The Political Hypocrisy of Teddy Kennedy, page 1

A little background:

Ted Kennedy is a long time US Senator from Massachusetts, which is a heavily Democratic state.

Ted Kennedy has brain cancer that has advanced to the point where he was unable to personally accept a Medal Of Freedom award, or to attend the funeral of his sister Eunice as recently as last week.

Massachusetts, although Democrat, has had many successful Republican Governors, the latest being Mitt Romney.

The current Governor of Massachusetts is Deval Patrick, a Democrat who is farther left than Barack Obama.

In 2004, in anticipation of a presidency win by US Senator John Kerry (D-MASS), Ted Kennedy advocated a bill that would strip the power of the governor to appoint a temporary vacancy in the US Senate. It was replaced by a law that required a special election. This power was stripped away from then Governor Romney in one day's time.

He didn't want Romney to be able to appoint a Republican to the empty Senate seat, should Kerry win the presidency.

Now that it is pretty much a certainty that Kennedy will be unable to return to the Senate because of his illness, he wants the state to change the very law that he endorsed and supported 5 years ago!!

He wants to give the Democratic governor the power to appoint a replacement for him!

The reason is obvious: Kennedy has been a long time advocate of socialized medicine, and he does not want a five month vacancy and less than 60 majority to jeopardize Obamacare.

The political game playing, the hypocrisy, the double standards, are staggering.

Sorry Teddy. But you were just a little too 'transparent' this time.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Edward Kennedy, who is battling brain cancer, is urging Massachusetts officials to change a law to allow for an immediate temporary replacement should a vacancy occur for one of his state's two Senate seats.

Under a 2004 Massachusetts law, a special election must be held 145 to 160 days after a Senate seat becomes vacant. The winner of that election would serve the remainder of a senator's unexpired term.


Kennedy, a Democratic senator who has represented Massachusetts for nearly 47 years, was re-elected in November 2006. His six-year term ends in January 2013.

Ailing Kennedy wants replacement law changed




[edit on 20-8-2009 by jsobecky]

reply to post by jam321

---

I think a case could be made for diminished capacity. Given his actions and inactions for the past few months, that should be easy to do.

Eunice was his favorite sister. He wasn't even able to attend her funeral, only a few miles away from where he is resting.

reply to post by RRconservative

---

Originally posted by RRconservative
Anyway, what happens the next time a Republican is governor? Do they just change it back?

Knowing Mass politics, there is no doubt that the veto-proof state legislature would do just that.

What is wrong with Massachusetts anyway? Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Deval Patrick.....ugh

Don't forget Barney Frank and Marty Meehan.

Who is Marty Meehan, you ask?

Here's some of his votes:

On Abortion:

# Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
# Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
# Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
# Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
# Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
# Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
# Voted NO on funding for health providers who don't provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
# Voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
# Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
# Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
# Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)

On Civil Rights:

# Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
# Voted NO on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
# Voted NO on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
# Voted NO on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
# Voted NO on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
# Voted NO on banning gay adoptions in DC. (Jul 1999)
# Voted NO on ending preferential treatment by race in college admissions. (May 1998)
# Constitutional Amendment for equal rights by gender. (Mar 2001)

On Gun Control:

# Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
# Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
# Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1. (Jun 1999)

You can see more of his record here:

www.ontheissues.org...

reply to post by kurioz

---

If these uninformed, hapless, left-wing cretins in Massachusetts had a functioning brain in their otherwise empty heads, rightful justice would have triumphed and Teddy Kennedy would still be in jail for killing Maryjoe Kopechne. Money talked and Teddy Kennedy walked!!

Since you are from Mass, did you hear the radio program where listeners called in about Kennedy having the entire flight crew fired?

Seems cheapskate Kennedy always bought cattlecar class tickets and then sat in first class. On this flight ALL the first class tickets were sold and there was one passenger too many. Kennedy pulled the "do you know WHO I AM" but the flight attendant got the pilot who made Kennedy sit in the seat he purchased. Kennedy retaliated by having the entire flight crew fired.

Boy did that open a can of worms on the radio program! I listened for an hour as caller after caller stated how Kennedy treated them like dirt or got them fired for not kissing his donkey. Despite this radio show and his voting record of 3% of issues voted on he was STILL voted back into office.

I thought liberals and the left wing wanted all to be treated the same and for there to be no Aristocracy -- Sure could have fooled me considering how they treat the millionaires and billionaires as gods. Seems Maurice Strong was correct. It is not the ultra wealth who are to be hated by the left wingers it is the middle class!

These chilling words are the ones Strong (happily living in China) used for the opening session of the Rio Conference (Earth Summit II) in 1992


“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class—involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing—are not sustainable. A shift is necessary toward lifestyles less geared to environmentally damaging consumption patterns.”


Notice it is the middle class who is vilified not the massive consumers like David Rockefeller, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy AND Maurice Strong.... I wonder how the liberal left and the welfare types are going to like working in sweatshops like the Chinese do.

Guangdong Province now has a booming economy and accounts for half of China's GDP.

