David Axelrod was officially named Senior Advisor to the President today, according to a press release issued by the Obama-Biden Transition Team.

Other key staff appointments include Lisa Brown as Staff Secretary, Greg Craig as White House Counsel, and Crhis Lu as Cabinet Secretary.

"I am pleased to announce these new additions to our team, and I'll be relying on their broad and diverse experience in the months ahead as we work to strengthen our economy, reform Washington, and meet the great challenges of our time," said President-elect Barack Obama, according to the release.

Bios offered up by the transition team:

David Axelrod served as President-elect Obama’s Chief Strategist during the presidential campaign, and led Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign. A native of New York City, Axelrod graduated from the University of Chicago and spent eight years as a reporter for the Chicago Tribune, where he covered national, state and local politics and became the youngest political writer and columnist in the paper’s history. Leaving journalism in 1984, Axelrod managed Paul Simon’s upset victory over incumbent U.S. Senator Charles Percy of Illinois. In 1985, he founded Axelrod & Associates, a political consulting firm known today as AKP&D Message and Media. Axelrod has worked for leading Democrats across the country, including Senators Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, and Herb Kohl, as well as Governor Tom Vilsack of Iowa, Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts, Congressman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, and Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago, along with mayors of big cities across the country. He is married to Susan Axelrod, president and founder of Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy (CURE). They have three grown children.

Lisa Brown, Staff Secretary

Lisa Brown is the Executive Director of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. Lisa was Counsel to Vice President Gore from September 1999 through January 2001, and Deputy Counsel from April 1997 through August 1999. In addition to advising the Vice President on legal issues, Lisa served on the Executive Board of the President's Committee for Employment of People with Disabilities and worked closely with the Vice President's Domestic Policy Office on a variety of legislative initiatives. Lisa was an Attorney Advisor in the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice from June 1996 until April 1997. Prior to her government service, Lisa was a Partner in the Washington, D.C. law firm Shea & Gardner. Ms. Brown graduated Magna Cum Laude from Princeton University with a B.A. in Political Economy in 1982. She received her law degree with Honors from the University of Chicago Law School in 1986.

Greg Craig, White House Counsel

Gregory B. Craig served under President Bill Clinton as Assistant to the President and Special Counsel. Prior to his appointment to that post he served for two years as Director of Policy Planning under Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Craig also worked for Senator Edward M. Kennedy as Senior Advisor on Defense, Foreign Policy and National Security from 1984-1988. In addition to his service in government, Craig brings to the White House a wealth of experience in civil and criminal litigation.

Chris Lu, Cabinet Secretary

Christopher P. Lu has worked for President-elect Obama in a number of roles over the past four years. He was Legislative Director and Acting Chief of Staff in Obama’s Senate office, as well as a policy advisor during the presidential campaign. Chris is now the Executive Director of the Obama-Biden Transition Project, where he manages the day-to-day operations of the transition. From 1997 to 2005, he was Deputy Chief Counsel to Rep. Henry A. Waxman on the Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee (now the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee). A graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School, Chris was a litigation attorney at Sidley Austin in Washington, D.C. (1992-1997), after a clerkship with the Honorable Robert E. Cowen of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (1991-1992).

• Nate interviews wingnut. Hilarity ensues.
• Missouri results were supposed to be finished yesterday, yet the outstanding counties (St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and Jackson still don't appear to have updated their results. Maybe today? This week? This year?
• Remember the documentary "Hoop Dreams"? The Trib follows up on the two subjects of the movie.

  One haunting line in that movie has always stuck with me:

  "People always say to me, 'when you get to the NBA, don't forget about me.' Well, I should've said back, 'if I don't make it to the NBA, don't you forget about me.'"

• NJ-Gov: The annual "give New Jersey Republicans hope" parade has begun.
• Newspapers are truly fracked. And I don't say that with any gusto.
• Conservatives are firing back against Kathleen Parker for claiming in her column this morning that the GOP's Christian-Right wing is too powerful and makes their party essentially unelectable. The argument is that the Christian Right is powerless in the GOP, and that its agenda gets short shrift. John Cole fires back, with a nice little list.

