No Senate Certificate for Franken

March 7th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

How sad:

The Minnesota Supreme Court today decided that Democrat Al Franken has no right to an election certificate — which would pave the way for Franken to immediately join the U.S. Senate — before the end of Republican Norm Coleman’s court case.

“We conclude that neither state nor federal law requires issuance of a certificate of election before the election contest is completed; we deny the petition,” the Supreme Court wrote in a unanimous opinion released today.

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, a Democrat and Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, have said that state law bars a Senate candidate from receiving an election certificate when there is a contested election.

What’s truly pathetic about the entire election affair in Minnesota – aside from the rather obvious strange things happening there – is that Franken was actually taken serious. The man’s a rude, impolite, uncivilized clown. Electing him into the U.S. Senate is idiotic.

Still, though, he may very well end up taking the seat.

Sometimes reality truly is pathetic.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. PhilosopherP
    March 7th, 2009 at 04:50
    Reply | Quote | #1

    We also elected Jesse!! I’m proud to say I didn’t vote for either of them.

    I suspect Franken appealed to the same demographic as Jesse… the young / rude bunch.

  2. Alan
    March 7th, 2009 at 08:39
    Reply | Quote | #2

    “What’s truly pathetic about the entire election affair in Minnesota – aside from the rather obvious strange things happening there – is that Franken was actually taken serious. The man’s a rude, impolite, uncivilized clown.”

    Remind anyone of a very recent US president who was (apparently) elected to office not just once, but twice?

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.