Should Sen. Roland Burris resign?

The buzz is loud. Should Roland Burris resign from his seat as the "junior Senator from Illinois"?

Let's play the Devil's Advocate here. He was legally appointed by Illinois' governor. The governor was under a cloud and kicked out of office shortly after he appointed Burris, but he was still, legally, the governor of Illinois. And he had the sole and legal right to appoint a person - any person - to fill the seat vacated by Barack Obama.

Secretary of State Jesse White climbed up on a shaky pedestal and announced he would not sign the form to certify the appointment.

And the U.S. Senate said it would not seat Burris without Jesse White's signature.

And they both lied. Well, let's say, they "changed their minds."

When those in the U.S. Senate first announced that they wouldn't seat Burris, I wondered what right could they have not to seat a duly-appointed replacement to an open seat of a State.

OK, so now Burris is there. Is possession 9/10th's of the law? Does that count for a seat in the U.S. Senate?

Can the powers in Illinois really unseat an elected Senator?

The U.S. Senate apparently has the right to unseat a Senator. How long will that take? And at what cost to other, more important, affairs of this country?

Should Illinois blow $50,000,000 to fill a seat for a year or so? By the time Burris could be removed and a special election held, his term would be almost over. He might have a few friends in high places who would fund an attempt at electing him to a full term. Would he have any chance at being elected?

Should we just let him stay for the few remaining months of that seat? Don't we have more important business and ways to spend $50,000,000 in Illinois?