SD Senator suffers brain hemmorhage.

[Controlled Chaos]

How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective.

 

How do you prove voters intent?

[NorthSideSox72]

How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective.

YASNY mentioned federal, that is who I replied to.

 

And I agreed earlier, a new election is most ideal. But next best is a state representative, like their legislature or Governor, as YAS and I have both stated. And further, I do not believe those entities should be held to a party requirement. The job, being a Senator, isn't about party first - its about representing your state first.

[YASNY]

How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective.

 

I brought the Feds into it based on your remark that it should be a person from the same party. The only way to implement that across the board is for there to be a federal statute. I countered by saying the people of the state should decide how and who their representatives are selected, and in this case, that is exactly how it is done.

 

The fact that legislature, which passed the law, and the governor, which makes the decision based on that law, are all elected by the people of the state ... that blows your 'will of the people' argument right out of the water. It's all about the states governing themselves. But, then, the left never did care for that point of view.

[southsider2k5]

The question becomes it is time and money effecient to hold a new election everytime that someone has to leave an office, especially when the costs of elections is hitting the area where even Jim Hendry looks nervous. I do think this is a state-by-state decesion, and if the voters of SD don't like it, they should start a referendum to have it changed.

[mreye]

Prayers for him. They played the tape from when the "attack" hit him on the radio this morning. Disturbing, to say the least.

 

I think Yas answeered your question, Tex. The people voted for the Reps that enacted whichever law they have for these circumstances, whether it be an election or an appointment by the Gov.

[Queen Prawn]

Sounds like he is pulling through okay. Glad they caught it early. I hope he continues to improve.

[Rex Kickass]

Anyone that goes through brain surgery is going to be in ICU and critical for at least a day or two after. The more I read about this story, the better I feel about his chances for recovery.

 

By the way, as long as the Senator doesn't die, he can't be replaced without resigning first. So the Senator could literally be incapacitated for the next two years and the Democrats could maintain control of the party, so long as he, or legal guardian representatives, don't resign the post.

[Gregory Pratt]

I would imagine that Republicans and Democrats are doing some nasty things right now. Nothing like a political death to bring out the wolf in politicians and Washingtonians.

 

I think that Johnson's condition is worse than announced (usually is in cases like this), that Democrats are pressuring him to keep his seat until death or recovery, and that Republicans are already lining up the attack ads a potential replacement.

 

Like when Wellstone died. But ten times worse, on all sides.

[kapkomet]

I really hope that this goes away quickly by his recovery. Otherwise, we are going to have Republicans going crazy for his seat, and the Democrats using his funeral for a GOP bashing party and political stump speech.

[YASNY]

I really hope that this goes away quickly by his recovery. Otherwise, we are going to have Republicans going crazy for his seat, and the Democrats using his funeral for a GOP bashing party and political stump speech.

 

I really hope so too.

[Balta1701]

Update

 

U.S. Sen. Tim Johnson will not need additional surgery, the U.S. Capitol physician said on Thursday, adding the South Dakota Democrat was having an "uncomplicated post-operative course."

 

Adm. John Eisold, the attending physician at the U.S. Capitol, said, "No further surgical intervention has been required." He gave no further details on Johnson's condition following surgery late on Wednesday for bleeding in his brain.

[Rex Kickass]

There is precedent for this. A previous South Dakota Senator suffered a debilitating stroke in 1969. He offered to resign on the condition that his wife would be appointed to fulfill his seat. The offer was rejected. He held his seat, basically in absentia, for four full years.

 

If there is a serious incapacitation threat in the long term, I see a similar offer tendered... as in I'll resign if you appoint a Democrat in my place.

 

But fortunately, it looks as if this isn't a situation we'll have to face.

[EvilMonkey]

How would requiring selecting someone with different views honor the voter's intent? I don't see anyone here mentioning anything about Federal. My point is honor the intent of the voters and select someone similar in views. So far no one has tackled this from the voter's perspective.

Where was the intent of the voters when Jeffords switched parties a few years back and changed the makeup of the Senate? Or how about when Republican Senator Paul Coverdale died of a stroke in 2000 and the Democratic governor appointed a Democrat in his place? Sure, it was Zell Miller, but at the time noone knew he was more R than D. Johnson narrowly defeted Thune this last time, so there was a lot of voter intent for the other guy as well.

[Balta1701]

Where was the intent of the voters when Jeffords switched parties a few years back and changed the makeup of the Senate? Or how about when Republican Senator Paul Coverdale died of a stroke in 2000 and the Democratic governor appointed a Democrat in his place? Sure, it was Zell Miller, but at the time noone knew he was more R than D. Johnson narrowly defeted Thune this last time, so there was a lot of voter intent for the other guy as well.