  1.) Justice (“Just Us”) Sunday
  2.) Schiavo legislation
  3.) Jesus is my philosopher.
  4.) Michael J. Fox must be mocked for wanting stem cell research.
  5.) The never-ending fake war on Christmas (Christmas keeps kicking ass, btw, and shows no sign of ending. Funny, that).
  6.) Federal Marriage Amendment and the never ending gay-bashing as wedge issue.
  7.) Evangelical support for torture.
  8.) The ceaseless idiocy about displays of the Ten Commandments.
  9.) Pharmacists for Life deciding that they get to choose whether or not you need your prescribed medicine.
  10.) School prayer arguments.
  11.) Demanding that intelligent design (aka creationism) be taught.
  12.) Meddling in the FDA.
  13.) Abstinence only as the only sex-ed.
  14.) The take-over at the Justice Department from the God Squad.

  I did that in a few minutes, and without needing to think too terribly hard about it. Feel free to add your own.

• Buchanan wants us to have a cabinet spot. I'm not one for tokenism. I'll be happy with Obama fulfilling his campaign promises.

So you may have noticed, along with the rest of America, that the Senate Democratic Caucus voted yesterday to allow Joe Lieberman to retain his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee.

I think we're all in agreement on the fact that the vote did take place yesterday, correct?

And that yesterday was November 18, 2008? Yes?

Here's why I ask:

Remember what Sherrod Brown told his constituents about this issue?

I do not expect any changes to committee assignments until the beginning of the next Congress in January of 2009.

And remember what Dianne Feinstein told her constituents about it?

I believe it is better to wait until the beginning of the new Congress to reevaluate Senator Lieberman's Committee Chairmanship.

Can anybody tell me why these two Senators (and probably several others) told their constituents that the decision wouldn't be made for another month and a half, when the whole world watched it happen yesterday?

Somebody owes their constituents an apology and a clarification. If you want to keep Lieberman in his chair, we can't stop you. But please, just say so honestly.

It's not January 20th, yet. We don't have a new President (and not to disappoint David Letterman, he can't start early). But there are interesting things happening out there on health care reform that one should take notice of.

To start off with, there's the Max Baucus white paper of general principles toward health reform. This put health reform front and center for debate and discussion even before the inaugural.

Next was Ted Kennedy announcing health care working groups, including this:

One group, led by Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, will work on prevention and public health. Another led by Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland will work on improvements in the quality of care. And the third, led by Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, will work on insurance coverage.  

The above is important because one of the major criticisms of the push during the Clinton years was that it was an executive (i.e WH) crafted program with little input from either Congress or the public. That's what made it so vulnerable to Harry and Louise commercials. This time, it's starting with Congress.

Next is incoming CoS Rahm Emanuel, from a WSJ article:

President-elect Barack Obama's incoming White House chief of staff challenged chief executives and other business leaders Tuesday night to join the new administration in a push for universal health care, saying incremental increases in coverage won't be acceptable.

Finally comes today's announcement that

According to CNN's Ed Henry, Tom Daschle will serve not just as Secretary of Health and Human Services, but will also be the administration's point person on the push for a universal health care plan. (A push that Rahm Emanuel apparently has gotten behind.)

More from WaPo:

Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, will also reportedly be given a policy portfolio that stretches beyond the department in order to help shepherd health care reform legislation in 2009.

There are a couple of thing to be gleaned from reading the tea leaves.

1. The new administration seems serious on spending political capital early on health reform.

2. The approach is coordinated (Emanuel and Daschle appear to be the same page, whatever that page is, and Kennedy and Baucus are interested in Congressional action) and won't be just from the WH.

3. There is a domestic focus from the new (and not-so-new) kids in Washington that's been seriously lacking.

4. This is one of the areas where one can truly say "elections have consequences". One consequence is the dearth of GOP Senate "old bulls" (Stevens, Dominici, Craig, Lott, Warner) inclined to oppose this. One suspects Senate attitudes – the Senate is where health care bills usually go to die – will be a tad different in the next Congress.