But it is an economy powered by millions of migrant workers who are desperate enough to accept long hours, low pay and dangerous conditions because the alternatives back home are worse Inside China's sweatshops

When a spot light was shown on these conditions, instead of changing, Chinese management learned to lie. I wonder if Maurice Strong, Business Consultant to the Chinese is one of the teachers?

Secrets, Lies, And Sweatshops
American importers have long answered criticism of conditions at their Chinese suppliers with labor rules and inspections. But many factories have just gotten better at concealing abuses...

when auditors interviewed workers in one section, some said that they were paid less than the minimum wage and that most of them were obliged to work an extra three to five hours a day, without overtime pay, the report shows. Most toiled an entire month without a day off. Workers told auditors that the factory had a different set of records showing actual overtime hours, the report says. www.businessweek.com...

I really really hate the hypocrisy of the billionaire left. They are really FOR Corporatism not Socialism but most do not see that.

I often wonder how many died when Kennedy was placed at the head of the waiting list for brain surgery here in North Carolina. Weren't the hospitals in Mass or DC GOOD enough for him????

[edit on 22-8-2009 by crimvelvet]

reply to post by jsobecky

---

This would be enlightening if it is true and for now I'll take your word for it, but can you please provide a source that explains that he had the law changed in 2004? It would be hypocritical, but there seems to be a lot of that going on on both sides of the aisle these days. Wouldn't you agree?

Originally posted by Tentickles
Wouldnt it just be better if someone shot the old fool. Say from a 3rd story book repository?

Not cool.

reply to post by Hal9000

---

Well he's dead now, so I guess this thread is rather pointless, because the governor will appoint a replacement that can attend the senate.

ETA: Re-read and misunderstood the initial OP. Looks like under the law Mass. will have a special election in January. I seriously doubt a Conservative could take the Senate seat, but I guess we'll see.

[edit on 26-8-2009 by Avenginggecko]

reply to post by Hal9000

---

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by jsobecky

---

This would be enlightening if it is true and for now I'll take your word for it, but can you please provide a source that explains that he had the law changed in 2004? It would be hypocritical, but there seems to be a lot of that going on on both sides of the aisle these days. Wouldn't you agree?

Absolutely.

Ted Kennedy had no direct influence in Mass state politics, i.e., he could not cast a vote per se, but he had great influence with the Democratic controlled legislature.

And he used that influence to persuade them to change the law. From the Wall Street Journal:

Last week, the Journal’s op-ed writers ripped the plan:

What Mr. Kennedy doesn’t volunteer is that he orchestrated the 2004 succession law revision that now requires a special election, and for similarly partisan reasons. John Kerry, the other Senator from the state, was running for President in 2004, and Mr. Kennedy wanted the law changed so the Republican Governor at the time, Mitt Romney, could not name Mr. Kerry’s replacement. “Prodded by a personal appeal from Senator Edward M. Kennedy,” reported the Boston Globe in 2004, “Democratic legislative leaders have agreed to take up a stalled bill creating a special election process to replace U.S. Senator John F. Kerry if he wins the presidency.” Now that the state has a Democratic Governor, Mr. Kennedy wants to revert to gubernatorial appointments.

blogs.wsj.com...

reply to post by Avenginggecko

---

Well he's dead now, so I guess this thread is rather pointless, because the governor will appoint a replacement that can attend the senate.

ETA: Re-read and misunderstood the initial OP. Looks like under the law Mass. will have a special election in January. I seriously doubt a Conservative could take the Senate seat, but I guess we'll see.

The succession procedure is actually still up in the air.

Maybe a conservative would have a hard time winning the seat. But the special election is for the unfinished portion of Kennedy's term only.

More importantly, it kills the 60 vote majority that the Dems currently enjoy in the Senate. At least for 5 months, it does.

reply to post by marg6043

---

Originally posted by marg6043
Well now that he is death, who is there to keep the dynasty and perpetuate their influence in Government.

I guess nobody.

Well, there is still the Bush family, and the Clintons...

And there are still the Shrivers, and Bobby Jr. and Joe Jr.

reply to post by jam321

---

It would be one of the most blatant examples of playing politics ever. Any politician should be ashamed to even entertain the thought.

But that only means that it will probably pass for politics as usual in Mass.

Breaking News: Judge Doesn\'t Rule, Secretary of State Doesn\'t Agree - Obama NOT off
  Posted 17 days ago with 39 member flags

On why America is in denial and Ron Paul will not be elected
  Posted 19 days ago with 21 member flags

Study says racists and conservatives are dumb
  Posted 9 days ago with 16 member flags

As of feb 9th, Canada\'s own version of SOPA: Bill C-11 will kill more of your freedom
  Posted 15 days ago with 11 member flags

Is ‘anti-Canadianism’ the new ‘anti-Americanism?’
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags

Councilman wants sheriff to stop urging people to get pistol permits
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags

Clarification on the definition of "natural born citizen"
  Posted 16 days ago with 7 member flags

ATS is not as awake as it should be. You might still be sleeping...
  Posted 8 days ago with 7 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: