Today once again Pennsylvania finds itself unexpectedly at the epicenter of the national political scene.
Today's headline story is the party switch of our senior Senator Arlen Specter.
Many Democrats will welcome the newly minted D-Pennsylvania senator with open arms; others will decry the act, fearing it blocks us from electing a better, more loyal and liberal Democratic voice to the Senate.
Mainstream Republicans will decry Specter's betrayal; many of the right will welcome his defection, opening the door for a more conservative Republican candidate.
But what does it all mean?
Specter was a likely loser in the coming Republican primary. His challenger, Pat Toomey, has little chance in a statewide general election.
Any Democratic candidate would likely trounce Toomey; Specter likely beats any Democrat.
If we accept the current conventional wisdom that Toomey would win, Specter's party switch looks like a bad deal for Democrats. However, though he's down far in the polls, a year is a lifetime in politics, and 10 lifetimes in the volatile Keystone State.
Specter was in trouble, but he was no dead duck.
Also worth considering is the type of Democrat we were likely to get. Pennsylvania is not New York or Massachusetts or California. Nor is it Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in the middle, no matter how many times that silly canard is repeated.
But it is a blend of Atlantic and Midwestern, and tends to make statewide Democrats cautious. Bob Casey is certainly no liberal firebrand. The next Democratic senator would likely be cut from the same middle of the road cloth.
It's worth noting that on some issues Specter is already more liberal than Casey, even in his previous Republican incarnation. Specter is pro-choice, for example; Casey is not.
So the question becomes: what has been gained, and what has been lost?
The gain, a probable Democratic senator has been replaced with a certain one.
And two years ahead of schedule. Certainly not meaningless, even if the new Democrat vote is not entirely reliable.
And it's worth considering that the moderate Specter, who has been dragged to the right by his old party, will now be dragged to the left by the new.
And history, especially today proves, that our Arlen is nothing if not flexible. Before long, he may well be Pennsylvania's more liberal voice in the Senate.
While we may lose for a time a chance to elect our own, more reliably Democratic voice to the Senate, this too shall pass. Frankly, there's No obvious bright and rising Democratic star the Senator's switch is clearly blocking.
Plus, the octogenarian Specter, with his history of ill health, is not likely to match Senator Strom Thurmond's longevity. This will almost certainly be his last term, and though it might sound crass, he's far from certain to complete it.
And holding the seat now improves our chances of holding on to it in the future.
It's not an occasion for dancing in the streets. I have my doubts and certainly share the concerns of the naysayers.
But on balance, though the Senator's motivation is most surely selfish, I have to call this one a net gain for our side.