WASHINGTON -- The political world is looking for some lasting significance out of Georgia's Senate runoff, which Saxby Chambliss won easily Tuesday night. And there is some, in fact: The result means, definitively, that Al Franken is now irrelevant -- Democrats can't get to 60 seats even if he wins the recount under way in Minnesota and takes Norm Coleman's place in the Senate.

Beyond reducing the importance of the Minnesota recount (at least for anyone who's not a resident of the state, a Coleman staffer or, like Franken, a comedian hoping to branch out into other lines of work), though, there probably won't be much in the way of lasting implications for the 111th Congress out of the Georgia runoff. The Democratic dream of 60 seats -- and therefore, an end to Republican filibusters -- may be dashed, but it was probably an illusion from the outset.

That's because over the last two years, Democrats have knocked out nearly every Republican who was willing to break with the GOP on anything approaching a consistent basis -- and replaced them with moderate Democrats who will probably feel heavy political pressure to peel off from the majority. The big margin that Democrats will have next year, ironically, probably made it harder for Majority Leader Harry Reid to hold the caucus together on tough votes. People like Nebraska's Ben Nelson and Arkansas' Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor already split with Democrats frequently; chances are, incoming freshmen like North Carolina's Kay Hagan and Alaska's Mark Begich will start doing the same thing. Not to mention Joe Lieberman, saved by Barack Obama's fiat from being punished for his own frequent meanders into the Republican column on votes.

But even though Republican moderates are a vanishing breed, party discipline may be tough to enforce on both sides. At least three Republicans still should be willing to join Democrats on some issues -- Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter (who may be worrying about a unique challenge in two years).

"I always thought that 60 was kind of a phony number," said Jennifer Duffy, who tracks the Senate for the Cook Political Report. "Its real power was psychological -- not that [Democrats] needed any more of a self-esteem boost, but they would have gotten one. It probably would have been more demoralizing for Republicans [to be at 40] than having just 41 or 42 seats."

Democrats claim they aren't too worried about the exact number they'll have, though, obviously, they say more is better. "Fifty-eight is the largest majority that we've had in decades," one leadership aide said. "We feel confident that we'll be able to enact a very robust agenda." Even without getting 60 votes, they expanded their numbers by enough to win larger majorities on every committee (and the extra staff and money that goes along with them), though negotiations about the exact makeup of the panels aren't finished yet.

Republicans have been making conciliatory-sounding noises since Obama's win last month, but it's not clear how long that friendly spirit will last. GOP leader Mitch McConnell sent Reid a letter a couple weeks ago, signed by every Republican senator, that indicated he'd be willing to go along with Democrats -- to a point. "When senators are permitted to fully debate and amend, we can work together to pass bipartisan legislation," he wrote. "Republicans will insist on our basic right to participate in the legislative process. The Republican Conference intends to protect the Senate's history of full and open consideration of major legislation, which includes a fair amendment process and the opportunity for debate." If you think there's a veiled threat in there, you're probably right. But the scale of Obama's win and the crisis the economy faces may have bought him some room to maneuver on policy early next year. (Transition aides, though, declined to comment about the Senate margin and what that might mean for Obama's legislative agenda.)

Besides, Democrats think Republicans only hurt themselves when they block legislation. "For two years, they tried the strategy of obstruction," said the leadership aide, who wanted to remain anonymous to discuss the partisan rivalry in the Senate. "Obstructing everything big and small -- it obviously didn't work out for them."

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell is one of those politicians (see also Allen, George and Biden, Joe) who spends a lot of time removing his foot from his mouth. On Tuesday, he stuck it right back in with some comments he made while, without knowing it, he was near a hot mic.

Speaking about Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, President-elect Barack Obama's choice to head the Department of Homeland Security, Rendell said, "Janet's perfect for that job. Because for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19-20 hours a day to it."

CNN's Campbell Brown went after Rendell for his remarks, saying:

[I]f a man had been Obama's choice for the job, would having a family or not having a family ever even have been an issue? Would it have ever prompted a comment? Probably not. We all know the assumption tends to be that, with a man, there's almost always a wife in the wings managing those family concerns...

Governor Rendell, I don't mean to rake you over the coals here. I know what you meant to say, but your comments do perpetuate stereotypes that put us in boxes, both mothers and single women. In government and beyond, men have been given the benefit of the doubt when it comes to striking the right work/life balance. Women are owed the same consideration.

I mean, come on. Michael Chertoff is married with two grown children. His predecessor, Tom Ridge, had a family. Anybody remember a debate about whether they would have trouble balancing the demands of work and family?

