Raul Julia Levy Actor

WASHINGTON — Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, convicted last month on federal ethics charges, lost his bid for a seventh term as final ballots were counted on Tuesday, giving Democrats at least 58 seats in the Senate for the first years of the Obama administration.

With an estimated 2,500 votes still outstanding and other election certification steps still to take place, Mark Begich, the Democratic mayor of Anchorage, had taken a lead of 3,724 votes out of more than 315,000 cast, and he declared victory.

“I am humbled and honored to serve Alaska in the United States Senate,” Mr. Begich said. “It’s been an incredible journey getting to this point, and I appreciate the support and commitment of the thousands of Alaskans who have brought us to this day. I can’t wait to get to work fighting for Alaskan families.”

Mr. Stevens did not immediately concede the race. He could request a recount, but he would have to pay for it if the current vote margins hold.

Mr. Begich’s victory will end the career of Mr. Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator ever and a pivotal figure in the history of his state after it initially appeared that he would triumph despite his criminal conviction just days before the election.

The defeat came on Mr. Stevens’s 85th birthday, at the end of a day in which he avoided expulsion from the ranks of Senate Republicans as his colleagues awaited the final results.

“I wouldn’t wish what I am going through on anyone, my worst enemy,” Mr. Stevens said Tuesday morning in the Capitol. Mr. Stevens’s defeat will strengthen a majority that Democrats sought to bolster Tuesday by allowing Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, to retain his high-profile committee chairmanship.

Instead, Democrats dropped Mr. Lieberman from another panel, delivering a mild rebuke for his strong support of Senator John McCain and other Republicans in this month’s elections.

The decision was part of the postelection Congressional tableaux as senators of both parties re-elected their current leadership teams for the first two years of President-elect Barack Obama’s administration. House Democrats met to make Representative Nancy Pelosi of California their candidate for speaker and essentially kept their leadership intact as well, with Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland remaining majority leader.

Aware of the legislative battles ahead, Senate Democrats said they wanted to adhere to Mr. Obama’s call for reconciliation and leniency for Mr. Lieberman.

But a pragmatic dynamic was at work as well. Having added seven new senators to their side, Democrats want to avoid driving Mr. Lieberman into the Republican fold. Even though they remain short of the 60 needed to cut off filibusters, the Democrats are aiming to keep their majority as large as possible next year when, for the first time since 1994, they have control of Congress and the White House. Two other Senate seats, in Minnesota and Georgia, have yet to be decided.

“We have got some big issues here, and we need all hands on deck,” said Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, who had pushed to keep the retribution against his home-state colleague to a minimum.

Democrats voted 42 to 13 to let Mr. Lieberman stay at the helm of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs while removing him from the Environment and Public Works Committee, where he led a subcommittee. The formal resolution before the Democrats, considered in what was described as an emotional meeting in the Old Senate Chamber of the Capitol, also declared that the Democratic caucus “rejects and disapproves of Senator Lieberman’s statements against Senator Obama in the 2008 presidential campaign.”

Lawmakers who attended the session said that Mr. Lieberman openly discussed the political and personal hurt he had experienced when many of his colleagues campaigned against him after he lost a Democratic Senate primary in 2006 before winning re-election as an independent. After the vote, he expressed some remorse for his campaign comments but noted that the resolution did not chastise him directly for backing Mr. McCain, who returned to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to resume life as a senator.

Mr. Lieberman, who only eight years ago was the party’s nominee for vice president, said he could have made some statements “more clearly.” He added: “And there are some that I made that I wish I had not made at all. And obviously in the heat of campaigns, that happens to all of us. But I regret that. And now it’s time to move on.”

Some Democrats remained angry that Mr. Lieberman had been so outspoken not only in his support of Mr. McCain, but also in his campaigning for Republicans like Senator Norm Coleman, who continued to hold a narrow lead in his re-election bid in Minnesota. They said that stripping the chairmanship was only fitting.

Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who aligns with Democrats, said allowing Mr. Lieberman to run the committee was a “slap in the face” to Americans who “worked day and night to get Barack Obama elected and to move our country in a very new direction.”

“Having said that, there is an enormous amount of work that is facing the Senate and we all have to move on and work together to address these issues,” Mr. Sanders said.

