Reply #8: GEEZ!!!!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

:banghead:

Is THIS really how they want to start the year off? As long as Burris meets the technical qualifications for the job and is not alleged to be involved in Blago's "pay for play" scandal (or otherwise legally or ethically compromised) in any way, then there should be no reason for the Senate NOT to seat him.
Any other move would just be boneheaded in the long term IMHO and physically blocking access (with the attendant media coverage) to a DULY appointed Senator is just even more bad publicity that Obama, Reid, et. al simply don't need. They've already embarrassed themselves somewhat by suggesting that Burris (or anybody appointed by Blago) should NOT be seated despite any apparent legal justification for their position but they will only be compounding their embarrassment by taking such an aggressive approach. They either need to provide some legal justification for their decision or they should seat Burris and let him serve until he has run for re-election on his own merits in 2010. There is nothing to be gained and a LOT to be lost in terms of time, votes, and bad publicity by so aggressively fighting against this appointment regardless of who's making it.

Our party leaders may be on the right side of the things (most of the time, anyway) but their political instincts on things like this leave MUCH more to be desired. It's really too bad they never felt this strongly about enforcing their subpoenas of Rove, et. al.