At a press conference on Wednesday, Rendell apologized. "I guess, if you stretch it, it could be taken by some people the wrong way," he said. "I certainly didn't mean it the wrong way. Janet is a friend of mine. She's a great, great governor, and she'll be a great Director of Homeland Security. And if anyone out there was offended, I apologize... What I meant is that Janet is a person who works 24/7, just like me. She works literally 24/7 as governor. She'll do a great job. You have to live that job every minute." 

Rendell also offered the example of Ridge having to give up golf when he ran DHS, saying, "You can't have another job, you can't have an avocation you're addicted to like golf or anything like that."

In June, during his campaign for presidency, Barack Obama promised that he would institute a "windfall profits tax" on US oil companies. "I'll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we'll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills," he said at the time.

Of course, crude was above $140 a barrel back then, and U.S. consumers were shelling out nearly $4 for a gallon of gas. Now, with crude prices having dropped more than $100 a barrel, Obama has apparently given up on his idea.

Wednesday, the Houston Chronicle reported that the American Small Business League noticed that language referring to the policy has been removed from the Obama transition team Web site, Change.gov. Asked about what seems like a sudden policy change conducted completely under the radar, an unnamed member of Obama's transition team told ABC News, "President-elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel. They are below that now and expected to stay below that."

An Obama aide told the Chronicle that the “emergency energy rebate," a part of Obama's windfall profits tax plan that would have used the tax revenue from companies like Exxon to grant US taxpayers up to $500 individually or $1000 for every married couple, is still intact and included in Obama's "rescue plan" for the middle class.

But some liberals, like columnist David Sirota, aren't happy about the change. In a blog post, Sirota wrote:

Between this move and the move to wait to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, it seems like the Obama team is buying into the right-wing frame that raising any taxes -- even those on the richest citizens and wealthiest corporations -- is bad for the economy... [I]f oil prices are down and oil industry profits are truly down, what's the harm in passing a windfall profits tax? Even if you buy the right-wing nonsense about a windfall profits tax 'hurting the industry' or 'hurting the economy' when it is applied, if there really are no windfall profits to tax, then it won't be applied.

In Lou Dobbs' world, apparently, everything is about immigration. Even the case of New York Giants wide reciever Plaxico Burress, who's in trouble with the law after accidentally shooting himself over the weekend.

Dobbs was up in arms Tuesday night because of recent comments New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg made about Burress: "If we don't prosecute [him] to the fullest extent of the law, I don't know who on Earth we would. It makes a sham, a mockery of the law."

If this sort of comment doesn't immediately make you think about New York City's immigration policy, well, you're clearly not watching enough "Lou Dobbs Tonight." One of the CNN host's favorite topics is the issue of "sanctuary cities," which are cities that, in most cases, employ a "don't ask, don't tell" approach when it comes to their residents' immigration status. For almost 20 years now, that's been New York City's policy. To Dobbs, it seems, that means  Bloomberg is a hypocrite for wanting to apply the law in any other situation.

Dobbs' commentary -- as well as reporter Bill Tucker's story on the issue -- was full of misrepresentations, even outright factual errors.

»Continued

Al Franken has gotten some good news in his recount fight against Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) recently: the discovery of 171 uncounted ballots gave Franken a boost of 37 net votes, and Minnesota's secretary of state made one move towards counting rejected absentee ballots the Democrat wants included. Now, Marc Elias, the lawyer leading Franken's recount efforts, says that according to the campaign's tally, the challenger has overtaken Coleman and, as of Tuesday night, was leading him by 22 votes.

There's good reason to be skeptical about this claim: First of all, on Tuesday night the secretary of state's official count still showed Coleman ahead, and by 303 votes at that. The two numbers are different because of two different assumptions about the result of about 6,000 ballot challenges the two campaigns have made. The secretary of state's count assumes that all the challenges will result in the ballots being declared invalid; the Franken camp's count, on the other hand, assumes that all the challenges will be overruled.

The Coleman camp isn't letting this claim go without a fight. Politico's Josh Kraushaar quotes campaign manager Cullen Sheehan as saying, "Today, they’ve invented a story of a lead in the recount. We have confidence that on Friday the results of the recount will show Norm Coleman has emerged, again, as the winner of the 2008 United States Senate election.”

This video, a star-studded cast performing a musical about California's Proposition 8, is really pretty funny -- and a good take on the whole situation. And while clearly people like Jack Black and John C. Reilly are the biggest names in the video, I happen to think the Neil Patrick Harris appearance is the perfect touch.

As expected, on Wednesday morning, President-elect Barack Obama announced that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is his choice to become commerce secretary.