The reluctance to move forcefully against their colleagues illustrates again how cautious senators are when it comes to punishing their own. After being thwarted repeatedly by Republican resistance in the past two years, Senate Democrats were unwilling to lose the support of Mr. Lieberman on most domestic policy issues, particularly after Mr. Obama had urged that Mr. Lieberman be allowed to remain in the Democratic fold.

The resolution noted that Mr. Lieberman’s vote gave Democrats the majority in 2007 and that he voted almost 100 percent of the time with the party on important procedural issues.

“I would defy anyone to be more angry than I was,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, who will remain majority leader, about Mr. Lieberman’s criticism of Mr. Obama. “But I also believe that if you look at the problems we face as a nation, is this a time we walk out of here saying, ‘Boy, did we get even’? I am very satisfied with what we did today.”

The decision touched off attacks on the Democrats by liberal and progressive groups and on the Internet, where critics accused Democrats of weakness in their posture against Mr. Lieberman, whom they have branded a traitor to Democrats.

But senators pointed to statements by the Obama campaign in support of Mr. Lieberman as justification for their decision. “The Senate Democratic Caucus has decided that if President-elect Barack Obama can forgive, so can we,” said Senator Thomas R. Carper, Democrat of Delaware.

Despite a second round of Republican losses, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky was returned as Republican leader.

Senate Republicans also easily disposed of a call by Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina to impose term limits on the Republican leader and members of the Appropriations Committee, overwhelmingly rejecting the proposals.

In the House, Democrats gathered for the leadership elections and bid farewell to Representative Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois Democrat who is relinquishing his No. 4 post in the party hierarchy to become chief of staff to Mr. Obama.

Those in the closed meeting said Mr. Emanuel became emotional and told his colleagues it was “not an easy decision for me” to give up his House seat.

“I want you to know, I’ve got your back,” Mr. Emanuel said, according to one account. “I’ll feel better knowing that you’ve got my back.”

He was a boy with a distant father, raised in a family of modest means. He had a curious intellect, devouring history and memorizing passages from Shakespeare. He became a lawyer and settled in Illinois, where he was elected to the state legislature. With relatively little political experience, he decided to run for president. Few believed he stood a chance of winning a primary campaign against the party’s heir apparent, a senator from New York.

But the gangly, bookish Illinoisan galvanized millions across a country in crisis with his soaring rhetoric, speaking in big strokes about transcending partisan politics and creating America as it ought to be. He rose from obscurity to clinch his party’s nomination and the presidency. The New York senator returned home deeply disappointed and bitter, having fallen to a shrewd political tactician.

Sound familiar?

The year was 1860, and Abraham Lincoln had narrowly defeated Sen. William H. Seward to become the Republican presidential nominee. After winning the presidency, Lincoln disregarded personal animosity and took the unprecedented move of tapping Seward to be his secretary of state. He appointed two other political adversaries as well: Salmon P. Chase, a handsome widower and Ohio’s governor, who resented losing to a man he considered inferior, as secretary of the Treasury; and Edwin M. Stanton, a long-bearded Democratic lawyer contemptuous of Lincoln, whom Lincoln inherited as his attorney general but later appointed as secretary of war.

Lincoln chose another foe, Missouri’s distinguished elder statesman Edward Bates, to succeed Stanton as attorney general. Bates had considered Lincoln incompetent but eventually concluded that the president was “very near being a perfect man,” historian Doris Kearns Goodwin writes in her 2005 book “Team of Rivals.” As the United States splintered toward civil war, the 16th president assembled the most unusual administration in history, bringing together his disgruntled opponents and displaying what Goodwin calls a profound self-awareness and political genius.

As he has been for many of the nation’s presidents, including the one now holding the office, Lincoln is a source of inspiration for Barack Obama, who will be inaugurated Jan. 20. On a chilly morning 21 months ago, Obama launched his long-shot bid for the presidency from the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Ill. — the same place where a century and a half earlier, Lincoln delivered his historic “House Divided” speech.

And now, Obama is contemplating Lincoln’s particular model of presidential leadership as he moves toward assembling his own team of advisers and Cabinet officials. His overtures to his former foes have suggested he may be mulling his own team of rivals, perhaps led by a certain senator from New York as secretary of state. Obama met with Hillary Rodham Clinton in Chicago last week.

