The Buzz in the LexBlogosphere

Five Detainees of Guantanamo Released After Seven Years: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:22:20 GMT

Seven years after being detained for plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo, (the U.S. government later retracted that allegation, and instead said that they were likely to return to Afghanistan to fight against the U.S.) five detainees left Guantanamo Bay. While the legal ramifications have yet to be seen, it is definitely a move away from the past practice of allowing the administrations nearly free reign in determining what constitutes an “enemy combatant,” and the legal authority of our government to hold such individuals.

“A federal district judge, Richard Leon, today ordered the Bush administration “forthwith” to release five Algerian detainees who have been held in Guantanamo without charges since January, 2002—almost seven full years. The decision was based on the court’s finding that there was no credible evidence that the 5 detainees intended to take up arms against the U.S. The court found sufficient evidence to justify the ongoing detention of a sixth Algerian detainee.” – from “Five detainees ordered released “forthwith after seven years at Guantanamo, at Salon: Glenn Greenwald
“Ruling from the bench, a federal judge has found that five Algerian men were held unlawfully for nearly seven years at the U.S. military facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and ordered that they be released “forthwith.” U.S. District Judge Richard Leon also urged the government not to appeal his decision, reports the New York Times. The judge, who heard the evidence against the men in a closed courtroom, is the first to hold hearings on whether Gitmo prisoners were lawfully detained.” – from 5 Gitmo Detainees Held Unlawfully, Federal Judge Says, at ABA Journal Daily News
“In the end, Judge Leon ruled that government lawyers failed in their burden to prove the men meet the definition of “enemy combatant” and could no longer hold them. The sixth man, Belkacem Bensayah, will remain in custody at Guantanamo Bay. Judge Leon held there was sufficient evidence to prove his link to Al Qaeda. The judge made the unusual move of urging government lawyers not to appeal his ruling, but to instead set the five men free. However, the Department of Justice has indicated it will appeal the ruling.” – from The Gitmo Decision, at On The Scene
“Big news on the detainee front: A federal judge has ordered the release of enemy combatants from Gitmo, ruling that the government had provided insufficient evidence to continue their detentions. The decision came in the case of six Algerians — including Lakhdar Boumediene, a named plaintiff in the Supreme Court’s landmark Gitmo case — who were detained in Bosnia after the 9/11 attack.” – from Judge Tells Gov’t Not to Appeal Detainee Ruling; 7 Yrs of Waiting Enough, at WSJ.com Law Blog
“It should be noted that Judge Leon is a Bush appointee who previously ruled against the detainees the first time their case came around. (The sixth man was deemed to have provided support to al Qaeda.) Judge Leon ordered the men to be released “forthwith,” and urged the United States not to appeal, but I suspect that an appeal will come. Of course, things could get shaken up quite a bit if Eric Holder is named as Attorney General and he gets confirmed for the post, because he is on record as being very outspoken against the maintenance of Guantanamo Bay.” – from Gitmo Releases, at CM Choate’s Lawblog

Barack Obama Leaning Toward Eric Holder for Attorney General: LexMonitor Editor's Recommendation

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:46:09 GMT

While there has yet to be an official announcement, it seems that Eric Holder, the former deputy Attorney General under the Clinton Administration, is Obama’s top choice for the Attorney General. Holder, who was Janet Reno’s number two, would be the first African American to hold the office. Officials from the Obama administration leaked this information along with news that several senators have been asked whether or not they would give their confirmation. For those who can’t recall, Holder reviewed the controversial pardon of fugitive Marc Rich during Clinton’s last days in office.

