Kass is a one trick pony who only knows how to write about the corrupt "combine" that dominates Chicago/Illinois politics. Same tone, same volume, same tune ... it never varies.

This is the only way he can write anything new: by applying the same old schtick to Obama.

Sorry Ezra, but that doesn't make any sense. Losing Burris lowers the bar by one vote, but you also lose Burris's vote.

Of course, that means Kass is completely wrong as well. As long as Franken isn't seated Burris's vote essentially was meaningless.

Don't I remember a number of blog posts on the left side of the interwebs where the various scenarios for the various Senatorial vacancies were examined and the reality that David Waldman points to concerning cloture was openly discussed? These hacks need to learn about the Google.

And yes, I know that the whole point is that the guy is a hack who wants to tell a particular story, and because reality doesn't match up with that story they create their own. But still.

Wouldn't they have needed the same number of republican votes, given that they would also have had one fewer D vote?

Actually, it is you who is wrong. Obama did not "need" three senators with Burris, he only needed two. The republican senators however decided amongst themselves that none of them would be the deciding vote, hence the need for three. And I think Waldman's point is that Burris made no difference, not that it made it harder.

also, there was no filibuster or intent to filibuster actually registered. The bill needed 3/5ths of duly sworn senators to waive the PAYGO rule, which requires that any legislation increasing direct spending or reducing revenues be offset.

Wasn't Ted Kennedy missing from the final vote because of his health issues. So if Burris missed it it would be 97 senators. I don't know the math. Math is hard.

"Because what Obama wants is more connection to the Spanish-language soap opera that is Illinois politics."

I am not sure if the metaphor is applicable. Where are all the smoking hot babes?

Kass is a crank. And a right-winger. And a general, all-around asshole.

Melvil, a Senator doesn't stop counting for the 3/5 requirement if he misses a vote. If there were 100 Senators and a cloture vote was 59-0, cloture would fail.

And BP is right, losing a Dem would have made no difference, not made things easier. The IDEAL position will be to have 100 Senators, will Franken seated.

But it raises the question, why aren't the Democrats pushing for Kennedy to take a well deserved retirement so a younger and likely as liberal (or more) replacement can be chosen in a special election and actually show up to vote?

A further brilliant assumption by Kass is that exposure of the problem would immediately result in Burris losing his vote. Remember, this was a multiparty conspiracy to suppress the fact that Burris had submitted his second affidavit a week earlier. As far as I know, my dear junior senator still has the right to vote, even if one questions the wisdom of it.

Designed for a different age, briefings no longer fill any purpose. Back in the day there were few writers, few TV reporters. What, maybe a dozen major outlets, give or take, attended these things? A press sec.replica BREITLING could easily create teh WH message and co-opt the writers, since, due to there being few personalities and outlets, personal relationships went a long way between the WH press corps and the secretary.