Clearly, they should appoint Thune as his replacement.

[Texsox]

I brought the Feds into it based on your remark that it should be a person from the same party. The only way to implement that across the board is for there to be a federal statute. I countered by saying the people of the state should decide how and who their representatives are selected, and in this case, that is exactly how it is done.

 

The fact that legislature, which passed the law, and the governor, which makes the decision based on that law, are all elected by the people of the state ... that blows your 'will of the people' argument right out of the water. It's all about the states governing themselves. But, then, the left never did care for that point of view.

 

State laws can be changed, and are, when people decide there is a better way. I agree in this case you have to follow the existing law. Nice bait with that last line. Show me anywhere where liberals cared any less about states governing themselves? It's insulting personal attack lines like that which start stupid arguments around here and show ignorance of what people actually believe.

 

Evil, that's what I am saying. I don't like it when it goes either way. I believe if it happened more often states would change their laws. But as it is, it doesn't happen that often and from a party standpoint, it will even out over time. Dems will replace Reps and Reps will replace Dems. But the evening will happen collectively on a state by state basis, voters will not have a guarantee that the replacement will be even close to the views of the person they elected.

[Rex Kickass]

Where was the intent of the voters when Jeffords switched parties a few years back and changed the makeup of the Senate? Or how about when Republican Senator Paul Coverdale died of a stroke in 2000 and the Democratic governor appointed a Democrat in his place? Sure, it was Zell Miller, but at the time noone knew he was more R than D. Johnson narrowly defeted Thune this last time, so there was a lot of voter intent for the other guy as well.

 

You don't vote for a party when you vote for your Senator. You vote for a Senator.

[YASNY]

State laws can be changed, and are, when people decide there is a better way. I agree in this case you have to follow the existing law. Nice bait with that last line. Show me anywhere where liberals cared any less about states governing themselves? It's insulting personal attack lines like that which start stupid arguments around here and show ignorance of what people actually believe.

 

Evil, that's what I am saying. I don't like it when it goes either way. I believe if it happened more often states would change their laws. But as it is, it doesn't happen that often and from a party standpoint, it will even out over time. Dems will replace Reps and Reps will replace Dems. But the evening will happen collectively on a state by state basis, voters will not have a guarantee that the replacement will be even close to the views of the person they elected.

 

Insulting personal attack lines? WTF are you talking about? It's well known that left is for more federal government and the right is more for states rights. There is nothing personal or insulting or attack mode about it. It's a fact. However, if you consider someone pointing out the left point of view to you to be an insulting personal attack, then maybe you ought reexamine your points of view.

[Texsox]

Insulting personal attack lines? WTF are you talking about? It's well known that left is for more federal government and the right is more for states rights. There is nothing personal or insulting or attack mode about it. It's a fact. However, if you consider someone pointing out the left point of view to you to be an insulting personal attack, then maybe you ought reexamine your points of view.

 

The right never did care about the United States federal government.

 

GMAB It is a balancing act, was from the beginning, and will be forever. It is not about caring 100% for one over the other. But then by acknowledging that your snarky comments can't be made. You always find a way to make little snarky comments about the left.

[YASNY]

The right never did care about the United States federal government.

 

GMAB It is a balancing act, was from the beginning, and will be forever. It is not about caring 100% for one over the other. But then by acknowledging that your snarky comments can't be made. You always find a way to make little snarky comments about the left.

 

Wow. Some people are really touchy these days. If you call that snarky ... You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet!

 

Seriously, Texsox. I considered that a lighthearted little dig. No malice intended. You are WAY overreacting to it. Besides, there are a few of you secular progressives that are quite fluent in Snark as well.

[NorthSideSox72]

Besides, there are a few of you secular progressives that are quite fluent in Snark as well.

 

 

[YASNY]

 

 

LMAO! I couldn't resist.

[NorthSideSox72]

LMAO! I couldn't resist.

Its all good. I resembled that remark anyway.

 

Actually, since the term "religious conservative" is often used to refer to that part of the populace, I guess "secular progressive" is a pretty good description of another part.

[YASNY]

Its all good. I resembled that remark anyway.

 

Actually, since the term "religious conservative" is often used to refer to that part of the populace, I guess "secular progressive" is a pretty good description of another part.

 

When you think about it, it is actually pretty much on the money. I wouldn't consider it an insult. It's more of a description or catagorization.

[Texsox]

BTW, I was just thinking if he loses some of his brain function, he may be a Republican anyway.

Alternate punchline for conservatives:

 

He's a Democrat, if he loses some of his brain function, how will we know? His heart is still beating.

I kid because I care™

[YASNY]

Tom Daschle just said he expects Sen. Johnson to back on the senate floor soon. I hope he's being straight with us.