If Burris is truly unconnected to Blago and he's as good as any other potential Senator (at least for 2 years), the easiest & quickest way to settle it would be for the Lt Gov to announce that if Blago's removed, (s)he would appoint Burris.

that the Democrats, when presented with the choice between keeping their word and folding, would do the latter?

Don't really know whether Burris' is good or bad. But do know that it is no wonder that no one believes the Dems when they say they will do something. Is there anything on which they have not backed down??

GREAT!!!!!

We ended the color line in the white house now attempts to keep senate free of Black americans has been defeated!!

The end of white supremacy is almost here in America!!!

Black senator, Black president...Nation needs more Black media lets start with SALON!!!!!!

that Harry Reid can manage to look weak even when he's doing the right thing? This wound is truly self-inflicted.

Is anyone challenging this jellyfish for Majority Leader?

Agreed with an earlier writer - even doing the right thing, Sen. Harry Reid looks outmaneuvered. There was never any upside to keeping Roland Burris out and there was no real downside to letting him in. This should have been over ten days ago.

We'll have Sen. Burris for two years.

It was obvious that Burris would have be be seated, and Reid's stupidity was simply illuminated by this silly argument.

The Democratic leaders in the House and Senate seem incapable of thinking, "If you do X, what will the consequences be?"

It's mind boggling.

Imagine for a moment that you are a citizen of a country other than the USA and you are closely following the politics in this country.

What you hear and see is this:

1) The Governor of Illinois is arrested and accused of trying to sell the vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder.

2) The President-elect assures everybody that he had nothing to do with this Governor-salesman and calls for his resignation.

3) The Governor refuses to resign and, instead, appoints Roland Burris to this seat.

4) The Senate Democrats vow that they are not going to accept the person appointed by a corrupt Governor.

5) The same President-elect now urges Democratic leadership in the Senate to seat Roland Burris.

6) After a weak resistance which lasted just a few days, the Democrats of the Senate agree to accept Mr. Burris as a junior Senator from Illinois.

Here is my question to Alex Coppelman and all the readers: as a citizen of a country in Europe, Asia etc., would you have any respect for this country?

What will it take to remove Reid from his leadership position? Will there be a vote sometime after the new congress convenes for leadership positions? Would it do any good to contact our Senator? It's obvious Reid is not cut out for this position, but he seems oblivious to the fact. How can we get a new and competent leader?

Once again, the Democrats vow to seek truth and justice, and a short time later, forget all about it. Whether it's failing to hold Bush and the Repugs accountable for their many crimes, applauding convicted felon Ted Stevens, or failing yet again to hold firm to ethical behavior (Senator Burris?), the Democrats prove once again why they -- to put it delicately -- suck as a political party.

Forget the donkey; the mascot of the Democratic party should be a jellyfish.

I genuinely don't understand the Democrats at all. Reid is the most bumbling useless spineless ultra-political loser I have ever seen in modern politics. Howard Dean leads his party in four years to huge majorities in two branches of government. Yet that idiot is still the Senate Majority Leader and Dean wasn't even invited to the Kaine press conference. Why would anyone actually want to be a Democrat?

Well, unlike most of the posts that followed yours, at least your plan revolves around a constructive idea. One potential roadblock would be that it requires cooperation from several separate interests that are most often competing against each other. It's Illinois, so the odds of a transparent process such as your idea being carried out without the usual backroom dealing clouding the process would be steep.

I think Nate Silver offered the best insight several days ago but even he acknowledged it wasn't anywhere close to bulletproof had Ried actually attempted it - Agree to seat Burris on a provisional basis while calling for a special election to allow Illinois voters the final say since Blagojevich queered the deal so badly. But even that presents risks that are potentially worse than what took place today. The story becomes fodder for MSM TV-talking heads for a prolonged stretch lasting far longer than what has taken place so far. If several posters here couldn't accept how this story played on this long, just imagine the complaining had the media and AM-talk radio machine been able to recycle this 4 or 5 times as long? Plus the tactic doesn't prevent Blago from doing what he did anyway, and it's pretty clear Blago could care less if his actions create a headache for Senate Dems.

Ried certainly isn't my favorite person in the Senate, but some of the rants here I think are way over the top. If people want to blame somebody, put the blame where it starts - Blagojevich. He's the guy who let this genie out of the bottle. Ried and Senate Dems aren't at fault because some jerk like Burris willingly accepted an appointment despite Obama making it loud and clear that anyone that did accept it would be pushing the lines of credibility. There's plenty more important pressing issues for Senate Dems to get to work on at a very critical time (stimulus package, healthcare, alternative energy). If Burris turns out to be the vote that thwarts Republican attempts to take us all back to 1932, nobody in 2010 is going to care less about whether Ried "failed" to keep Burris out of a seat that the law clearly indicates he has every right to fill.