“As we wrote yesterday, Obama has apparently picked Eric Holder, one of his veep vetters and a former deputy attorney general under Bill Clinton, for attorney general. Holder is black, which would be a first for the Cabinet position, and rocks a mustache, which isn’t a historical first, but certainly can’t hurt his prospects. But what could harm him are the concerns coming from both the right and the left — most notably, Holder’s role in facilitating the infamous Marc Rich pardon.” – from Obama’s Attorney General Pick Gets MixedReception, at Daily Intel
“Eric Holder, a former judge, is by all accounts intelligent, capable and honorable—except that, in the Rich case, he also seemed to be spineless, afraid to stand up for his Department and his line prosecutors when Jack Quinn (right), a lawyer who was tight both with Clinton and Al Gore, decided to use Holder to maneuver around the Justice Department.” – from Holder as AG: Why Marc Rich matters, at Spin Cycle
“I hear a storyline hardening around Eric Holder’s nomination. Instead of being celebrated for the accomplished and outstanding public servant that he is, Holder is being portrayed as more of the same Clinton-era politics that Obama was supposed to leave behind. I disagree that Holder’s nomination is just “more of the same.” Yes, Holder served in the Clinton Justice Department, but that does not mean his nomination is not totally welcomed and savored by many of his supporters.” – from Eric Holder Is Change I Can Believe In, at Huffington Post
“Before nominating Eric Holder to be his attorney general, President Elect Barack Obama quietly asked key Senate Republicans if there would be any potential confirmation problems with Holder´s nomination. Holder is his first cabinet pick and Obama wants to make sure that the pick will be hailed as a good one. The last thing he needs is a bitter, partisan, and contentious scuffle over Holder.” – from Holder Could Be GOP Target, at American Chronicle
“At confirmation hearings for the AG post, Holder will probably have to relive an episode that previously brought him before the Senate Judiciary Committee: the Marc Rich pardon. During the last hours of the Clinton administration, Holder signed off on the pardon of the fugitive financier, whose ex-wife turned out to be a major Clinton donor. Critics charged that Holder should have consulted with the line prosecutors on Rich’s case and questioned Holder’s dealings with Rich’s lawyer, onetime White House counsel Jack Quinn.” – from The Am Law Litigation Daily: November 19, 2008, at The Am Law Daily

Senator Joe Lieberman to Keep His Chairmanship: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:00:47 GMT

Senator Joe Lieberman will be allowed to keep his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and the Airland Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Rumors had swirled that Senator Lieberman (I-Conn.), a former Democrat, would lose his chairmanship last week after his vehement support of Republican Presidential Candidate Senator John McCain. Senator Reid, for his part, said that now was not the time for “retribution,” a statement that was echoed by many Democratic senators.

“Sen. Harry Reid just announced in a press conference on CNN that Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) will keep his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and the Airland Subcommittee of the Armed Services Committee. Lieberman will relinquish his seat on the environment committee.” – from Lieberman Keeps His Chairmanship, at The Washington Independent
“Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) said today he regrets attacking President-elect Barack Obama during the presidential campaign. Lieberman escaped a closed-door Senate Democratic caucus vote today with his caucus membership and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee chairmanship intact. Democrats agreed on a resolution that condemned Lieberman for attacking Obama during the campaign but did not eject him from the caucus or strip his committee chairmanship, as some had called for.” – from Lieberman Regrets Obama Attacks, at The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room
“So they allowed the senator from Connecticut to keep his chairmanship. The vote was 42 to 13. It was really important to Lieberman to stay in the Homeland committee post since he authored the authorizing legislation for the Homeland Security Department. “Joe Lieberman is a Democrat. He’s part of this caucus,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who said no Democrat was angrier than he was but that he wanted to let bygones be bygones. ” – from Lieberman keeps his chair, at The Swamp
“DNC Chair Howard Dean welcomed the decision to keep Senator Joseph Lieberman as head of the Homeland Security Committee and, consequently, in the Democratic Caucus, saying the move was pragmatic, magnanimous and politically shrewd. Speaking to the Huffington Post just moments after it was announced that Democrats in the Senate had voted to keep Lieberman as committee chair, Dean said the party had done the right thing by not giving into urges for retribution. ” – from Dean: Keeping Lieberman As Chairman Is Shrewd Move, at Huffington Post
“It’s the position he prizes above all else — he had told Harry Reid that losing it would be “unacceptable.” And so the Democrats, feeling mighty beneficent as they bask in the glow of Barack Obama’s victory, decided to let him keep it. But these Democrats are no wimps. This ain’t the Mommy party anymore, no way. There must be repercussions. So as punishment for campaigning on behalf of John McCain, speaking at the Republican National Convention, musing that it’s a “good question” whether Obama is a Marxist, and saying that Obama hasn’t always “put the country first,” the Democrats ruthlessly stripped away Lieberman’s seat on the less prominent Private Sector and Consumer Solutions to Global Warming and Wildlife Protection subcommittee. Ouch?” – from Joe Lieberman Can Still Sit in His Favorite Chair, at Daily Intel

