Milk And Dianne Feinstein

Dianne Feinstein was in the news earlier this week; first she was upset that Obama named Panetta to CIA without consulting her (she's on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which did a very poor job of oversight of the CIA and NSA during the Bush administration), and then she broke with Democratic leadership over whether to seat Blagojevich's pick for Obama's Senate seat, the incomprehensible Roland Burris (she's on the Senate Rules Committee, and therefore it's her decision whether the Senate has the power to eject Burris)

But she also was very briefly in the movie Milk, which I saw this week (the day after she had come out in favor of Burris). She plays a minor, minor role in the movie even though she played a slightly larger role in real life--in real life, [spoiler alert] she was the one who found the bodies of Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk after they were shot by former city supervisor Dan White.

For some reason, on a human level, I feel like that explained to a certain degree her decision to side with Burris. Something about being in the front row of watching a sidelined politician lose out because of the larger political atmosphere... well, that's where Roland Burris is right now.

Of course, I don't think Dianne Feinstein is backing Roland Burris because she thinks if she doesn't, he's going to shoot Harry Reid and Dick Durbin. That would be ridiculous. But her decision to stick by the rules (of which Harry Reid is aware and feels less bound by) may partly be her role on the Rules Committee, but it may partly be a sense of personal compassion for the man.

It's just some speculation, for if one day we decide to make a movie about this AWESOME Blagojevich story. Trust me, it'll make a great movie.

First Cheney-Burress Award Nominee

First Cheney-Burress award nominations! Remember that the Cheney-Burress Award is for "Did you just say that?" or "Did that just happen?" moments. Things which strain not only your own credibility, but the credibility of reality.

Obviously, the winner for my general preposterous stupidity awards simply HAVE to come from the ongoing Blagojevich scandal. I'm limiting myself to one citation, for the moment, from this scandal for 2009. I think it's fair because the gentleman in question is not Blagojevich (who already has an award NAMED after him for crying out loud).

Here it is:

Nominee: Congressman Bobby Rush (D-IL). This gentleman appeared on the national radar when he showed up to Blagojevich's press conference naming former Attorney General Burris to the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama. While the whole press conference itself probably deserves a Cheney-Burress award (why would Blagojevich do such a phenomenally pointless thing? Why would Burris accept? Why would anyone show up to support it), Bobby Rush takes the cake.

Not only does Rush stand next to a guy who's in the process of an impeachment for corruption, not only does he defend the man who's being appointed to the Senate despite the very clear indications that he will very certainly not be going to the Senate... but take a look at what he said!

"This is a matter of national importance," Rush said. "There are no African-Americans in the Senate, and I don't think that anyone, any U.S. senator who's sitting in the Senate right now wants to go on record to deny one African-American for being seated in the U.S. Senate. ... And so I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus... I will ask you to not hang and lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer. Separate, if you will, the appointee from the appointed."

Classy, Rep. Rush. Classy.

Also of note: in the last senate Democratic primary, Rush supported a white man (Hull) against a black man (Obama).

Ah Rush... thank you. Please don't keep up the good work.

UPDATE: Oh Bobby Rush. Must you compare Harry Reid to George Wallace?

Burris And Franken COLLIDE

Democrats are threatening not to seat Burris. Constitutional questions persist.

Republicans are threatening to filibuster the vote to seat Franken (when Coleman's ridiculous opposition to his seating finally fails).

These two events are not disparate. Republicans are going to let Franken sit once Democrats allow Burris to sit--on the same rationale (they were picked by the legal process, so let it happen). If Democrats cave, so as to allow Franken to sit, it will feel like a Democratic victory (they get two Democratic senators rather than risking losing both Franken and Burris), but will really be a Republican victory (seating Burris might look like it damages Democratic legitimacy).

This Republican strategy doesn't seem to me like it'll work. It'll basically ask Republicans to go against two instances of Democracy (in one, opposing a special election in favor of an appointment; in the other, trying to invalidate an election as certified by the process). Furthermore, the odds are that at least two Republicans are going to think this strategy is cheap and political (Specter? Snow?), and Democrats will be able to override the filibuster--so they have no reason to cave on Burris. Let's just hope that they know that.