# Kirk takes over for Kennedy **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 25, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585 "2009-09-25T22:27:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/1 "2009-09-25T22:27:14Z")
[http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us\_kennedy\_successor\_gop](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_kennedy_successor_gop) It is my understand that it takes 90 days for a Mass. law to become effective except in the case of an “emergency”. What was the emergency here? “Help! Help! We need a filibuster-proof majority for health care reform!”? Seems pretty feeble to me… ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/2 "2009-09-25T22:49:11Z")
The MA legislature decided to go back on there change to the law that would have prevented Mitt Romney from being able to appoint someone. MA is effectively a single party state. We did not want the possibility of a republican representing us. It’s not really fair the way we manipulated the system, but then again it wouldn’t have been very fair to let Mitt put someone in office the people of the state wouldn’t want. Kirk will be able to represent us for approx 14 days in the senate before the special election chooses a new senator. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/3 "2009-09-25T22:51:05Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Kirk will be able to represent us for approx 14 days in the senate before the special election chooses a new senator. Is this hyperbole? He is in until January, no? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/4 "2009-09-25T22:52:47Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Seems pretty feeble to me.. Losing elections has consequences. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/5 "2009-09-25T22:54:43Z")
Now we just need the Republicans to appoint Spock… Like if that will happen, Republicans nowadays would appoint a Ferengi like Glenn Beck. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/6 "2009-09-25T23:01:15Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Is this hyperbole? He is in until January, no? Yes but when you take into account the senate breaks and weekends over the next few months there isn’t much time actually spent in the senate. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/7 "2009-09-25T23:11:21Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us\_kennedy\_successor\_gop](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_kennedy_successor_gop) > > It is my understand that it takes 90 days for a Mass. law to become effective except in the case of an “emergency”. What was the emergency here? “Help! Help! We need a filibuster-proof majority for health care reform!”? > > Seems pretty feeble to me.. As I pointed out in a [recent](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=532549) thread, every 12 minutes someone in the U.S.A dies from lack of access to healthcare. This is the equivalent of September 11 every 25 days. So, yeah, it actually is an emergency. It may not psychologically feel as urgent because this problem has been around a long time, the people are spread around throughout the country instead of all happening in one place, and it’s not as terrifying a visual as airplanes crashing into skyscrapers, but those people are just as needlessly dead as 9/11 victims and delay will increase the body count. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/8 "2009-09-25T23:44:21Z")
> [@](#): > > The MA legislature decided to go back on there change to the law that would have prevented Mitt Romney from being able to appoint someone. MA is effectively a single party state. We did not want the possibility of a republican representing us. It’s not really fair the way we manipulated the system, but then again it wouldn’t have been very fair to let Mitt put someone in office the people of the state wouldn’t want. Clearly, Massachusetts isn’t completely a single-party state, or Romney would never have been elected in the first place. When the voters of the state elected him, they knew that he’d have the power to appoint a replacement senator, and if that possibility troubled them, they should have elected somebody else. I recognize that the Massachusetts legislature acted legally then and now, but it’s still a kind of sleazy move, and I wouldn’t mind at all seeing laws passed that made such a move impossible in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2009, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/9 "2009-09-25T23:54:52Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Clearly, Massachusetts isn’t completely a single-party state, or Romney would never have been elected in the first place. When the voters of the state elected him, they knew that he’d have the power to appoint a replacement senator Eh? When they elected their representatives to the legislature, they knew they’d have their power to empower the governor to fill vacancies or not. If they really wanted Romney to have that power, they would’ve had to give him a legislature that wouldn’t vote to take away that power. The Constitution specifically allows state legislatures to empower or not empower their governors to fill vacant seats. It doesn’t say or even imply that they can’t change back and forth depending on the party of the governor involved. I don’t really have any problem with them exercising that power, and don’t really see anything sleazy about it. ---
**Author:** ![Nicest\_of\_the\_Damned](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8baadc/32.png) [@Nicest\_of\_the\_Damned](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nicest_of_the_Damned)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/10 "2009-09-26T00:36:19Z")
More on the judge’s decision here: [http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking\_news/2009/09/judge\_to\_rule\_b.html](http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/09/judge_to_rule_b.html) It doesn’t bother me that Governor Patrick was allowed to appoint a replacement, what bothers me is that Ted Kennedy’s wife and kids felt it was their place to make a recommendation for Kirk and Patrick went along with it. Before they spoke up everyone was looking at Mike Dukakis. I know nothing about Kirk and he may not be a bad choice but the Kennedy meddling burned me up. It really looks like Patrick just gave in to them, though there was some talk that somehow Kirk would help retain Kennedy’s staff. For what it’s worth, a Boston Globe survey asking “Is Paul G. Kirk, Jr. the governor’s best choice for interim US senator?” is currently about 60-40 in favor of Kirk. ---