Mark Cuban is Charged With Insider Trading by the SEC: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:12:33 GMT

The Securities and Exchange Commission charged Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban with insider trading relating to his sale of 600,000 shares of Mamma.com Inc., an Internet search engine company. According to the allegations, Cuban sold these shares based on information that was not readily available to the public. Cuban, for his part, is denying any wrongdoing, and is accusing the SEC of “win-at-any-cost ambitions.” This case, which has been before the Commission for nearly two years, does not look to proceed any faster than it has thus far, which means we might have to wait a while before any substantive result comes from this.

“This just in: the WSJ is reporting that the SEC has charged billionaire entrepreneur and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban with insider trading relating to trades made of Mamma.com. Click here for the WSJ story; here for the SEC’s complaint. It hasn’t been a good stretch for Cuban. Last week, reports appeared indicating that Cuban had “zero chance” of buying the Chicago Cubs, which real estate mogul (and Michigan Law grad) Sam Zell has put up for sale.” – from Breaking News: Mark Cuban Charged with Insider Trading, at WSJ.com Law Blog
“Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban has been charged by the SEC with insider trading relating to Mamma.com. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Mark Cuban insider trading charges stem from and allegation that he sold shares of Mamma.com prior to a private offering” – from “Mark Cuban Insider Trading Charges Relate To Mamma.com, Now Known As Copernic”http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/17/mark-cuban-insider-tradin_n_144320.html, at Business on HuffingtonPost.com
“The S.E.C. said Mr. Cuban sold the stock in the company, Mamma.com, based on nonpublic information about an impending stock offering. The commission asserted that Mr. Cuban avoided losses in excess of $750,000 by selling his stock prior to the public announcement of the offering. The commission filed a civil lawsuit against Mr. Cuban in Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, accusing him of violating federal securities laws. It said it was seeking to impose financial penalties and confiscate gains from the trades.” – from S.E.C. Accuses Mark Cuban of Insider Trading, at DealBook
“Of course, there are two sides to every story, and you can be sure that Cuban’s high-priced legal team is working on his right now. However, the SEC has cited what it says is the entrepreneur’s own language from 2004 to make its case. In the Statement of Facts of the SEC complaint, Cuban is quoted as saying “Well, now I’m screwed. I can’t sell,” to Mamma.com’s CEO after being told of an upcoming shareholder dilution event. If that quote is accurate, it would appear that Cuban knew better—but went ahead and made the sale anyway.” – from Mark Cuban charged with insider trading by the SEC, at Industry Standard News and Predictions
“In a blog post from March 2005, Cuban fully admits that he sold the stock because of the PIPE financing, which when combined with the testimony of the CEO of Mamma.com makes him look pretty guilty. Unless he can prove that that he disclosed the information before actually placing the sell order, he’s in big trouble and his own blog could be used against him. Or it could help him if the post proves the timing works out in his favor. That’s the key point of the case, and one that is—for the moment—still unclear.” – from The Mark Cuban Scandal For Dummies, at Deadspin

Senator Hilary Clinton the New Secretary of State?: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:24:37 GMT

Former First Lady. Senator of New York. Secretary of State? Rumors are flying today that Senator Hilary Clinton might be on the short list (along with Senator John Kerry and Republican Senator Chuck Hagel) for the position of Secretary of State in President-Elect Barack Obama’s new administration. If this is true, and Sen. Clinton takes this position it would be a key move for Obama’s administration. However, this move would take New York’s senator away from the domestic policy issues (health care reform, education, and the economy) that she could play a prominent role in forming.