Since winning the election two weeks ago, he has been reading Lincoln’s writings again, Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” “There is a wisdom there and a humility about his approach to government, even before he was president, that I just find very helpful.”

Offers Goodwin: “You can’t find a better mentor than Abraham Lincoln.”

“Lincoln said, ‘The country’s in peril. These are the strongest and most able people in the country and I need them by my side,’ ” she said in an interview. “At first, people wondered whether or not Lincoln would be overshadowed by Seward. But in the end, Seward ended up becoming his closest friend. . . . He went on in history in a more profound way than he ever would have had he stayed just a senator from New York.”

If Lincoln is the president against whom all others are measured, it is in no small measure because he was the greatest politician to occupy the White House, said presidential historian Richard Norton Smith. “Lincoln is a crossroads of character and political shrewdness,” said Smith, a scholar-in-residence at George Mason University. By appointing his former rivals, he “displayed a remarkable generosity of spirit. On the other hand, it’s a very shrewd attempt to co-opt your potential enemies.”

Obama may let it drop that his proverbial desert-island book is Goodwin’s 916-page tome, and Garry Trudeau may decree Obama is “The Second Coming of Lincoln” in his “Doonesbury” comic strip, and the president-elect may grace this week’s Newsweek cover standing in Abe’s long shadow.

There is a second transition underway over which President-elect Barack Obama has no control — the transition of conservatives to minority status. How they do this will have a powerful impact on the new presidency.

If you doubt that, ask Bill Clinton. Clinton was elected in 1992 with only 43 percent of the popular vote, while Republicans gained seats in the House. The right felt empowered to treat Clinton as a not fully legitimate minority president and moved into unrelenting opposition. Republicans took over Congress in 1994 and pushed the logic of their hostility to impeachment in 1998.

This time, conservatives can find no silver linings. Obama won the first Democratic majority in 32 years, and Democrats added seats in Congress. And conservatives can’t blame John McCain for running as a moderate. He picked a right-wing running mate, abandoned some of his own unorthodox positions (notably on taxes), and ran a classic conservative attack campaign against the “socialist” Obama. None of it worked.

Note that I have been using the word “conservative,” not “Republican.” This is because the Republican Party is now wholly owned by the conservative movement. The new Democratic majority is built in part on voters who once thought of themselves as moderate Republicans but have abandoned the party in large numbers.

Because of these conversions, moderate Republicans in Congress have been knocked off, one by one, and are nearly extinct. This year’s defeat of Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut is the most evocative symbol of moderate Republicanism’s death.

In the meantime, today’s Democrats are a more confident, disciplined and pragmatic lot than their 1993 counterparts, and this is one of Obama’s big advantages over Clinton. Right-wing Democrats have been replaced by moderates with a greater sense of solidarity with the rest of the party, particularly on economic issues.

The early signals — notably the appointment of Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, an ally of incoming White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, as the House liaison to the new administration — make clear that congressional Democrats are determined to govern with, not against, their new president.

But how conservatives resolve their differences will also matter to Obama’s success. For now, the right is divided into ideological conservatives and dispositional conservatives.

The ideological conservatives hold to a faith linking small government and tax-cutting to extreme social conservatism. That mix is increasingly incoherent and out of step with an electorate that is more diverse and more suburban than ever. Ideological conservatives talk obsessively about returning to the glory days of Ronald Reagan and sometimes drop Sarah Palin’s name as a talisman.

Dispositional conservatives have leanings and affections but not an ideology. They have had enough with rigid litmus tests, free-market bromides irrelevant to the current economic downturn and anti-government rhetoric that bears no relationship to the large government that conservatives would inevitably preside over if they took power again.

The dispositional conservatives want to check government’s influence on the economy but not eliminate it. They would call Obama to account but wouldn’t oppose him on everything. They accept that social problems, notably the growing ranks of those without health insurance, will require new action by government. They want solutions that are as unobtrusive as possible, but they do want solutions.

Think of the dispositional conservatives as the new moderates, and of leaders such as Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota or Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee as their potential champions.

The hero for dispositional conservatives is not Ronald Reagan but David Cameron, the leader of Britain’s Conservative Party. Cameron has rehabilitated what once seemed to be a dying outfit by pulling his party back toward a moderate brand of conservatism similar to that of Prime Minister Harold Macmillan. Tomorrow’s American conservatism will find its own Cameron.