5. The biggest question on the table is the (decades-old) debate between expanding coverage and controlling costs. Any program that suggests progress on both will get an interested hearing from Congress, business and the public.

6. If health reform were easy, it'd have been done by now. Expectations should be dampened until we see the work product, particularly on the Congressional side.

7. With Tom Daschle at HHS, another side-issue is whether public health will get the attention and respect it deserves (it needs to be funded properly as part of health reform). It will help to have a star-power figure at HHS. So, what's next for CDC?

With inauguration tickets pretty much unobtainable,

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who is chairing the committee, said today that Congress was hoping to find some "creative" ways to accommodate more people because the demand for tickets is vastly outstripping the supply.

Committee aides said they were looking at maps with the architects "and trying to see if more people can be squeezed in." The configuration will be slightly different from previous years.

Whatever their solution, it's not going to be enough. The vast majority of people who would like to see Obama inaugurated will be unable to do so -- as many as 4 million people are expected, and hotels up to 150 miles away are starting to get booked up.

But if it's about the people and not just Obama himself, what's available to the most of us might still be pretty cool:

Most of the crowd is expected to gather on the National Mall to watch the events on big-screen TVs.

"The Mall actually may be the best seat in the house. ... It'll kind of be like the world's biggest stage and auditorium on January 20th," Mayor Adrian Fenty told the paper.

...and John McCain under 46%. Here's where the numbers stand right now:

Obama: 67,065,042 (52.7%, 365 EVs)

McCain: 58,420,587 (45.9%, 162 EVs)

Remember how things looked on election night at around midnight ET?

Since then, Barack Obama's margin of victory has grown from 5% to 7% and his vote total has swelled by 12.6 million (compared with 8.5 million for John McCain).

The crazy thing is, it's still growing, bit by bit.

National Journal's Congress Daily (subscription) is reporting that the House Democratic Steering Committee has voted 25-22 to replace current House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-MI) with second-ranking Henry Waxman (D-CA) in the next Congress.

Final decision to be ratified by the full Caucus in a vote tomorrow.

Past Daily Kos analysis here.

The long recount process for Minnesota's Senate race is under way:

The recount is being carried out in more than 100 sites. It is required under state law because the votes cast for Coleman and Franken differed by less than 0.5 percent. Coleman's 215-vote lead heading into the recount translates to 0.008 percent.

The Secretary of State's results are here. The counters are getting right down to business:

All morning, Beckman roamed the cafeteria, where eight recount stations were set up at tables, each with three election judges. They carefully handed each ballot across the table, where one Franken supporter and one Coleman supporter sat peering intently at each ballot.

The mood was serious, the tones hushed, but every so often, a stir of activity came from a table where a challenge ensued. Beckman would hurry over.

One issue that may loom large in this race - the closest in Minnesota history and one of the closest U.S. Senate races ever - is the issue of discounted absentee ballots.

Ramsey County Elections Manager Joe Manske has been getting some calls like that too. About one in ten Minnesotans voted absentee in this election, close to 300,000 ballots total, and local election officials rejected a small percentage of those ballots.

"A few people, "Manske said. "I wouldn't say that it's a lot."

DFL candidate Al Franken's campaign estimates the rejected ballots number at least in the hundreds, however.

Secretary of State Mark Ritchie said his office doesn't keep a tally of rejected absentee ballots.

With just 215 votes separating the two candidates, obviously, every vote counts.

Meanwhile, Franken is heading to DC to meet with Harry Reid...but it's not what you think:

Al Franken is living in electoral limbo, but he's walking the Senate halls today nonetheless, and meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Franken is heading into a recount in Minnesota, and told reporters gathered in a Senate hallway that he was simply in town "to brief the leader on the recount."

...

