Obama and the Democrats are totally wrong-headed in rejection Blagovich's appointment of Burris. The problem is not the race card which is a distraction but rather the importance of the rule of law.

What the Senate Democrats are proposing to do is to set a precedent that if a Governor is accused on a substantive basis of being corrupt in the process of making an appointment the appointment cannot stand. Those of us old enough to recall the Gingrich congress know exactly how much hay such individuals would have made with such a power -- any excuse to claim that a Democrat had been corruptly appointed would be used to alter the partisan balance. However responsibly you believe that you are conducting yourself in adjudging that Blago is unfit to appoint, you cannot ensure that subsequent Senates seeking to use the same power would use it responsibly. Currently, Blago is the elected Governor as Illinois and as such he has the power and duty to make that appointment. Indeed, if he refused to make an appointment he could be impeached on that basis by itself. If Illinois wanted to avoid this they have had two chances -- pass the legislation to allow a special election or a quick impeachment. So here sits Blago accused but unconvicted.

Does this mean that I think Blago is likely innocent? Not at all: he clearly contemplated the solicitation of a bribe and most likely attempted to obtain such a bribe. But the revelation of the prosecution's side of the evidence in public though persuasive is not the equivalent in our system of a conviction.

Obama should know better and not allow his disgust at Blago to move him away from the rule of law and into setting a precedent which would be used in the future to alter the basis of politcal power on the basis of plausible accusations of criminality.

There is time enough to expell Burris if it is subsequently shown that there was any criminality involved in his appointment.

I expect the Supreme Court will so decide if this becomes necessary but meanwhile in attempting to hit Blago, the rejection of the Burris appointment hits the right of Illinois to be represented in the Senate.

I suspect he's already looking at 2010.
Republican intransigence is already playing into Democratic hands, and the narrative is already in place.
It just needs fleshing out.
Stay clean even if it means a smaller majority while the election and appointment issues are being worked out. "Good goverment yada yada."
Make proposals to mitigate the recession and let the Republicans hem, haw, obfuscate and delay.
"We're working on problems while they're posturing and obstructing for the sake of air-time."

Neither count of the criminal complaint seems to mention the Senate seat. See page 1:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/acrobat/2008-12/43789434.pdf

I repeat: user-pic

Obama -- "accused of selling this very Senate seat"??

Not formally nor informally that I can see. Sure a bunch of loud-mouthed pundits have accused him and even convicted him in the minds of many, but should Obama being following the crowd, or offering sober leadership here?