For Obama, a victory by the ideological conservatives could make his life unpleasant — they will attack him on everything — but also allow him to brush the right aside as a pack of irrelevant naysayers.

The less ornery dispositional conservatives would allow Obama to breathe easier in the short run. But they pose a bigger threat for the long term because they would reconstitute the right as a plausible alternative government.

My bet: The ideological conservatives will hold sway for a while, but the dispositional conservatives will triumph eventually. As Margaret Thatcher noted in a different context: For the right, there is no alternative.

WASHINGTON - Word of warning to President-Elect Barack Obama, you probably don’t want to pet First Dog Barney when you visit the White House on Monday.

President George W. Bush’s Scottish Terrier was not feeling too friendly on Thursday when a reporter tried to say hello and pet him on the White House driveway.

Barney snarled and chomped down on Reuters Television correspondent Jon Decker’s index finger, causing some minor bleeding. White House medical staff attended to Decker’s injury and he will require a tetanus shot.

Below is the video courtesy of April Ryan, the White House correspondent for American Urban Radio Networks, and we’ll hopefully have a first-person account a little bit later. (Watch to the end of the video for a close-up shot of the incident.)

Obama is in the market for a pooch to keep a promise he made to his daughters to get a dog. But it looks like they’re aiming for a different breed.  However, when Obama visits Bush on Monday at the White House, maybe he will ask if he can keep Barney around after Jan. 20 to fend off pesky reporters.

Por: Ángela Torres corresponsal                          05-11-08

ACTOR Y FILÁNTROPO RAUL JULIA LEVY  OPINA SOBRE EL TEMA DE SEGURIDAD EN MÉXICO.

No solo ha sido su gran interés la actuación, el arte y la cultura si no también ha sido fiel seguidor de la política en México, manteniendo una postura informada y de gran análisis. Sobre todo de gran importancia en su vida, dada esta pasión hacia el bienestar mexicano y el pueblo, comenta sobre la seguridad en México que no solo le interesa, si no que le preocupa. Siendo  una persona humanitaria y totalmente interesada en el bien de México y su gente como su fiel patria, nos concede esta entrevista sobre su punto de vista a la situación que atraviesa México con la violencia y la inseguridad devastadora, de un país con gente trabajadora que merece más de lo que recibe.

Vía telefónica desde su casa en Los Ángeles CA.

Raúl gracias por tomar la llamada, sabemos que estas muy ocupado en estos momentos, pero quisiéramos hacerte un par de preguntas en toda esta situación con respecto a México y su entorno a la inseguridad, dime

¿Que opinas sobre el accidente que sacudió  a la Ciudad de México ayer en la avenida reforma en el cual fallecieron Juan  Camilo Mouriño y Santiago Vasconcelos?

R.J.L.   Ángela primero que nada te doy las gracias por darme la oportunidad de dar esta entrevista, yo siempre políticamente he mantenido mi postura muy neutral, sobre todo por que vivimos en un país, de constantes cambios, el tema de la seguridad en México es un tema que vengo escuchando desde que tenia yo 7 años, lamento mucho la perdida del licenciado Camilo Mouriño, lo poco que conocí de el me pareció una gran persona, tuve la oportunidad de conocerlo por primera vez en la toma de protesta de Felipe Calderón como presidente de México en la cena de estado, en realidad es una perdida para México la muerte inesperada de un gran político mexicano.

A.T.  Dado que tú lo conociste, y abiertamente sabes sobre el tema yo quisiera preguntarte, en estos extremos de la situación, ¿quien crees tú que sería el reemplazo perfecto que ocupase la labor que desempeñaba exitosamente Mouriño?

R.J.L.  México como te mencione antes, es un país de grandes talentos y personas muy capaces de ocupar ese puesto en estos momentos, uno de los candidatos que yo le tengo mucha fe por que es un gran amigo mió con una habilidad y un talento impresionante, para ocupar este cargo es el Lic. Ricardo Sheffield Padilla, quien hasta ahora se viene desempeñando como subsecretario de la reforma agraria, creo que Ricardo reúne todos los requisitos para poder ocupar ese puesto tan demandante y exigente.