Franken's real reason for being in town is financial -- he needs to raise money for the recount. Franken attended a fundraiser in Washington last night to help pay for costs related to the recount, including monitors and lawyers in the dozens of sites across Minnesota where the hand recount will take place. Franken is expected to attend another fundraiser in New York tomorow night with Al Gore and George Soros.

Emerging from the meeting with Reid, Franken said that he was "cautiously optimistic" that he would prevail in the recount.

Questionable ballots often skew Democratic, in part because they tend to be cast by first-time voters, elderly voters, and less well-cducated voters - three demographics which tend to go Democratic. So there's reason for some optimism in this race. Obviously, it would be better if Franken were leading at the moment, but it's doubtful either Franken or Coleman is ready to bank on victory in a race this close.

On the web:
Al Franken for U.S. Senate
Orange to Blue ActBlue

There's plenty of time to change his mind, but for now, McCain says he's running in 2010 (subscription only):

After much speculation that his failed presidential bid would be his last campaign, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has decided to run for re-election to his Senate seat in 2010.

McCain, 72, announced the decision during a meeting Tuesday evening with top ally Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), advisers Rick Davis, Charlie Black, Carla Eudy and other aides. The meeting, according to a knowledgeable source, took place off the Hill in a private office.

This is a good time to bring this poll back, pitting McCain against Gov. Janet Napolitano:

Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 10/28-30. Likely voters. MoE 4% (No trend lines)

If the 2010 election for U.S. Senate were held today for whom would you vote for if the choices were between Janet Napolitano the Democrat and John McCain the Republican?

McCain (R) 45
Napolitano (D) 53

Assuming Napolitano wins runs, this will be a top-tier battle.

Another day, another cabinet appointment. According to CNN's Ed Henry, Tom Daschle will serve not just as Secretary of Health and Human Services, but will also be the administration's point person on the push for a universal health care plan. (A push that Rahm Emanuel apparently has gotten behind.)

Notice that with both Holder and Daschle, President-elect Obama has apparently offered the post, and the post has been accepted. No mess, no fuss.

The auto industry is desperate to get another $25 billion in funding, and it's likely that they'll get it -- though not until the GOP has a go at being the party that killed GM. As we limp toward the well-nigh inevitable bailout, there are some demands on the table.

Under the Senate plan drafted by Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, automakers and their suppliers would have to submit a detailed plan for revamping their businesses and building more fuel-efficient models.

"This is a starting point in the Senate; there'll be a starting point in the House," Levin said. "The ending point is hopefully $25 billion in a bridge loan for the auto industry."

But the version backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi released late Monday makes far stricter demands on the industry, giving the government veto power over major business decisions.

The automakers would only get part of the $25 billion now, with the rest coming after they submit a "plan for long-term viability and international competitiveness" by March 31, or face having their first loan called back. Those plans would have to include how the automakers will restructure debt, cut costs and meet fuel economy standards.

Those are fine ideas, and certainly the public has every reason to require that we not toss another $25 billion down a rathole without any expectation of improvement.

But while they're working out what to ask of Detroit, there's one very simple thing that should be at the top of the list. Stop blocking the states that are trying to do the right thing.

Under the federal Clean Air Act, California is entitled to set more stringent pollution regulations on motor vehicles than the federal Environmental Protection Agency so long as California receives a waiver from EPA. Yet the U.S. automobile industry has prevailed upon the Bush EPA to deny California a Clean Air Act waiver in a decision that was contradicted by the analysis of the EPA's own staff.

For decades, the America auto industry has been "helped" toward the dustbin of history by Senators and Congressmen who have ensured that they don't have to make improvements as quickly as their competitors. Honestly, I don't care if Chrysler throws out every executive, or if GM lays out a blueprint for becoming profitable by 2015. I do care if they're begging for cash while still colluding with the Bush administration to block implementation of the Clean Air Act.

In the House, courtesy of the Office of the Majority Leader:

FLOOR SCHEDULE FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2008
House meets at 1:00 p.m. for Legislative Business
No votes are expected

Members are advised that the House will reassemble at 1:00 p.m., at which time Member-elect Marcia Fudge (OH-11) will be sworn in.

