Here's a story burning up the wires, and causing a fair amount of froth on the right-hand side of the spectrum:
Massachusetts' top election official says it could take weeks to certify the results of the upcoming U.S. Senate special election. That delay could let President Barack Obama preserve a key 60th vote for his health care overhaul even if the Republican who has vowed to kill it wins Democrat Edward M. Kennedy's former seat.
Secretary of State William F. Galvin, citing state law, says city and town clerks must wait at least 10 days for absentee ballots to arrive before they certify the results of the Jan. 19 election. They then have five more days to file the returns with his office.
These days, when the most vocal quarters of the right are so thoroughly infused with conspiracy theorists, it'll be less than fun to have to deal with any delay like that in the event that Naked Scotty Brown manages to score a victory. You can already hear wingnuts warming up the pipes and getting ready to howl. And this particular story even gives them ammunition:
Galvin bypassed the provision in 2007 so his fellow Democrats could gain a House vote they needed to override a veto of then-Republican President George W. Bush, but the secretary says U.S. Senate rules would preclude a similar rush today.
The potential delay has become a rallying point for the GOP, which argues Democrats have been twisting the rules to pass the health care bill despite public opposition.
What Senate rules? Why, the rules requiring that Senators-elect (and Senators-designate -- which is what we call appointed Senators who haven't yet been sworn in) arrive with a set of valid official credentials certifying their election or appointment, of course. Remember those? Maybe Senators Roland Burris (D-IL) and Al Franken (D-MN) can remind you, if you've forgotten.
So, did any Republicans cry so loudly when Democrats in the Senate denied themselves Burris' vote until mid-January, and might have tried to do so for even longer if they'd been able to? Or when they had to do without Franken's vote for half a year while Norm Coleman clowned Minnesota and the nation with his hopeless march to nowhere? Because if they did, I can't remember it. All I remember is Democrats causing problems for themselves because they felt hampered by the rules. But whatever you may have thought about those situations, the fact is that when those rules handicapped Democrats, Democrats lived with it. Now that the same rules could handicap Republicans, well, my goodness, it's an assault on liberty!
Heck, why leave things up to poor old Bill Galvin, anyway? If Naked Scotty Brown pulls it out manages to win, maybe Martha Coakley will pursue the cause of freedom and justice with all the vigor Norm Coleman did.
That, of course, would be A-OK. Because winning isn't about Martha Coakley. You know, it's not about her or even us as Democrats. It really is about this country. And about the future of the country.