What is this constant need to depict Rodham-Clinton as some kind of super-woman? Haven't you seen a recent, untouched-up, sans-makeup pic of ORC?

Does she strike you as the most "powerful" woman in the world?

Of course Barry O can control her.  If she doesn't do what HE wants, he'll fire her!!!  

Won't that be a sight?  3 months after Rodham-Clinton gives up her senate seat to be Barry's secretary, they have a disagreement on policy, Rodham-Clinton resorts to form and insists she knows best.

To be a fly on the wall for that meeting between ORC and BarryO:

Rodham-Clinton:  "Barry you're being naive if you believe Iran will give up its nuclear reactor if you play nice with them."

Barry O:  "Rodham-Clinton, I'm the president here, you're just a new hire!"

Rodham-Clinton:  "Yea, but that's only because the blacks all voted for you, if it wasn't for the blacks, I'd already moved back into MY living quarters..."

BarryO:  "Rodham-Clinton, I'm sorry you can't move back into your old bedroom with the leader of the Clintonistas, however, at least you and he will get to spend more time together in your other old bedroom -- back in Chappaqua!!!

Rodham-Clinton, YOU'RE FIRED!!!!!!!!"

Hahahahahahahaha.... also, Hussein apparently found the perfect way to get ORC out of the senate!

Remember where you read this first lefties:  I give ORC 6 months before she's ousted!!!

Cross-posted at the Francis L. Holland Blog.

Most of the public (including myself) believed that Hillary Clinton was qualified to be president, according to polls, so I can't imagine that they will oppose her nomination for secretary of state. If she could have been commander in chief, there's no reason not to put her in charge of the nation's diplomacy.

Yes, Hillary engaged in color-aroused politics during the primaries, which caused me to oppose her presidential candidacy.  Now, I'm in a forgiving mood with respect to Hillary, if only because she did a lot to help get Obama elected, and she didn't do any of the many outrageous things she COULD have done to PREVENT President Obama from being elected, once his nomination was secured.

I'll tell you one thing, though: I don't accept her excuse for voting for the war in Iraq and I will not accept any future excuse that "I went along with a treacherous policy/invasion because the CIA told me it was a good idea."

If Hillary's got any Bay of Pigs invasions in her future, then she should step down and not accept the nomination for secretary of state.

I am going to assume that Hillary is at least as smart as I am, so I will expect her to be at least as incredulous and skeptical as I would be under similar circumstances. Obviously, there are some people working in agencies within the US Government whose word should NEVER, EVER be taken at face value. Hillary must know that, and she must behave at all times like she knows that.

Seventeen days after the election, there's a lot of groaning and moaning about the President-elect's appointments.  

He's made a lot of progress with choosing his cabinet, which is a good sign.   My one beef is that he's depleting the Democratic ranks, which helps the GOP.  The blogosphere's beef is that his picks aren't progressive enough.

Let me look at some of his choices:

1.  Retaining Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense.  This is the most difficult Cabinet department for a Democrat.  The military will always lean right, and at least Gates is a huge improvement over Rumsfeld.  It's a good step in winning over the military.

2.  Timothy Geithner for Treasury.   I think this a really good appointment.  I don't understand how reassuring the finanacial markets is necessarily anti-progressive.  

Cross-posted at River Twice Research.

So here we are once again on the precipice, at least in terms of global stock markets and credit markets. Another bout of nail-biting panic is hardly unexpected, though it's always surprising when otherwise sane people veer sharply into hysteria. It's a good, albeit painful, reminder that the bonds of what we call civilization are always more tenuous than we would like to believe, that things like "value" and "worth" and "the economy" are ultimately the products of human beings simply agreeing on a set of rules. Stocks, bonds, gold, silver, none have any intrinsic value, nor do Gucci handbags, Deere lawnmowers, and GM trucks (in case anyone was wondering about that one). We act as if they do, because it gives us some sense of an orderly world, and because the alternative is just too unsettling to live with on a daily basis.

From Alaska to Florida, to battleground states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, working with the AFL-CIO through the Labor 2008 program, helped make the difference for the Obama-Biden ticket and other pro-worker candidates this year.

Thousands of IBEW members volunteered--knocking on doors, leafleting workplaces, making phone calls and stuffing envelopes--to convince their co-workers to vote for candidates who have built strong records of supporting working families.

"These efforts weren't just about partisan politics," says International President Edwin D. Hill.  "They were about the very survival of working families. I am so proud of the work of our members in Labor 2008."

Watch a recap of the IBEW's efforts.

I have been an advocate of Richardson, for Secretary of State - for quite some time. But given the economic situation - is Bill actually better suited for Secretary of Commerce?

What do you think?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/reliabl e-source/2008/11/rep_linda_sanchez_pregn ant_now.html

It's actually going to be funny, listening to people who attacked Bristol Palin defend Linda Sanchez. And, vice versa, of course.

They are obviously in different situations.

One is a private citizen, and a kid, and had an "accident".

The other is a public official, and an adult, and the pregnancy is wanted.

Democrats we are the majority party now.  We have responsbilities to 100% of the population.  We can no longer look at the country from a protest point of view from various numerical minorities if we don't want to return to be minority status.

Or is that where most here feel comfortable?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,233 5035,00.asp

This article shows that the exremists in the gay rights movements have moved past tolerance, acceptance, and even equality.  They are demanding that people who disagree with them have their rights curtailed.

In this case the E-harmony business decided it was better to settle than fight a civil lawsuit.  I think that is a horrible idea because it will re-invigorate others to use the law to force others to think a certain way.

Let's understand:

E-harmony had a business that matched

men

with

women

Everyone was welcome to purchase their service if that's what they wanted.

There are other businesses that offer similar services for people seeking same sex relationships.

Yet, the premise of this suit is that it is discriminatory for
eharmony to be in the business that they want to be in, and that the government should either force them to change their business or go out of business.

For people who keep comparing this to race, this is just one of many examples of why the comparison is not apt.

First it is offensive to me as an African American to compare what my people have gone throught to an orientation that a person can declare or not declare and switch based on their preference.

But I digress.

When blacks sue to be served by the private businesses, it was to receive the same  exact service as the next person.  No better. No worse.  No different.

This person who brought the suit is forcing eharmony to have to actually change his business, change his computer programs, and now actually do something the company obviously didn't want to do.

If Democrats on all sides of these issues can't agree that a website has the right to determine what business they are selling, and not be forced to offer a service they might disagree with, we will deserve to lose the majority.

Luckily, so far President - elect Obama has shown himself to be in tune with the American people.

It would be equal to forcing MyDD to print pro-Republican material to balance the pro-Democratic tilt on this site.