In the Senate, courtesy of the Office of the Majority Leader:

Convenes: 9:30am
Morning Business with senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S.3297.

Not long ago, the hope in the Congress was that this week's lame duck session would be spent on further economic recovery measures. But without agreement ahead of time that whatever they work on won't just be filibustered or vetoed, it's not looking like a whole lot's going to happen. There aren't even any votes scheduled in the House, though they'll be convening to swear in Marcia Fudge, who'll be filling the seat of Stephanie Tubbs Jones, who passed away in August.

Over on the Senate side, further consideration of whether or not to filibuster consideration of all the bills previously filibustered by Crossword Tommy Coburn. Yes, it's the continuing saga of the "Tomnibus."

The last go-round on which there was a vote featured a failed cloture motion that garnered 52 votes, including Lieberman's and those of three Republicans: Coleman, Smith and Warner. Pending the outcome of the Minnesota race, all three could be replaced by Democrats in January.

Just as a reminder, we'll be kicking off our Congress-watching blog just as soon as we get the kinks worked out. So for those wondering how the role of the Daily Kos community can evolve under our new circumstances, this could perhaps be part of the answer: a closer look at the mechanics, procedure, politics and personalities who'll actually undertake the business of governing. The more you know... blah, blah, blah.

Stay tuned for further details.

The news of the day just gets better and better. Here's hoping there's some way the Obama Justice Department could or would revoke this:

The Justice Department has agreed to pay for a private lawyer to defend former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales against allegations that he encouraged officials to inject partisan politics into the department's hiring and firing practices.

Lawyers from the Justice Department's civil division often represent department employees who're sued in connection with their official actions. However, Gonzales' attorney recently revealed in court papers that the Justice Department had approved his request to pay private attorney's fees arising from the federal lawsuit.

Dan Metcalfe, a former high-ranking veteran Justice Department official who filed the suit on behalf of eight law students, called the department's decision to pay for a private attorney rather than rely on its civil division "exceptional."

"It undoubtedly will cost the taxpayers far more," he said....

Asked why Gonzales made the request, Gonzales spokesman Robert Bork Jr. said that his client "values the work that the department's civil attorneys do in all cases" but thinks that "private counsel can often be useful where (department) officials are sued in an individual capacity, even where the suit has no substantive merit."

The case stems from the politicized hiring practices in the department that stacked it with ideologically "pure" Regent University types over highly qualified but "politically suspect" applicants.

We should have gotten the slimy little bastard impeached and instead we're going to have to foot the bill for his legal defense. Isn't that just a perfect summation of this whole f'ed up administration? We're going to be paying for the myriad debacles they created for who knows how long.

From an article on Texas "losing its clout" when George Bush finally leaves office, former Counselor to the President Dan Bartlett:

I won’t be surprised if there is a resurgence after this president rides off into the sunset and all those animosities and short-term issues around George W. Bush fade away.

If only there weren't all of those long-term issues like Iraq, massive debt, loss of stature in the world, a shredded Constitution...

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE...

Results: Testing the "Lieberman Effect"

Yesterday I got stopped for speeding. I told the cop he was a terrorist sympathizer who wants America to fail. He let me off with a warning. I complained. He took back the warning and let me go after giving me his handcuffs as a gift.

Yesterday my neighbor loaned me his leafblower. When I was done with it he asked for it back. I told him to go screw himself. He said I could keep the leafblower forever and apologized for bothering me.

Yesterday I told a friend I'd pick her up after her outpatient surgery and drive her home, but I blew her off so I could go see a movie. Afterward I called her up to tell her how great it was. She laughed and said the walk home wasn't too bad because only one of her feet was operated on and besides it was only ten miles and she had a cane.

Yesterday my landlord stopped by to fix the basement door. I poured hot coffee down his pants. He screamed. I expressed regret. He lowered the rent.

Yesterday I appeared at the trial of my uncle to defend him as a character witness against false charges of pedophilia. I decided instead to tell the jury that, yeah, he probably was a pedophile because sometimes he gets that look in his eye. As he was led off to jail to begin his 20-year sentence, he waved and said I could have his Ferrari.

