That didn't take long - Burris "confesses"

Ah, the truth starts to emerge. And so soon after clearing the hurdles of his appointment to a seat in the U.S. Senate.

Why would U.S. Sen. Roland Burris speak up now? What could possibly prompt him to “remember” that there actually were several others with whom he discussed the Barack Obama's Senate seat? Why now, instead of later? Or at all?

Could the rantings of Blago on the talkshow circuit be making him nervous? Could the fact that people often choose to save their own skins be an effective memory-jogger? If you might get pushed out in front of the bus, is it better to leap out in front of it and hope the driver brakes in time?

His attorney provided the excuse of “fluid nature.” Poor Burris. He "was unable to fully respond to several matters." And maybe we still believe in the tooth fairy.

Several news sources reported that Burris “quietly” filed an affidavit on February 5 with State Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie (D-Chicago), head of the impeachment committee that heard sworn testimony from Burris. Be sure to reach today’s article on www.chicagotribune.com, which is much more complete than today's article in the Northwest Herald. The Tribune article includes this wonderful statement: “Currie, who is House majority leader, said the affidavit suggests Burris wants to be 'very forthcoming.'"

That’s kind of like saying, “Now I’m going to tell you the truth.” Every time I hear that one, I immediately wonder what is it that I have been told previously!

You’re a little late, Sen. Burris.

Did Burris perjure himself at the impeachment committee? What will be the effect, if he did? Criminal prosecution? Removal from the U.S. Senate? How long will that take? Is Pat Quinn already picking out a replacement for Burris?

Just what, exactly, do you have to do to get kicked out of the Senate?