll hold a place in history as the first convicted felon ever reelected to the Senate.
As the Anchorage Daily News reports, the race may not be decided for two weeks given the roughly 40,000 absentee ballots left to be counted, plus "9,000 uncounted early votes and thousands of questioned ballots."
If Stevens does beat the odds and wins his surreal reelection battle, he won't be welcome back in the Senate, where Democrats gained at least five more seats last night with the counting still going strong in yet undecided races.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said this week that even if Stevens wins his race, he shouldn't expect to keep his job on Capitol Hill. "The reality is that a convicted felon is not going to be able to serve in the United States Senate," Reid said. "And as precedent shows us, Senator Stevens will face an ethics committee investigation and expulsion, regardless of his appeals process."
And what might happen if his colleagues do kick Stevens out of the Senate, prompting a special election? Who might be in line to replace him? Hint: lipstick; $150,000 wardrobe. Yep, you betcha! Sarah Palin.
And although Palin would likely face a legal challenge if she tried to appoint herself or a temporary replacement (a law passed by the Alaska Legislature after Lisa Murkowski's appointment to the Senate by her father, former Gov. Frank Murkowski, requires a special election to fill any Senate vacancies) she would certainly be the frontrunner in any race to replace Stevens.
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
“I like how Reid said that a convicted felon would not serve in the Senate, but the Dims elect Klansman and vehicular manslaughterist (I know that’s not a word) to leadership roles.”
They’re a bunch of hypocrites. Reid is a piece of....something smelly that usually ends up in the outhouse hole.
I’d lose interest in anyone once in that Senate snakepit.
how does that make us different by keeping him in the GOP, the man is 84 anyway he needs to go.
It was the late-added presence of SARAH which energized an otherwise moribund and apathetic conservative voting base.
It was SARAH who drew record-shattering crowds, everywhere she went on behalf of a sour and ungrateful McCain campaign.
Friendly little word of warning to any/all RINOs out there reading this, and thinking about standing in the way between this woman and the conservative base that adores her, anytime during the next four years:
You're expendable to us. SHE isn't.
“how does that make us different by keeping him in the GOP, the man is 84 anyway he needs to go.”
I didn’t say it made us different. But I don’t believe people ought to be judging someone else if their sins (so to speak) are just as bad or worse than someone elses.
We don’t have a viable option up here. And just because the man is 84 doesn’t mean squat to me. Someday I’ll be 84 but that won’t mean I’m unproductive....good Lord willin’.
You're expendable to us. SHE isn't."
{Applauding} Excellent post!
We need to mark their posts, in response, with these:
PALIN DERANGEMENT SYNDROME: "The instinctive, automatic response of the true liberal or RINO."
Hey, you! ;)
I don’t think Governor Palin would tell “rinos” they don’t matter. She’s not an idiot, ya know.
Let's face it, Stevens has not and is not going quietly into the night. He's going to fight his conviction, and may very well win his appeal because of prosecutorial misconduct and jury tampering by the judge's substitution or failure to do so because of a jurors family member's death.
I think Stevens is going to win on appeal for at least a new trial which would void his conviction and return the matter to the courts, and conceivably a court in Alaska rather than DC.
If he wins a new trial in Alaska then all this speculation is moot!
Besides who would want to be a U.S. Senator?
Other than for the alleged media attention they're is really no benefit and all downside.
Additionally, she would loose control of all the appointments she has in Alaska and the last time I looked it takes a core cadre to run for President.
Palin is actually #3 on my list for a Presidential choice for 2012, providing there is an election that year, #1 is Senator Jim DeMint (Senator Jim DeMint website), if he survives re-election in 2010, and #2 is Mitt Romney.
DeMint because of his ideological orientation and Romney because of his wealth.
McCain might have made it Romney on the ticket because we could've matched Obama's media spending and additonally I don't think Mitt would've gone the "high road" on Obama's associations. Let's face it, McCain ran a really poor campaign largely because he allowed the MSM and people like Ken Duberstein and Colin Powell to inhibit it. I knew Charlie Black from the 1980 Reagan campaign's early days, and he never would've gone down the path that Rick Davis did. When McCain fired Charlie Black he lost the race for President.
It might be wise to have a Romney/DeMint ticket in 2012 and make the realization that Palin's time has come and unfortunately gone.
“It might be wise to have a Romney/DeMint ticket in 2012 and make the realization that Palin’s time has come and unfortunately gone.”
Me thinks you underestimate Governor Palin. Romney can’t hold a candle to Sarah Palin.
Hey, did you hear the vbied yesterday, been a while since i heard one. :p
These Drive-By Bitches will never stop with the lies, will they.
Doubtless she wouldn't. Not being the Republican Party heir apparent for 2012, however: I, thankfully, needn't be as diplomatic to the pests in the room.
Yep...heard it. Heard a loud explosion from somewhere in the center of town, anyway. Our C-RAM went off in the early evening for the first time in ages as well.
I figured it was the terrorists celebrating the stupidity of American voters.
“Doubtless she wouldn’t. Not being the Republican Party heir apparent for 2012, however: I, thankfully, needn’t be as diplomatic to the pests in the room.”
I’d respond, but I’m not sure what you meant. :)
List the words with which you're unfamiliar. I can help. ;)
yeah an obamaclaus present
“List the words with which you’re unfamiliar. I can help. ;)”
Smart aleck, huh? ;) It’s not the words I am not familiar with, it is the sentence structure that causes some confusion.
Allow me.... Who are the “pests in the room”?
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.