Damn. It works.

Cheers and Jeers starts in There's Moreville... [Swoosh!!] RIGHTNOW! [Gong!!]

Wednesday is a good day to abbreviate.

Thomas Frank:

It is possible, I suppose, that the pundits are right and the public didn't really mean it when it elected a liberal Democrat president and gave Democrats even larger majorities in both houses of Congress. Maybe America really wants the same nice, reassuring, centrist thing as always.

But it is also possible that, for once, the public weighed the big issues and gave a clear verdict on the great economic questions of the last few decades. It is likely that we really do want universal health care and some measure of wealth-spreading, and even would like to see it become easier to organize a union in the workplace, however misguided such ideas may seem to the nation's institutions of higher carping.

Thomas Friedman: So now all the lazy pundits are back to writing about the Clintons. How should we feel about that?

Maureen Dowd: If Hillary Clinton gets to be the Mistress of Foggy Bottom, my forlornness when I'm not writing about the Clintons would be alleviated.

David Broder: Not the Clintons!! Nooooo!!! Will no one rid me of this scourge?

Kathleen Parker (apostate):

As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit.

Three little letters, great big problem: G-O-D.

I'm bathing in holy water as I type.

To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh.

Brendan Miniter (unrepentent): Forget the RINOs.

Maybe that's because Republicans have looked closely at the election results. The country hasn't so much moved left as it has abandoned a GOP that abandoned its own principles. In Ohio, Barack Obama actually won about 40,000 fewer votes than John Kerry did four years ago. Mr. Obama took Ohio only because John McCain pulled 350,000 fewer votes than George W. Bush did in 2004. Republicans and Republican-leaning voters stayed home.

That's not an endorsement of the ideas of the left. It's a lack enthusiasm for a party that failed to deliver the smaller government it promised in Washington. At least the GOP, in settling on future leaders like Governors Jindal, Sanford and Palin, seems to understand that.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha.

Michael Gerson: When it comes to complex economic issues, leave it to a Bush speech writer to explain why the GOP doesn't suck as much as it appears – and why in the end they'll do the right thing even though they don't want to.

See also  Kula2316's Morning Reaction.

By video link, President-Elect Barack Obama spoke to a gathering of governors and foreign officials in Los Angeles Tuesday, reiterating his stance on climate policy.

The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. ...

My presidency will mark a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process.

That will start with a federal cap and trade system. We will establish strong annual targets that set us on a course to reduce emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce them an additional 80% by 2050.

Further, we will invest $15 billion each year to catalyze private sector efforts to build a clean energy future. We will invest in solar power, wind power, and next generation biofuels. We will tap nuclear power, while making sure it’s safe. And we will develop clean coal technologies.

This investment will not only help us reduce our dependence on foreign oil, making the United States more secure. And it will not only help us bring about a clean energy future, saving our planet. It will also help us transform our industries and steer our country out of this economic crisis by generating five million new green jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced.

But the truth is, the United States cannot meet this challenge alone.

John Broder at The New York Times writes:

Some industry leaders and members of Congress have suggested that Mr. Obama’s climate proposal would impose too great a cost on an already-stressed economy — having the same effects as a tax on coal, oil and natural gas — and should await the end of the current downturn. A bill similar to Mr. Obama’s plan failed to clear the Senate earlier this year, largely because of concerns about its impact on the economy.

The same old, same old from the fossilized powers-that-be.

Some environmental advocates also have critiqued what they've heard from President-Elect Obama previously and what he's repeating in this video: about what they believe are inadequate goals for reducing carbon emissions by 2020, about the prospects for truly "clean" coal, about nuclear power.

My own perspective is that conservation should at least get a shout-out every time climate policy and energy policy are mentioned in one of these speeches, however short. Happily, it's on the agenda, as you can see at the Obama-Biden transition Web site. So there is no reason it should not be mentioned in the speeches.

