Chicago Tribune, Washington Post Call on Roland Burris to Resign

Two weeks ago, the New York Times had their way with Tom Daschle, convincing him to withdraw his HHS nomination within hours of a reproachful editorial.

Jealous that their proverbial big brother took down a former Senate majority leader/one-man savior of American health care, the Washington Post and Chicago Tribune have set their sights a bit lower...

On a lame duck political appointee who's been on the job for all of three weeks.

From the Trib:

The benefit of the doubt had already been stretched thin and taut by the time Roland Burris offered his third version of the events leading to his appointment to the U.S. Senate. It finally snapped like a rubber band, popping him on that long Pinocchio nose of his, when he came out with version four...

Enough. Roland Burris must resign.

From the Post:

Mr. Burris's story has more twists than the Chicago El, and none of them good...

[T]his latest revelation makes a mockery of his professions of no quid pro quo. It is a violation of the public trust. The people of Illinois have suffered enough. Mr. Burris should resign.

Harsh words, and yet will a disciple of Rod Blagojevich leave office merely for being corrupt? Perhaps Burris will resign... but it's just as likely he'll go for media-chaperoned jogs around Chicago, compare himself to Gandhi, and don a wet cat atop his head. Just saying it's been done before.

Our take: Burris should get out now before this thing gets any uglier. If he thinks the Post and the Tribune are giving him a hard time, just wait until Sports Illustrated starts in with the steroid allegations.

Should Roland Burris resign?

Yes. Nothing this side of Nancy Pelosi could sway me more than a Washington Post editorial.	202 (68.7%)
No. Burris has been pilloried by the liberal, socialist media and must stay on for the sake of traditional values.	15 (5.1%)
I resent the first two answer choices.	77 (26.2%)