Norm Coleman and Al Franken have reached a deal on disputed absentee ballots -- the votes will only be counted if both sides agree they were wrongly cast aside.

This makes no sense to me. I realize they don't get to look inside the envelopes to see how the votes were cast, but they're not going to even agree to what criteria is valid? Meanwhile the court said they could not reject ballots, simply because a driver's license is not written on the outside of the envelope. Does this new agreement allow them to ignore that order?

Anyone get a feel for how significant Bill Richardson's issues are with the contributions?
Also, I see the MSM/righters are already digging Obama for implying he had a hands off approach to the Senate appointment despite his staff's horrific impudence in suggesting desirable names to Blago (who was and is after all, the Governor, legally charged with making that pick with no caveats before the scandal broke.)

LBNL: Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays/Observances/Debauched Baalmass

- N.B.

Yeah Danp that looks wrong, since Coleman has veto power over votes and he now stands to lose from counting the maximum. This isn't fair to voters, but I suppose 1. Franken realized he had to make a deal for practical purposes. 2. Likely realizes he will win now even after this agreement. I hope so, he will be fun in the Senate and surely a more genuine progressive than lots of flabby Dems.

aww mann, Jerry Nadler should be a great senator, from the progressive point of view, as he was fighting the good fight in the darkest times of Bush Overreach.
He has been out front on a number of important issues, and generally on the side of the Left (at least, as he has made it to national Cable TV).
His downside seems to be that he is a tubby and somewhat neckless guy (rather like me, BTW).

Pardon the thirdie, but I waited a bit. Anyway, here's some dish on vulgarian Sarah Palin supporters reffing their website:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-dunn/watermellon-roll-more-rac_b_152743.html

there's some buzz about Democratic state Senate President Peter Groff, the highest-ranking African-American elected official in Colorado history.

This isn't completely accurate unless you're using some definition of "highest-ranking" that excludes the state's lieutenant governor. George L. Brown was elected to the lieutenant governor's office in 1974, and Joe Rogers was elected to the lieutenant governor's office in 1998. The president of the state senate may wield more power than the lieutenant governor, but it seems odd to say that the president of the state senate (who only has to win an election in a single district and then convince a majority of senators of his own party to support him) "outranks" someone who has to win a state-wide election.

Putting it another way, if Obama had picked Hillary Clinton as his VP, would you say that Nancy Pelosi was the highest-ranking female elected official in American history?

[...] January 6, the day the 111th Congress convenes.-- Steve Benen

January the 6th? They're going back to Congress on January the 6th??? Couldn't have waited another day, the fake Christians as they're now revealed? Who do they think they are? 5oo+ Wise Men following the star to the trough?

if you had told me, 35 years ago, when john hickenlooper and i (and other college classmate buddies) were drinking his homebrew and playing poker that hick was a potential senator....

Hickenlooper! Hickenlooper! Hickenlooper!

I was wondering how Nadler could represent most of Manhattan, given that Chicago has nine Congressional districts (albeit with most of them snaking out into the 'burbs). Then I looked at a map of NYC's districts and saw you were right. I'll be damned.