Most important, the incoming administration should recognize that $15 billion a year over 10 years - $150 billion - isn't nearly enough for the government's portion of funding for clean energy. That's only a single year's U.S. military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan. Dealing with global warming, weaning ourselves off fossil fuels and all the rest of it, is going to take a war-time level of government and private investment. That's both the frame and the reality: Don't call it spending, call it investment in a Green New Deal.

Despite criticisms, Obama has delivered a welcome and timely message in advance of the international negotiations on climate coming up in Poland in two weeks. The crux: Global warming deniers are finally getting the boot instead of the red carpet treatment at the White House. Expect science once again to be respectable in the federal government.

+ + +

The Overnight News Digest is posted and includes the story, Gift card sales seen down 6 percent this holiday.

Tonight's Rescue Rangers are Louisiana 1976, ybruti, HansScholl, dadanation, taylormattd and srkp23 with vcmvo2 editing.

~ The time is always right to do what is right.
Martin Luther King, Jr ~

Time to do Right

• Valtin discusses The Forgotten Men: New UC Report on "Guantánamo and its Aftermath". (ybruti)
• Thin Ice reports on The NASA transition: Why Griffin must go. (srkp23)
• Chris Rodda reminds us how far we still have to go before we can claim to be free of prejudice in Beating of Jewish Soldier at Fort Benning Turns Allies Into Foes. (dadanation)
• crowbar317 makes A Case for the Auto Industry Bailout by showing what happened to workers in the failed textile industry. (ybruti)

Life Stories

• Milos Janus Outlook writes that rescuing man's best friend can also be the Rescue of a Human. (srkp23)
• CA coastsider shares the long, rich life story of her father and her grief over his passing in The Grieving Room - a life well-lived. (Louisiana 1976)
• ramara describes the problems of a small town orchestra in A Little Piece of the Economy. (ybruti)

Leadership & Policy

• dansac's Obama Declares Fight on Global Warming Today (w/Video) revels in the reality of a President-elect who actually believes science. (dadanation)
• JohnnyRook provides a thorough update on global warming-induced ice melting around the globe in Climaticide Update: Thirsty Yet? Alpine Glaciers in Full Retreat. (taylormattd)
• Press to Digitate looks at "America's dirty little infrastructure secret" in An America Flush with Infrastructure: Why They're ALL "Bridges to Nowhere". (srkp23)
• A Siegel discusses the risks and benefits of debating global warming with climate change skeptics in Truth vs Truthiness: Debating Global Warming with those beyond convincing. (taylormattd)

jotter has High Impact Diaries: November 17, 2008.

brillig brings Top Comments- 11/18/08 Splinter Meet Log Edition.

Enjoy and please share your own favorite diary in this Open Thread.

::

No doubt you've all heard the hottest rumor coming out of Washington over the last week; that the top choice for Secretary of State in the Obama Administration is none other than Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

As of right now, that's still a rumor. No evidence that Obama is going to offer it, none that she'd take it. We'll wait and see. But that doesn't mean we don't get to speculate...

Leaving aside the merits of the selection (personally, I think she'd be an outstanding choice, but then, I've always liked her), the next question would be: if Clinton is offered the position and accepts it, who would be appointed as her successor?

What's interesting about such speculation now, as opposed to during Clinton's presidential campaign, is that the leading choice for a replacement during much of her campaign is now out of the running. That would be Governor David Paterson, who seemed a likely pick when he was Lieutenant Governor, but ascended to the governorship upon the resignation of Governor Eliot Spitzer.

So now that Paterson is out of the running, who might the new governor select to fill Clinton's shoes? A couple things to keep in mind:

• Paterson has never been elected governor, and though he is currently fairly popular in New York, he could face a spirited Republican challenge. Rudy Giuliani is kicking the tires as we speak, and trails Paterson in polling by six points as of now. Michael Bloomberg is out, but theoretically another wealthy liberal Republican could step up. As such, Paterson will probably ultimately do what's best for his own reelection, and pick someone to shore up support among a particular constituency.