“President-elect Barack Obama offered Sen. Hillary Clinton the position of Secretary of State during their meeting Thursday in Chicago, according to two senior Democratic officials. She requested time to consider the offer, the officials said. Multiple reports have indicated that Clinton was under serious consideration for the nation’s top diplomatic post, in addition to Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and Chuck Hagel, the Republican Senator from Nebraska.” – from Officials: Obama Offered Clinton Secretary Of State, at HuffingtonPost.com
“Hillary Clinton worried us exactly a month ago when she said she had no interest in running for president again, or for being a Supreme Court justice, or for being Senate Majority Leader. Had she lost her will to live?? Maybe not. Maybe nobody was asking the right question, which was: “What about Secretary of State?” That’s the one that’s on everybody’s lips this morning, as the Obama campaign confirms that she’s being considered. Some of the president-elect’s aides are strongly pushing her, in a bid to echo Abraham Lincoln’s famous “Team of Rivals.” Obama himself has been in talks on the issue.” – from Obama Advisers Pushing Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State, at Daily Intel
“Aides to Clinton had little to say about the news reports, including including one that said she was in Chicago where Obama is holding daily transition planning meetings. Clinton’s office would only say that the New York Democrat and former first lady had no public schedule on Thursday. Her office said any speculation about Cabinet or other administration appointments is for Obama’s transition team to address.” – from Hillary Clinton: Secretary of State?, at The Swamp
“President-elect Barack Obama met with New York Sen. Hillary Clinton late Thursday afternoon in Chicago, two sources confirm to CNN. The meeting was held at the request of Obama. One of the sources says Clinton went to the meeting because “she knew Obama wanted to talk about whether she would have a role in the administration.”” – from Obama, Clinton meet in Chicago, at CNN Political Ticker
“Here’s another grim reality to consider: Clinton’s odds of ever becoming president are grim. There are cases of candidates that lost primaries went on to become president ~~- Reagan’s failed 1976 bid springs to mind -~~ but unless Obama’s presidency is a disaster, Clinton won’t compete for the job until 2016, when the entire political spectrum likely will have changed.” – from The latest Cabinet gossip: Hillary Clinton as SoS?, at Left in the West

The Saga of Senator Ted Stevens Continues: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:13:45 GMT

Weeks after being convicted in federal court for failing to report nearly $250,000 in gifts, Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska finds himself over 800 votes behind Democratic challenger Mark Begich. The process of counting the nearly 90,000 absentee ballots began yesterday, and although nearly 50,000 have been counted thus far, the race may stretch into next week. We’ve spent some time covering Sen. Stevens’ trials and tribulations here at LexMonitor, and hopefully we’ll get a chance to see how Stevens’ swan song ends relatively soon.

