This was obviously an attempt to force the Democratic leadership to vote on vS's nomination. The thinking was, "for anybody who felt there was a cloud over vS's head, therefore providing legitimate reason to hold or reject his nomination, well the cloud is gone, bring him up for a vote now!"

I wonder how a vote would go for the GOP? Wouldn't he lose on an up/down vote?

For all we know,Mosk might actually be von Spakovsky himself!!

'Strategery'-wise, the Von Spakovsky nom is a window into the Republican Party soul:

On the one hand, if Dems are stupid enough to cave to Repub pressure and vote him in as FEC head, then he IS the fox in the henhouse, who will use his position to improperly promote Repub party interests over the interests of his country (what kind of person puts party over country?) in this crucial election year.

On the other hand, the current stalemate provided by Sen. Obama's brilliant move to put a hold on the vS nom has similar benefits for the Repubs --- for one, they have hilariously attempted to smash up the Dems for being 'obstructionist', although honest Americans are catching on to their dishonest tactics.

Plus, no FEC means no investigation into the McCain campaign's violation of McCain's own campaign-finance reform laws --- a felony with substantial fines and up to five years in prison. If any other Repub campaigns are laundering money Tom Delay-style, then they will get away with it, too.

Naturally, Dems can take improper advantage of a non-functioning FEC to do the same --- but they are not the architects of this stalemate, the GOP is.

So either way, the Repubs can pat themselves on the back for their machinations --- because either way they can twist the situation to suit their goals. No matter that it's at the cost of fairness and against the spirit of the Constitution, the rule of law, and other such quaint notions. Yep, them's true patriots.

Well parsed, Des.

matthew mosk has shared a byline with the infamous john solomon, notorious dem-chaser. that's who he is, but why the wapo would exercise such poor editorial management is the larger question.

my suspicion about mosk's (and solomon's) placement on staff is that this is part of a wapo lean toward 'balance,' though clearly not balanced journalism. balanced what, who knows? boot-licking?

yeah, that's the ticket; balanced boot-licking. the post-modern face of american journatainment.