• Hillary Rodham Clinton is the first female Senator in New York history. Paterson will be under some pressure to appoint a woman to fill her seat.

• New York has never had a black or Latino Senator.

• There will be some pressure to appoint a Senator from upstate. Both Paterson and senior Senator Chuck Schumer hail from New York City, and Clinton lives in Westchester County just north of the city.

• Schumer could be a major player in the negotiations, as Dick Durbin has been in Illinois. Schumer is arguably the most powerful politician in New York State, and as two-term DSCC chair, is the captain of Democratic Senate recruitment around the country. He will no doubt seek to be somewhat involved in the process within his own state. While Schumer and former Governor Spitzer had a frosty relationship, he will likely have more influence with the less combative Paterson.

So here are some of the names being kicked around:

Rep. Nydia Velazquez of Brooklyn. She's a Brooklyn native, like Schumer. However, she's a woman and a Latina, which would cater to two critical Paterson constituencies. Velazquez kills two birds with one stone like no other candidate.

In addition to being the second woman and the first Hispanic to represent New York in the Senate, she'd be the first Latina Senator from any state.

The New York Daily News reports that Velazquez is the current frontrunner. She's a perfectly solid vote, so she'd be a fine appointment from that perspective, and she'd help Paterson. The major drawback to Velazquez is that she might have some trouble holding the seat. It's not clear how well she'd run upstate.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler of Manhattan. Nadler wants the appointment badly - if anything, he may want it too badly. He'd be a great Senator if he got it, but a Nadler appointment doesn't do much politically. If anything, it might be dangerous to Paterson to appoint another white man from NYC to the Senate.

Rep. Brian Higgins of Buffalo. Higgins fits the bill as an upstater, and he's a generally solid vote. That said, he probably wouldn't set the world on fire as a Senator, and though he'd be better positioned than Velazquez for reelection, his appointment would lack the historic significance that appointing Velazquez would have. Higgins would be fine, but unexciting, and a backbencher.

Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo has Washington experience from his term as HUD secretary during the Clinton administration, and a Cuomo appointment would eliminate a potential primary rival for Paterson in 2010 (although a Cuomo run against Paterson for Governor would be folly).

Rep. Steve Israel of Long Island. Israel wouldn't exactly solve the upstate problem, and he isn't a minority. That said, he's a pretty decent vote, his Blue Dog membership aside. He'd be about as generic an appointment as one could ask for.

Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown. He's the dark-horse pick here, but he's an exciting prospect for two reasons; he's African-American, and he's an upstater. Beyond those, he's a rising star in the state party, and would be a good vote in the Senate.

Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand of Columbia County. She's considered a major rising star in the party; she's young, intelligent, attractive, won an upset victory in 2006 and a convincing reelection this year.

She's a woman and an upstater, so she's a solid pick for those reasons. Only problem is her Blue Doggery, as well as the fact that she holds a seat which could go Republican in 2010. She'd be a sure thing for reelection, though.

Rep. Michael Arcuri of Oneida County. Arcuri was considered a rising star in the party until nearly blowing his 2008 reelection against no-name opponent Richard Hanna. This has taken some of the luster off of the Congressman.

If Hillary Clinton is appointed to the Senate Secretary of State, as the Guardian believes she will be, it should be an exciting time for New Yorkers.

Dean:

So if you run and get a mandate for reconciliation is your first act to kick this guy out of the party?

The question wasn't kicking Lieberman out of the party. Democrats in Connecticut already did that in 2006.

And once again, given this "mandate for reconciliation", I suspect that Reid won't reduce committee staff and seats for Republicans? Since that would be punitive. And we all want reconciliation, right? And maybe we can give Inhofe his committee chairmanship back, because apparently, the American people didn't vote for change.

And while we're at it, it just wouldn't be right for Obama to rid the executive branch of its thousands of political appointees, right? Because the first act once you have a "mandate for reconciliation" shouldn't be booting people out of their jobs for the pesky little reason that they supported the other party.

Right?