A.T.  La situación en México hoy día es muy estresante, para todos los capitalinos, y obviamente la labor que desempeñaba Camilo Mouriño sin duda era de extremada relevancía y  responsabilidad, en anteriores ocasiones ya se había hecho notar el nombre de Ricardo Sheffield Padilla como político responsable y de impecable reputación, siendo así, en lo personal no me sorprende que lo nombres, pero ¿de no ser Ricardo a quien más tienes en mente?

R.J.L.   Como te decía Existen muchas personas capaces, obviamente quién  sea que Felipe Calderon vaya a escoger. Estoy completamente seguro que tomará la decisión correcta  brindándole al pueblo de México la persona indicada que desempeñará  responsablemente el cargo de un país tan rico y tristemente con tanta violencía.

A.T.   Desafortunadamente Raúl tienes razón en lo que mencionas sobre lo maravilloso que es México y lo triste que es tener ese alto índice de inseguridad.

R.J.L.  Pues el tema de la seguridad en México siempre me ha preocupado por que tengo familia en México y sobre todo por que México esta en un momento de mucha crisis y con mucho que combatir como, la pobreza, la economía social, y muy importante la seguridad,  si no combatimos esto de una manera eficaz puede poner en riesgo la seguridad total de toda una nación.

A.T.  Ya me has comentado sobre tu visión hacia la inseguridad de México, ahora el punto que tocas sobre la crisis económica que tiene como blanco directo a México sin duda es una de las grandes preocupaciones, sobre todo por que crisis económica es igual a gasolina y gasolina es igual a petróleo, lo que es PEMEX, 

¿cual es tu opinión al respecto de todo esto que arroja la cuestión de PEMEX, los mexicanos y la gasolina?

R.J.L.   El tema del petróleo en México, yo digo que es un tema muy delicado, por que hay millones de personas que se oponen a eso, por  falta de información o el miedo de que en realidad se vayan a ver beneficiados 2 o 3 políticos corruptos. Si en realidad el tema de la energía en México es aprobado  para veneficiar la economía de ese país, y generar más empleos, mejorar su educación, brindar oportunidades a todos aquellos que busquen de ellas, creo que siempre cuando existe un cambio en un país, la gente por naturaleza tiene miedo de el, solo espero que los resultados de todo esto, sean de verdad positivos, para el pueblo de México, y digo para el pueblo de México en general, para la gente, para nuestra gente.

A.T.  Bueno ahora ya sabemos que tienes una alta comunicación con México, que tienes familia, que estas en contacto con lo que sucede en nuestro país, pero ahora quisiera que me dieras tu opinión sobre el ahora nuevo presidente de  Estados Unidos, Barack Obama.  ¿Cual es tu opinión?

R.J.L.  Creo yo que el hecho de que haya ganado Obama las elecciones, es un beneficio incomparable, ya que traerá muchas oportunidades, sobre todo para las minorías de este país, yo personalmente lo conozco muy poco a Obama, tuve la oportunidad de hablar con el en 2 ocasiones, y me dio la impresión de ser una persona recta y justa, yo siento que el cambio también le va a favorecer mucho a Estados Unidos como nación  sobre todo la imagen de este país que esta totalmente destruida, a nivel internacional.

A.T.  Honestamente comparto tu opinión y creo que la mayoría del mundo también, sabemos que la potencia financiera de Estados Unidos recae también en nuestro país, así que la victoria de Barack Obama claramente no solo es de índice nacional si no totalmente mundial. Te agradezco mucho Raúl el tiempo brindado para esta entrevista que viniendo de ti , que conoces la problemática de los 2 países, fundido entre las políticas de ambos y conociendo a los protagonistas en primera instancia. Muchas gracias, y esperamos en el futuro nos brindes más, mucha suerte en tu carrera y actividades filantrópicas.

Pet lovers, beware, public display of care for your four-legged friend could put you behind bars.

Feeding your pet at table or giving them chocolate treats might land you in jail, if new guidelines proposed to pet owners in Britain are to be believed.

The new code released for consultation, as a part of Animal Welfare Act 2006 to prevent cruelty, recommends that chocolate, raisins or grapes are “poisonous” for pets and a dog should not be disturbed when eating as this can cause “food-related aggression”.