“Democratic challenger Mark Begich leads by 814 votes in his bid to oust incumbent Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, according to the state’s elections division. Alaska is still counting absentee ballots from the Nov. 4 election. Anchorage Mayor Begich had been trailing Stevens by 3,257 votes until state officials started counting approximately 90,000 absentee ballots yesterday, a process that may stretch in to next week.” – from Begich Leads Stevens by 814 Votes in Alaska U.S. Senate Race, at Michael Moore – This Just In
“As the final numbers were tallied this evening, Democratic Senate candidate Mark Begich pulled ahead of convicted felon and frontrunner, Republican incumbent Ted Stevens by 814 votes! The word is that the Division of Elections decided not to keep releasing new numbers as they became available throughout the day, to save people’s nerves. It didn’t work. The lack of information between 3:30 and when the final numbers came in at 8:30, was nerve-wracking to say the least.” – from Begich Pulls Ahead of Stevens in Latest Vote Count!, at Mudflats
“The three Senate races that will determine whether the Democrats gain that coveted 60-seat majority are still deadlocked – by the slimmest of margins in Alaska and Minnesota, and by a tense runoff in Georgia. In Alaska, Democratic challenger Mark Begich overtook the lead on Wednesday as thousands of new ballots were counted, holding a 814 vote advantage over Sen. Ted Stevens at the end of the day” – from Neck And Neck: Senate Races Deadlocked, at HuffingtonPost.com
“If Begich becomes Senator for Alaska, this forecloses the possibility that Sarah Palin might run for Ted Stevens’s seat when he resigns because of his felony conviction. For Palin this news represents another door closing. Since the recount in Minnesoata appears to be going for Democrat Al Franken, that means it is very likely that the Democrats together with Joe Lieberman are going to have 59 votes in the the Democratic caucus in the Senate in the 111th Congress.” – from ” Alaska: Begich now leads Ted Stevens by “814 votes – recount continues, at Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot
“The Anchorage Daily News reports this morning that Democratic Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich has pulled ahead of Sen. Ted Stevens in the vote tally expected to take about another week to complete. Begich has been trailing Stevens by 1.5 percent in the count, a bizarre situation since Stevens was convicted on seven counts of federal bribery-related charges one week before Election Day. Today, Begich is ahead by 814 votes, with 40,000 questioned and mail-in ballots still to be counted.” – from Stevens Trails Begich in Vote Tally, at The Washington Independent

Supreme Court of the United States Rules in Favor of Navy in Whale Case: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:09:51 GMT

The Supreme Court of the United States took up a case of whale-like proportions today, literally. In what could be titled United States Navy v. All Marine Mammals (the name for the case is actually Winter (Navy Secretary) v. National Resources Defense Council, et al.) the SCOTUS ruled in favor the the navy, even though environmentalists argue that the sonar is detrimental to marine life. The court ruled 6-3 on the case, however, the larger issue in the case (whether or not the Navy must write an Environmental Impact Statement) was largely ignored.

“The Supreme Court, dividing 6-3, upheld the Navy’s power to use sonar in military training exercises, even though environmentalists claim that the technology threatens marine life in the training zone off the Pacific Coast. Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote for the majority; there were two full dissents and one partial dissent.” – from Court rules for Navy in sonar use, at SCOTUSblog
“It’s a loud, sad day off the coast of California: the Supreme Court today ruled in favor of the Navy and against environmentalists who argued that military sonar frequencies kill whales. “The balance of equities and the public interest … tip strongly in favor of the Navy,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion. “The Navy’s need to conduct realistic training with active sonar to respond to the threat posed by enemy submarines plainly outweighs the interests advanced by the plaintiffs.”” – from Supreme Court: National Security Trumps Whales, Environmental Law, at Wired Science
“In October, the High Court heard arguments in a case pitting the U.S. Navy against, essentially, whales off the California coast. Today, the whales lost. Here’s the opinion. The Court, in its first decision of the term, ruled the Navy needs to conduct realistic training exercises to respond to potential threats by enemy submarines.” – from Navy Wins, Whales Lose at High Court, at WSJ.com Law Blog
“We do not discount the importance of plaintiffs’ ecological, scientific, and recreational interests in marine mammals. Those interests, however, are plainly outweighed by the Navy’s need to conduct realistic training exercises to ensure that it is able to neutralize the threat posed by enemy submarines. Justice Stephen Breyer filed an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which Justice John Paul Stevens joined as to Part I. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice David Souter joined.” – from Supreme Court rules against environmentalists in Navy sonar case, at JURIST – Paper Chase
“In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court decided the US Navy can conduct sonar tests without restrictions off the coast of Southern California. Environmental groups, including the National Resource Defense Council, brought the lawsuit against the Navy, claiming that the intense sound waves from the Navy’s sonar arrays can injure and even kill ocean life. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, a lower court ruled the Navy had to shut down their mild-frequency active sonar (MFA) when a marine mammal was spotted within 2,200 yards of a vessel and lower the frequency of the sonar during certain ocean conditions.” – from Supreme Court Says Navy Can Test Sonar, at Outside Blog

