NEW ERA

It's Feb. 21 editorial harumphs:

(1)"Democrats in the U.S. Senate made a mistake when they bowed to racial power politics and voted to confirm Roland Burris to the Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama...

(2) Burris, who clearly wanted the Senate seat, should have turned his back on Blagojevich — as all honorable people should do. ..

(3) ... Burris now acknowledges he had conversations with key aides and even offered — unsuccessfully, it turns out — to raise money for Blagojevich...

(4) Burris faces the possibility of perjury charges in Illinois and the Senate has begun its own ethics investigation.

5) Burris should protect what remains of his reputation and resign."

WATCHDOG: (For clarity, we added the numbers.) (1) Did they "bow to racial power politics" or did they approve the appointment because he was legally appointed and had as good or better record than most other senators? Is the New Era suggesting a white appointee would have been rejected?

(2) Turning down a legal and well earned appointment as U. S. Senator is doing the "honorable" thing? Other candidates were envious for not understanding that they also would have been seated.

(3) Since when is it unusual for politicians of the same party to offer to campaign and to help raise funds for each others campaign?

(4) The "possibility of perjury charges" - not even yet being charged, let alone found guilty - is reason for senators to resign?

(5) Resigning when you believe you did nothing wrong is the way to protect a reputation?

Politics is not a tea party. NewsLanc will await the outcome of an investigation before rendering its verdict.