**Author:** ![Hellestal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ab097/32.png) [@Hellestal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hellestal)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/11 "2009-09-26T00:58:50Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > Eh? When they elected their representatives to the legislature, they knew they’d have their power to empower the governor to fill vacancies or not. If they really wanted Romney to have that power, they would’ve had to give him a legislature that wouldn’t vote to take away that power. > > The Constitution specifically allows state legislatures to empower or not empower their governors to fill vacant seats. It doesn’t say or even imply that they can’t change back and forth depending on the party of the governor involved. I don’t really have any problem with them exercising that power, and don’t really see anything sleazy about it. You can make the same argument about gerrymandering. The people knew that they were giving their Republican/Democratic legislature the power to redraw districts to make a stronger Republican/Democratic legislature. It’s legal, but it’s still a sleazy move regardless of who does it. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/12 "2009-09-26T01:49:35Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Now we just need the Republicans to appoint Spock… [He was way too libheral for the Pubbies](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock). 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Poster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Happy\_Poster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Poster)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/13 "2009-09-26T01:50:33Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > As I pointed out in a [recent](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=532549) thread, every 12 minutes someone in the U.S.A dies from lack of access to healthcare. This is the equivalent of September 11 every 25 days. > > So, yeah, it actually is an emergency. It may not psychologically feel as urgent because this problem has been around a long time, the people are spread around throughout the country instead of all happening in one place, and it’s not as terrifying a visual as airplanes crashing into skyscrapers, but those people are just as needlessly dead as 9/11 victims and delay will increase the body count. Ultimately we all die from how resources are allocated, are we in permanent emergency? Blithering idiot… ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/14 "2009-09-26T02:20:50Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Now we just need the Republicans to appoint Spock… > > Like if that will happen, Republicans nowadays would appoint a Ferengi like Glenn Beck. 😃 I was just going to say that the OP title would make a hell of a movie for the new Trek reboot! ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/15 "2009-09-26T03:13:26Z")
You know, they should have laws in place that lay out how and when a Senator is to be replaced, so when it happens one side can’t game the system. Oh wait, they do have laws in place. Leave it to the Kennedy’s to make a mockery of it. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/16 "2009-09-26T03:17:35Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > You know, they should have laws in place that lay out how and when a Senator is to be replaced, so when it happens one side can’t game the system. As i said, losing elections has consequences. I certainly didn’t hear this outrage from conservatives when Republicans held all the chips and ratfucked the country. I am not going to apologize for it now. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/17 "2009-09-26T03:20:32Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > As i said, losing elections has consequences. I certainly didn’t hear this outrage from conservatives when Republicans held all the chips and ratfucked the country. I am not going to apologize for it now. That line works with things like Supreme Court nominations, and I agree with it. But you don’t expect one side to cheat and simply make shit up. You want to associate yourself with such behavior? Enjoy. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/18 "2009-09-26T03:34:15Z")
Sorry, your appeal to liberal guilt won’t work. I am a partisan, and I think it is about time Democrats grow a spine, and keep our foot on the collective conservative throat until they stop thrashing around. They would not hesitate to do the same or worse, were the situation reversed. Welcome to the jungle. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/19 "2009-09-26T03:56:37Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > That line works with things like Supreme Court nominations, and I agree with it. But you don’t expect one side to cheat and simply make shit up. You want to associate yourself with such behavior? Enjoy. So when the state legislature decides that the state should have a dead Senator replaced as soon as practical, but that the will of the people should also be heard as soon as is practical, that’s cheating and making shit up? ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2009, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585/20 "2009-09-26T04:22:05Z")
> [@Angry Lurker](#): > > Ultimately we all die from how resources are allocated, are we in permanent emergency? > > Blithering idiot… It’s all pretty subjective, isn’t it? Any measures for natural disaster relief would also be a matter of “resource allocation”, but nobody would complain about it not being an emergency, would they? I don’t see any meaningful distinction. Unless there’s a particularly narrow definition within the Massachusetts Constitution defining what an emergency is (I’m no expert on MA law), they seem to be perfectly within their authority to call a special session on this matter. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kirk-takes-over-for-kennedy/511585.md?page=2)