Lieberman's Political Fate to be Determined Soon: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 23:43:56 GMT

Senator Joe Lieberman, a one time Democratic Vice President candidate, now finds himself on the brink of losing his Homeland Security Committee chairmanship. The former Democratic senator, now an independent, was a strong supporter of Senator John McCain’s campaign during the presidential race. Harry Reid, the senator of NV and majority leader in the senate, has insinuated that Lieberman’s chairmanship rests on a vote by a Democratic caucus. Adding to the intrigue, the GOP has reached out to Lieberman and offered him a spot in their party.

“Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) may leave Senator Joe Lieberman’s (ID-CT) fate up to the Democratic caucus in a secret vote. Rumors have circulated for months that Lieberman would be stripped of his Homeland Security Committee chairmanship duties after choosing to unapologetically support Senator John McCain’s (R-AZ) candidacy for president.” – from As Republicans Reach Out, Reid May Let Democratic Caucus Vote on Lieberman’s Future, at Senatus
“Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is talking to Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman about the possibility of Lieberman caucusing with the GOP. Lieberman’s affiliation with Democrats is up in the air. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, angered by Lieberman’s support of Republican John McCain for president, is considering yanking Lieberman’s chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee as punishment.” – from GOP Senate Leader Reaches Out To Lieberman, at The Huffington Post
“Former Democrat vice-presidential hopeful (in 2000) Senator Joe Lieberman (pictured), who has since gone Independent but votes with the Democrats most of the time, looks set to be stripped of his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.” – from US: Will One Maverick Be Punished For Backing Another?, at Politics & The City
“He’s with us on everything but the war.” This is it. This is what it all boiled down to for Democratic Senators who were asked why we had to tolerate television’s number one go-to guy for Democrat bashing, Senator Joe Lieberman, as a part of the Senate Democratic Caucus and as chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.” – from Lieberman with a gavel: unacceptable., at Daily Kos
“Harry Reid told CNN Friday that he is unhappy with Joe Lieberman’s passionate support of John McCain for president. “Joe Lieberman has done something that I think was improper, wrong, and I’d like if we weren’t on television, I’d use a stronger word of describing what he did,” Reid told CNN’s John King. “But Joe Lieberman votes with me a lot more than a lot of my senators. He didn’t support us on military stuff and he didn’t support us on Iraq stuff. You look at his record, it’s pretty good.”” – from Harry Reid: What Lieberman Did Was Wrong, at The Huffington Post

Rahm Emanuel Chosen as Obama's Chief of Staff: LexMonitor Editor's Recommendation

Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:24:59 GMT

Rahm Emanuel, after much speculation yesterday, has indeed been tapped to rise to the position of Chief of Staff. Emanuel, the fourth highest ranking member of the House of Representatives, accepted the position earlier today. The Congressman from Illinois was a former member of the Clinton administration, and brings Washington D.C. political experience to an administration that may be lacking in that arena.

