Given what poor Sarah Palin’s been subjected to over the past few months (FOX News just revealed she wasn’t even aware that Africa was a continent), it’s a bit mean-spirited to “pile on” her state. But how else should we take the election results showing Ted Stevens, convicted of seven felony counts, coming within a hair’s breath of winning his re-election to the Senate?
The NY Times reports that this would be the first time that a senator convicted of a crime had ever won re-election. It seems a given the Senate would vote pretty close to 99-1 to expel him. Don’t the Republicans already have a tarnished-enough ethics reputation (keep in mind they just got rid of Larry Craig who declined to run for re-election)? But in a special election, Governor Barracuda would get a chance to run for Stevens seat. How could she pass up that opportunity to do her part to turn our nation into a Christian republic?
I suggest Sarah start boning up on her Senate facts: remember there are 100 of them; they’re elected for six years. And while it should reassure her that her recent election loss rid the Senate of its lone Negro, there are still a few members of the Hebrew faith. If I were the chief librarian of the Library of Congress I’d prepare for an inquiry from Sen. Palin on what the government’s policy is about banning certain inconvenient books.
And hey, the coolest thing is it will reunite those two Bobsey twins Sarah and John, who were such cuddle-bunnies during their recent campaign. Their theme song could be: “Reunited and it feels so good.” Wouldn’t you like to be a fly on the wall of the Republican caucus meeting room to hear what they have to say to each other?
Returning to Stevens, this tells you something about the insular politics of Alaska that a convicted felon would retain the voters’ loyalty merely because he was good at bringing home the bacon for his state. Another idiocy of those Alaskans who voted for “Uncle” Ted is that they’ve chosen to send a Republican to the Senate who will be in the minority and hence unable to bring home any more bacon. Not to mention that no fellow senator will want to be seen to do any favors for either Stevens or the state he represents. That pretty much makes both persona non grata in the next Congress.
Even if Palin wins the seat after Stevens is expelled, given the scorched earth campaign she chose to run against President-elect Obama (I like the sound of that!), I think she’ll also be in the deep freeze. I guess Alaskans are used to frigid weather. They might want to send her to Washington with one of those big, bulky down parkas she can bundle up in against the D.C. chill.
Just couldn’t pass up this hilarity from Gail Collins:
O.K., there is nothing positive to say about Sarah Palin. And Alaska, are you re-electing Ted Stevens? What’s going on there? Did you actually believe him when he said that the court verdict was still up in the air? On the day after he was found guilty? By the way, if Stevens does win, it will be with about 106,000 votes. In total. There are more people than that in my immediate neighborhood! What kind of state is this, anyway?
But we’re in a good mood, so let’s forget Alaska.
I couldn’t understand how he could possible win after getting convicted.
However, I saw a news report on him. Apparently Alaskans feel like the red hedded step child of the lower 48 and view Stevens fondly as the elder beloved grandfather of Alaskan politics who was able to make Alaska relevant.
I assume Palin would then appoint someone.
If Expelled, Will Palin Run for Stevens’ Seat?
I assume Palin would then appoint someone.
Why run for the seat? as Governor she can’t appoint herself, but she could resign as Governor, which would promote her lieutenant governor (also a republican) to Governor, who then could appoint her as the replacement senator. Will they even have a special election?
Maybe her husband?
@Gerald: Alaska works differently than other states. The governor doesn’t appoint anyone, at least as I understand it. There’s an election to replace.