Sticky wicket

This senate seat, as with any other senate seat, is not a seat of color. Gov. Blagojevich has many charges against him, I agree. But, he is still Governor of the state and has the right to make the appointment. The state Attorney General refused to sign the letter of appointment of Roland Burris not because of color but because of the allegations concerning the chair. The senate refused to seat Mr. Burris because of the AG not signing the letter. I fail to see where color has anything to do with who will replace the President-Elect as the Illinois Senator.

Since you fail to see, I'll try to help you... The fact is that it really has little to do with the fact that Burris is a qualified appointee. The issue is that many others, including those who reported the "pay to play" to the FBI are probably or at least possibly better choices. By making an appointment, especially of a black, qualified candidate, Blago has managed to make sure that those who cooperated with the FBI cannot be appointed by his replacement. The fact that Burris is black shouldn't matter, but it does. Why? Because it makes opposing him political suicide since it can be spun in the media as a racial issue. Think about it.

let the man into congress he will do a good job as much as anyone else does. darlene

The politics of it makes no sense (not unusual). If seated, he will be a Democrat for 2 years. In 2 years the Obama agenda with the Democrat majority congress should have been well set. So, even if after 2 years a Republican and not another Democrat runs for the Burris seat (doesn't have to be Burris himself), it will not be critical to the Democrates and the Obama administration.
And, it is possible that a Democrat will be elected whether it is Burris or somebody else in 2 years. Who can possibly predict what will happen at this time?