“Democratic officials who disclosed Obama’s acceptance did so on the condition of anonymity to avoid angering Obama’s team; it had not planned to announce the chief of staff position on Thursday. In offering the White House post to Emanuel, Obama turned to a fellow Chicago politician with a far different style from his own, a man known for his bluntness as well as his single-minded determination.” – from Rahm Emanuel: Obama’s Chief Of Staff, at Huffington Post
“Rahm Emanuel, who received training in ballet as a boy, has shown no lightness of step in his political career: would-be enemies are advised to heed the story of a pollster who wronged him and promptly received a large, decomposing fish in the post. Reflecting on his own foul-mouthed, attack-dog style, Mr Emanuel has said: “I wake up some mornings hating me too.” Commentators have suggested that Mr Obama, who ran a lofty campaign based on national unity and bipartisanship, has recognised the need to employ a tough enforcer to push through his policy programme.” – from OBAMA NAMES ‘RAHMBO’ EMANUEL WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF, at San Francisco Sentinel
“According to reports from the Associated Press, Rep. Rahm Emanuel from Chicago has agreed to become President-Elect Barack Obama’s White House Chief of Staff. Emanuel, who just was re-elected to Congress less than 48 hours ago and previously worked as an advisor to President Bill Clinton, would have to give up his seat to a special election and his powerful position as running the political show for House Democrats.” – from Rahm Emanuel Agrees to White House Chief of Staff for Barack Obama, at OpenlineBlog.com
“Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a Democrat from Chicago’s North Side, has agreed to be Barack Obama’s White House chief of staff, a Democratic source confirmed this afternoon. A formal announcement is expected Friday. Emanuel wrestled with the choice, sources say, but will return to the White House after previously serving there in the Clinton administration.” – from Rahm Emanuel accepts Obama job, at The Swamp
“Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) had high praise Thursday for Rep. Rahm Emanuel’s (D-Ill.) selection as White House chief of staff to President-elect Barack Obama. Dodd said during a news conference that Emanuel was “a great choice” and that he has known the Illinois congressman for many years.” – from Dodd: Emanuel’s A ‘Great Choice’, at The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room

Barack Obama Elected President: LexMonitor's Daily Bloggers Discussion

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:10:14 GMT

The race was being called before all of the polls had even closed. As people cried tears of joy, Barack Obama accepted the office of Presidency last night. His speech, while powerful and moving, reminded the nation that this election is not the end of the process. There remains skeptisism on both sides of the isles, but for today hope reigns.

“One of the undercurrents driving the movement that led to Obama’s landslide victory is that people have finally started to reject en masse a public policy that by and large conceived of them only in the most limited, reductionist, and anemic way possible: as private, rational actors, pursuing primarily their own (usually material) advantage. Yesterday, people asserted their roles as citoyens, as political beings concerned not only with themselves but also with the public good. One of the hallmarks of Obama’s campaign was to ask people to do something, to get involved.” – from The Resurgence of the Idea of the Public Good, at Antitrust Review
“Barack Obama just became President of the world – but it is Americans of all shades and backgrounds and stories who are the proudest ones of all. In one instant America and the world has changed forever and all of us Americans who proudly voted – for the first time with a real sense of support for the candidate, rather than the intention of stopping the other man from ruining our livelihoods – we are brimming with hope and history.” – from The United World of Obama: The Future is Now, at Huffington Post
“Obviously, I am disappointed in last night’s outcome. Nevertheless, I am not going to join the chorus of conservatives who claim that the election of Barack Obama as our next president is the end of the world as we know it. It isn’t. America is bigger than one man, even the president of the United States. And the truth is that we have no idea what kind of president Obama will be.” – from Keeping Things in Perspective, at Southern Appeal
“With the stunning election of Barack Hussein Obama to the presidency, change has officially arrived. Even if he is a complete failure as a president, or if tragedy strikes. Change is here because even more important than the policy differences with Sen. John McCain is the fact that Americans actually elected him to begin with. Martin Luther King famously said, had a dream that his children would one day live in a nation “where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”” – from President-Elect Obama – Change Has Officially Arrived, at New York Personal Injury Law Blog
“While support for presidential candidates varied, I have never been prouder to be a part of the blawgosphere based upon its reaction to the election of our 44th President, Barack Obama. The reaction has been uplifting, in the belief that regardless of who, and how strongly, one thought would make a better president, so many have put that aside and noted two critically important things: That we have broken a barrier by electing a black man to be President, not because he is black but because we believe that he is the right man for the job, and that we will now go beyond partisanship to work together to overcome our nation’s problems.” – from The Blawgosphere, At Its Best: Congratulations, Barack Obama, at Simple Justice