It also says that dogs should not be fed at the table as this can lead to begging, while “curious” cats should be kept away from windows or tumble dryers. Although, the guidance says that breaching the three codes will not in itself be a crime, however it could prove to be the deciding factor in whether an individual is found guilty in court of a pet welfare offence

The Opposition politicians criticised the “over the top” rules that “take people for fools”. Bill Wiggin, the Tory spokesman on animal welfare, said the new codes are “absurd”. “Defra has missed the opportunity to produce a set of sensible proposals that would protect animals from abuse and mistreatment. Here we have this ridiculous guide, which tells people not to walk their dog in the heat of the day or feed it at the table,” he added.

The punishment includes a maximum jail sentence of six months or a fine of up to 20,000 pounds. Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, said the new laws afford animals “greater protection than ever before”. “These three new codes of practice will outline the responsibilities of owners under the Act and give practical advice on how to fulfil them,” the Telegraph quoted Benn, as saying.

“This means no one will be able to claim ignorance as an excuse for mistreating any animal,” she added. The code of practice for dogs advises against taking a dog for a walk during the hottest part of the day or feeding it less than an hour before vigorous exercise in order to avoid “bloating”.

It also ask pet owners to groom dogs with long hair at least once a day and all dogs should have teeth cleaned with dog chews or canine toothpaste as part of routine care. Training dogs should be done through “positive reinforcement” rather than punishment that can lead to behavioural problems in the future.

HE has already been the target of two assassination plots and delivered a victory speech from behind bulletproof glass.

Although US President-elect Barack Obama will not take office until January, he will be guarded as he prepares to move into the White House.

In May 2007, fears for his life lead to him being the most heavily-guarded US presidential candidate ever, when he was placed under Secret Service guard.

The potential threats against him are numerous and are likely to come from hate groups, or any number of organisations in and outside the US.

Accordingly, Senator Obama’s closest relatives will also be affected. Family outings will be cut out and his daughters will receive protection on their way to and from school.

Already, there is speculation that Senator Obama might not live to see out his term - just hours after his victory, the term “Obama assassination” appeared on the top 100 Google search terms.

In a video shot before the outcome of the election was known, the national director of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Thomas Robb, predicted “there may be a backlash” if Senator Obama won the presidential race.

In a lengthy rant on the Klan’s official website,  the white supremacist said: “We are in a race war.”

He went on to describe yesterday’s poll as “the last real election this country is going to have” before describing Senator Obama as a Marxist whose intention was to redistribute the earnings of hard-working whites.

Four US presidents have been assassinated - Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley and John F. Kennedy - while eight have survived attempts.

FROM a pound puppy to a First Dog, the White House is to receive not just a new president but a new four-legged friend.

In his victory speech yesterday, President-elect Barack Obama told his daughters, Malia Ann and Natasha, they had earned a new dog for their support during the campaign. The girls, aged 7 and 10, have been devoted to their dad’s dream of becoming president.

Like normal young girls, Malia and Sasha, as her dad likes to call her, are also fans of slumber parties - something the White House will also have to get used to.

“Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy that’s coming with us to the White House,” he said.

But this will be no ordinary pooch. During the election campaign, his wife Michelle announced on TV’s Entertainment Tonight they would adopt a rescued dog.

It will be just what the greenkeepers of the presidential compound need - another hound to bestow gifts on the perfectly manicured East Lawn.

Senator Obama will not be the first president with a canine companion. America’s first president, George Washington, started the trend by owning seven dogs.

Bill Clinton’s chocolate labrador Buddy was often seen by his side.

Senator Obama’s first task will not be fixing the financial crisis.

He will want to get the dog house trained, unlike Ronald Reagan whose dog, Grits, was kicked out of the White House for his pooping.

Barack Obama made history last night when he was elected as the first African American U.S. president, but he may have also made history in yet another way when he said, “I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last sixteen years, the rock of our family and the love of my life, our nation’s next First Lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy that’s coming with us to the White House.” That brief puppy mention may represent the first time that an animal has been referenced in a presidential victory speech. If not, use of the word “puppy” would certainly seem to be a rarity. 