The press conference at which the announcement was made featured several rather unsubtle reminders of one reason Richardson is politically valuable: namely, he's Hispanic, and Obama owes a great deal to Hispanic voters. As he said goodbye to the state he leads, Richardson made an extended digression in Spanish. And one of the three questions Obama took from the press was from a Hispanic reporter, Telemundo's Vicente Serrano, who had a question about whether Richardson's nomination was a consolation prize for Hispanics who wanted to see him become secretary of state.

On a wholly different note, one reporter asked Richardson why he'd shaved off his beard, which he began sporting after he dropped out of the presidential race earlier this year. Obama fielded the question for him, saying, "I think it was a mistake for him to get rid of it. I thought that whole rugged look was really working for him ... We're deeply disappointed with the loss of the beard."

I feel I can safely speak on behalf of the New York bureau of Salon -- which has previously declared Richardson's beard the best beard ever -- and say that kind of honesty and support for great beards, well, that's change we can believe in.

It just doesn't seem possible to read a true national trend into Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss' run-off win. Chambliss is, after all, from Georgia -- these days a dependably red state -- and the fact that the campaign even had to go to a run-off was surprising, and probably attributable only to the surge in Democratic turnout in the state due to the presence of Barack Obama on the ballot on Nov. 4th.

But, of course, some people are trying to claim the results are a sign of something bigger. A few choice examples:

• ABC News' Rick Klein and Hope Ditto, writing for The Note: "Fresh from the glow of their historic electoral sweep, Democrats are getting a glimpse of their own limits. President-elect Barack Obama’s pull wasn’t enough to bring out voters in Georgia one more time, for one more Senate seat."
• CNN's David Gergen (via Todd Beeton): "[T]hese last couple of days have been a real dose of harsh reality for the Obama team. You know, after they had that -- they announced their economic heavy weights coming in, the market rallied for three days in a row there, and this week, the markets have been down, the economic news is pretty dire. And now they've had this defeat in Georgia. And it seems to be a fairly decisive defeat. And I think it's really reminded the Obama team of, you know, as much hope as they have and they've started in the country, there are some harsh limits they're by bouncing up against... I think this actually puts a lot more pressure on Barack Obama to govern much more from the center and not from the left. He is going to need Republicans now. He's going to need a bipartisan approach on his economic stimulus package and on other things, even though as all this claims has lined up to get money. He's going to need some Republican votes."
• Don Surber: "Sarah Palin wins the first round as Sen. Saxby Chambliss wins the runoff. Gov. Palin went to Georgia and saved the Republican senator from the dustbin of history. I suspect it will be downplayed by the media. But if you look at the early posts at the lefty blogs, you see they really had high hopes -- which were dropped like a moose by Gov. Palin... The seat means little to anyone. It is Palin who has them scared."
• Bill Dupray: "Will the MSM hail this GOP win as the first repudiation of the Obama Administration? After all, the Obots threw a pile of cash at this race and brought in all the heavy-hitters. Perhaps a case of buyers’ remorse set in and the voters wanted to curtail Obama’s ambitious Socialist agenda."

Come on. This election showed the Democrats' limits? OK, sure, if you define "limits" as "being unable to perform miracles."

The national political situation undoubtedly had some effect on the results here. Clearly, Republicans could be motivated to vote by the threat of a 60-seat Democratic majority in the Senate. But let's not get too carried away. Chambliss won this time around by about 15 percentage points; the results currently stand at 57.4-42.6 in his favor. Compare that to his first race, when he beat incumbent Democrat Max Cleland 53-46. If anything, now that Chambliss is the incumbent, his numbers should improve. That's especially true in a state like Georgia. In 2004, President Bush beat John Kerry there 58-41. That same year, Republican Johnny Isakson won his Senate race 58-40.

Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida -- and the president's brother -- may be returning to politics.

Bush is eyeing a run to replace Florida Republican Sen. Mel Martinez, who announced on Tuesday that he will not seek reelection. In an e-mail sent Tuesday night, Bush told Politico, "I am considering it.” 

Obviously, the Bush name is a liability in national politics these days. But the same isn't as true in Florida, where Jeb Bush remains popular, even if his brother isn't.

Left, Saxby Chambliss, right, Jim Martin.

At about 9 p.m. EST Tuesday night, two hours after polls closed, the Associated Press called the run-off election between incumbent Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss and Democratic challenger Jim Martin. Chambliss, as expected, is the winner.

Chambliss' win seems to put the Democrats' goal of achieving 60 votes in the Senate out of reach, at least for now. If Al Franken is able to prevail over Minnesota Republican Sen. Norm Coleman in the ongoing recount in their race, the Democratic caucus -- which includes independents Joe Lieberman and Bernie Sanders -- will have 59 members. Democrats can, of course, still try to persuade a Republican or two to cross the aisle.