(Credit: Robert Sebree / reprinted from A Rare Breed of Love: The True Story of Baby and the Mission She Inspired to Help Dogs Everywhere (Fireside Books)

The above photo shows Obama with “Baby,” a three-legged dog that lost its fourth limb following years of mistreatment at a California puppy mill. The toy poodle spent much of its life locked in a small wire cage. The breeders cut out Baby’s vocal chords so that they would not have to hear her cries. In cages next to her, other dogs literally went insane, spinning repetitively with blank stares. Still others were gravely ill, maimed and had filthy, matted coats. A number was tattooed on the inside of Baby’s ear, marking her as just one of many dogs at the mill.

When Baby got too old to produce enough puppies, the mill breeders planned to kill her. A passing stranger noticed the little dog in her wire cage and rescued her. Through a pet rescue web site, Baby was then adopted by psychologist and animal welfare advocate Jana Kohl, who previously worked for the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies.

Kohl recently traveled around the country with Baby, lobbying politicians and inspiring an entire movement to end the kind of animal abuse Baby suffered. Many of the cute dogs that you see in pet store windows come from puppy mills like the one that housed the now-famous toy poodle.

Baby, an unofficial spokesdog for The Humane Society of the United States, stopped to pose with many high profile supporters, including our new president. The images were compiled in Kohl’s book A Rare Breed of Love: The True Story of Baby and the Mission She Inspired to Help Dogs Everywhere (Fireside/Simon & Schuster; June 3, 2008; $25.95/hardcover; 1-4165-6403-9).

Gloria Steinem wrote an essay about her love of animals for the book.
(Credit: Gerri Hernández)

And Baby also posed with the Chicago White Sox.
(Credit: Jamie Slade)
    

Please watch the below video to see additional photographs from the book including, towards the end, more memorable images of president elect Barack Obama and Baby.

Welcome to the Lite Tuesday Notebook, where we say hail to the chief, hell to the chef and heel to the Chihuahua as we address the most curious issues on this Election Day.

» Speaking of Chihuahuas … Did you ever wonder which presidential candidate your dog would vote for if his little paws could reach the voting machine buttons? Well, we have the answer, thanks to Hawaii Pet Nanny owner Tammy Kubo.

I told you several months ago about how Tammy had decided to conduct a poll of pets to see how pets would vote if they could. On the Web site visitmypet.com she allowed visitors to answer the question: Are you a doggie mama for Obama or a K9 for McCain? The results are in and Obama has claimed a majority of pet support with 73.9 percent versus McCain’s 26.1 percent.

Forget all those other polls you hear about, like CBS and the New York Times. They only reflect the fallible human point of view. When results from today’s election are in, Tammy’s pet poll likely will prove to have been the most reliable.

Tammy points out it is ironic that Obama won the most pet votes because he doesn’t even own one. “He’s promised his daughters he will get them a pet whether he is elected president or not,” she said. “I think he should get a poi dog from Hawaii to show he is not elitist.”

McCain would seem to have been the animal favorite since, according to reports, he owns three turtles, three parakeets, two dogs, a cat, 13 saltwater fish and a ferret.

» Grossout of the Year: I regret that I have some totally disgusting news to share with you. As president and founder of the Worldwide I Hate Mayonnaise Club, it is my reluctant duty to keep abreast of distasteful mayo-related events.

A reader alerted me to a new product that will turn the stomach of anyone with good taste: Baconnaise. I wish this was a joke but it isn’t. A company called J&D’s is marketing Baconnaise, a mixture of mayonnaise and bacon flavoring.

Is the world clamoring for mayo that tastes like bacon? The inventors, Justin and Dave, admit on their Web site they don’t even like mayonnaise. Nevertheless, they set out to see if they “could make a mayonnaise product that met our own high bacony standards.”

The result is Baconnaise, which sounds like something a dog would cough up after scarfing down your BLT behind your back.

Even worse, Baconnaise doesn’t even contain real bacon. They claim it can be eaten by vegetarians. Why they think vegetarians are looking for a greasy glob of gunk that tastes like dead pig is beyond me.

» Find Lite Easier: This newspaper’s webmaster, Rob Myers, has overseen a spectacular overhaul of starbulletin.com with many cool new features. One improvement is that it is now easier to find past Honolulu Lites. Click “Features” at the top of the page, scan to columns and voila! Lots of Lites. Thanks, Rob!